Donald Trump is picking his national security team quickly, and his choices run the gamut. There are respected normies like little Senator Marco Rubio for Secretary of State.
It's a tremendous honor to the president who replaces confidence in me in a position of such importance. Mike Walls, a China Hawk, and advisor to Dick Cheney, who Trump chose as his national security advisor, is the first green beret in Congress. In our training, we have to learn multiple languages. We have to blend in. We have to specialize in certain parts of the world, South Central. Culture warrior, immigration hardliner, RIP cricket, South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem, arguably, has the experience to lead homeland security.
when Texas and Arizona asked for help that sent my National Guard troops down there to help. Then there are the provocative choices. The weekend Fox News host, Pete. The fill-in Fox News host, Tulsi. Are they prepared for this moment? We're going to ask on Today Explained.
Hey everybody, I'm Ashley C. Ford and I'm the host of Into the Mix, a Ben & Jerry's podcast about joy and justice produced with Vox Creative. And in our new mini series, we're talking about voter fraud.
For years now, former President Donald Trump has made it a key talking point despite there being no evidence of widespread fraud. But what impact do claims like these have on ordinary voters? People like Olivia Coley Pearson, a civil servant in Douglas, Georgia, who was arrested for voter fraud because she showed a first-time voter how the voting machines worked. Hear how she fought back on the latest episode of Into the Mix. Subscribe now, wherever you listen.
For over 30 years, XPRIZE has been the global leader in designing and executing large-scale incentivized competitions. And through these competitions, they've accelerated solutions to some of the world's greatest challenges, such as climate change, water scarcity, and healthy aging, just to name a few. XPRIZE is a catalyst for radical breakthroughs that have impacted the lives of millions, and they're just getting started.
Through the power of incentivized competition, XPRIZE can drive scientific discovery, cutting-edge innovation, and groundbreaking solutions. The future is still ours to create. Head to XPRIZE.org to learn how you could help architect a future of equitable abundance. This is Today Explained.
I'm Noelle King. Dan Lamoth of The Washington Post has covered the U.S. military in the Pentagon for the last 16 years. Dan, tell us what you know about Pete Haggseth, who Donald Trump has picked to lead the Pentagon. Yeah, Pete Haggseth is currently a Fox news host. He's one of the hosts of Fox and Friends weekend. I don't think I've washed my hands for 10 years.
Really, I don't really wash my hands. That would help me. No, I inoculate myself. It's not germs or not a real thing. Prior to that, he led a couple of small veterans, non-profits. And prior to that, he served in the Army National Guard. He had a pretty serious deployment to Iraq in a infantry unit and then also served as a military advisor in uniform for a deployment to Afghanistan.
I served in Iraq before I deployed to Afghanistan. Before I left for deployment to Iraq, I had a pessimistic view of the war. Negative headlines were everywhere. We were told it was a quagmire. Instead, after a year of combat, I came home cautiously optimistic. Iraq had some basic... Is this typically the kind of experience the person leading the Pentagon has?
No. Most typically, your defense secretary is not only somebody who's got experience around the defense department in some capacity, but often they've got very serious CEO level experience running major institutions. Be that a different government agency, somebody that maybe ran the CIA or something like that first.
or someone who's coming into this with, you know, serious experience running a major corporation. I mean, the Pentagon is really both. It is both a national security institution and a major, major, major business. So why did Donald Trump pick him if he doesn't have the experience?
I think first and foremost, they're aligned on a lot of the issues. I think this is someone who has the impulse to go after the Pentagon, go after the senior officers who have made decisions over the years that they disagree with. I think a generous interpretation would be he will shake up the status quo. I think the concern that a lot of people are sharing with me is that he's going to tear down the institution in any way he can.
You reported this weekend that a fellow member of the National Guard at one point questioned whether Hegseth has ties to extremism. Why was this accusation made and by whom? Yeah, this starts with, if we can set it, I guess, around the inauguration period of Joe Biden. On this hallowed ground were just a few days ago. Violence sought to shake the Capitol's very foundation.
We come together as one nation. We had January 6th, the attack on the Capitol that had just happened early in January. And then you had this period where there were tens of thousands of National Guard members who were stationed all over the city, particularly all over the federal part of the city.
Probably about a third of them will be carrying weapons as we came in today. You could see it on the street corners in DC. You've got National Guardsmen with M16s over their shoulder. Yeah, guardsmen that were sleeping in the parking garages of the city, they mean they were kind of everywhere at that time.
And Hegseft was a member of the DC Guard. The DC Guard was activated more or less and full. And as that happened, Travis Acres flagged a couple of the tattoos that he had and that generated an internal report to DC Guard leadership, basically questioning whether the tattoos he had would indicate that he may have been a white nationalist or had some sort of sympathies along those lines.
I was supposed to be guarding the inauguration. I had orders like everybody else. Half the National Guard was there, and I quietly got a phone call from a member of my unit saying, your orders are revoked. You don't need to show up.
What are those tattoos? Can you explain? There's two. And I think the challenge here is there is dual meanings for both of these things. These are things that have been co-opted. One of them is a Jerusalem cross. It's basically a cross with four smaller crosses around it. That's on Hexett's chest. And then there's a saying, deuce bolt.
That is on his bicep and deuce fault means God wills it It goes back to the crusades so does the Jerusalem cross in a lot of ways But they've also been increasingly adopted by the far right so
Hegsef has said repeatedly. It's a religious tattoo. It has nothing to do with white nationalism or nationalism or extremism. It's across you'll see in Jerusalem when you visit. Christianity is near and dear to who I am. It's really, you know, there's a number of ways you can interpret this. And I think that's one of the challenges when symbols and locals and mottos get co-opted like this is, you know, there's often a sort of, you know, very visceral reaction to it.
But then you got to dig deeper. And I think, you know, we're still going to be looking for more explanation for why would you choose to get that? What were you thinking? Things, things like that. All right. So there's an investigation conducted into Pete Haggseth. And then what happens next? What happens to his standing in the National Guard?
He left by choice. It's like, I don't need to be here. I don't need to deal with it. That sort of vibe to it. He has written basically that that helped motivate him to really scrutinize the military on whether it had become too political, whether it's
woke stuff, social justice stuff, gender stuff, environmental stuff, the obsession with electric tanks, stuff that doesn't make us more lethal, that doesn't point toward American democracy and poisons the ranks. So I saw it firsthand. I joined the Army to fight extremists. 20 years later, I was deemed an extremist because of a tattoo I had on my chest.
He's really gone to some length since then to portray the military as a very partisan organization, an organization that has become too woke to left wing. And obviously there are a broad spectrum of people that would disagree with that assessment.
So there was another big story this weekend about Pete Haggseth, and it has to do with a woman who claims he paid her off. Can you tell us what happened with this woman? What is alleged to have happened? So we're talking 2017. He was out giving a speech of sorts at a hotel in California. He appears to have met this woman in the bar.
nearby after doing the engagement. The allegation is that they ended up in the room. She alleges sexual assault. He says it was consensual. The police looked into it. They didn't file charges. And then in 2020, Hexette's lawyer is now alleging that she approached again. She was seeking on the civil side, recompense for this, and Hexette decided to settle on this close amount, but basically try to make the problem go away.
Apparently, right after the nomination of HECSEF, a report was generated to the transition team going back to this incident. It seems to have caught the transition team by surprise. At the moment, Trump is still standing by HECSEF, but there are at least other people on that transition team that are now, I think, running a serious assessment of whether they have a problem here.
Okay, so if they do have a problem here, what does that mean? Does it mean he can't get through the Senate, he can't be confirmed? I think first and foremost is a question for the senators. I think we're running into a situation where we're not sure what it would take for a public led Senate in the year 2025 to knock down a nominee.
All right, aside from these things that have been dug up, reported on and dug up about Pete Haggseth, there's a bunch that did not have to be dug up because he's a media personality. And he talks a lot. What has he said in the past that has kind of sent a shiver through the spines of sort of normy DC?
right before the nomination. He appeared on a podcast called the Sean Ryan Show. It's become very popular, particularly among a lot of veterans. And they were discussing what would it take to sort of fix the quote unquote, woke military. And he said, well, first of all, I would start by firing the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. So that's the Pentagon's top general, CQ Brown. This is somebody that Trump himself selected to run the Air Force.
You've got to fire the Chairman and Joint Chiefs, and you've got to fire this. I mean, obviously, you're going to bring in any Secretary of Defense, but any General that was involved, General Admiral, whatever that was involved in any of the DEI, whoa, sh**, it's got to go. Hex that's point of view is that he's too woke, has leaned into diversity issues too much, you know, basically is not focused on lethality and other issues that the Pentagon should be concerned with foremost, and basically they need to reset.
Is there any argument for Pete Haggseth as head of the Pentagon? Any argument that you've heard beyond just Donald Trump wants this guy? Yeah, I think the argument you hear from people who know Haggseth, from people who want something different, is that Haggseth
is a well-spoken individual who has served, does have experiences in these wars on the ground level, who is willing to look at this from a critical point of view, not a sort of institutional, I'm going to be a figurehead at the top. All right, so you've been on this beat for 16 years, and so you know the type of reaction that usually comes when a president's picks are announced.
What do you think about the reactions this time around? I think it's just the idea that these are...
These are not serious people. These are not serious nominees in the eyes of the overwhelming institution. The institutions they will lead, the people that work around them, the people that have spent their entire lives focused on this sort of thing. And I think there is a very fair discussion, particularly coming out of 20 years of war or rock Afghanistan and so forth, about whether or not the institutional perspective here often is missing other things. That is a very fair discussion to have.
But I think the counterpoint here, the fear here is whether or not, if the response to that very fair criticism is gonna be, all right, we need to fire X number of generals. We need to more or less turn the clock back 20, 30, 50 years where you're like, this is culture war stuff that on one hand,
will make a point, but on the other hand, actually turns off a significant number of people who may want to serve. That was the Washington Post's Dan Lamoth. Coming up, what Donald Trump's picks, tell us about his priorities.
Support for today explained comes from Ramp. If you run a company and you're looking for a way to simplify those finance operations, then Ramp could be a complete game changer. Ramp is a corporate card and spend management software designed to help you save time and put money back into your back pocket.
According to Ramp, when you use Ramp, finance teams can get unprecedented control and insight into how your company is spending its money. Ramp lets you issue those cards to every employee, automate that expense reporting. It even collects receipts and categorizes your expenses in real time so you don't have to. No more chasing down receipts. No more spending hours on expense reports. Whether you have 5 employees or 5,000, Ramp can help you close the books faster.
And now you can get $250 when you join RAMP. You just go to ramp.com slash explained. That's ramp.com slash explained. R-A-M-P dot com slash explained. Cards issued by Sutton Bank, member FDIC, and terms and conditions do apply.
Support for today's plane comes from delete me. When your data is compromised, you can be fished or identity-theaved or spam-called. Even if you're not in the public eye, bad actors can still find your personal information online. Delete me wants to help you. Delete me is a subscription service that can find and remove your personal info online and from hundreds of data brokers, our colleague Claire deleted herself. It's been really wonderful having delete me. I feel like my information is much more secure.
The amount of listings that they found, including my address, my phone number, my email, was pretty staggering. But they've removed it for me and I feel a lot safer online. Now you can take control of your data and keep your private life private by signing up for Delete Me. Now, with a special discount for our listeners, you can get 20% off your Delete Me plan when you go to joindelete.com slash today.
and use the promo code today at checkout. The only way to get 20% off is to go to joindeleteme.com slash today and enter code today at checkout. Joindeleteme.com slash today, code today.
Support for today's explain comes from Shopify. Running your own business has never been easy business owners know, and these days, it's even harder. You might have a killer product, a slick brand, and still not be able to convert browsers into buyers, especially if it's just too complicated to buy your product.
You might want to try Shopify. Shopify is an online commerce platform that makes it easy to buy and sell. According to Shopify, businesses that use their shop pay feature, see conversions up to 50%, fewer carts abandoned, more sales.
The platform is engineered to drive growth for mom and pop shops and retail giants alike. Shopify's own form of useful tools can make it easy to sell in person and online. Shopify's the commerce platform of choice for brands such as Allbirds, Skims, Momofuku, Mattel, and so much more. You can sign up for your $1 per month trial period at Shopify.com slash explained all lower case guys. You can go to Shopify.com slash explained to upgrade your selling today. That's Shopify.com slash explained.
Katherine Kuzminski is the Deputy Director of Studies and Director of the Military Veterans and Society Program at the Center for a New American Security Sea-Nast, her friends' caller. Katherine, we learned in the first half of the show that Donald Trump likes Pete Haggseth, in part because he's a veteran who served in Iraq and Afghanistan. Haggseth is very critical of those wars, which America was in and out of for a generation. What does Donald Trump want when it comes to war? So there's a couple of things.
One is in line with what we see in our current national security strategy that was rolled out during the Biden administration, a strong emphasis on deterrence against China specifically in terms of a near-peer threat. China doesn't want me to win, obviously, because I was kicking China's ass.
There's been a lot of rhetoric against the forever wars, so considering the wars in the Middle East in Iraq and Afghanistan. A big part of my campaign, I want to bring our troops back from the endless wars. We have endless wars that go over 19 years in the area. And then also not being drawn into large-scale conflict, specifically into Russia, Ukraine, which has been a focus on the campaign. I want everybody to stop dying.
They're dying. Russians and Ukrainians. I wanted to stop time. But also a recognition that there are strong threats coming from, certainly from China. Also, Iran and North Korea. If we take that option, it will be devastating. I can tell you that, devastating for North Korea. That's called the military option. If we have to take it, we will.
The focus there is on deterrence, so he essentially wants to build a strong military but not use it. We saw as he was leaving his previous administration, he called for a removal or a moving of troops out of Germany back to the United States.
We're going to be reducing Germany very substantially down to about 25,000 trips. We actually had 52,000, but we'll be moving it down to about 25,000. Germany's paying a very small fraction of what they're supposed to be paying. That didn't actually occur, even though he called for that.
because that requires quite a bit of resources from Congress to wholesale move troops internationally, and that that plan did not play out. But I do think that we should expect to see that he will be pushing to move troops from overseas stations back to the United States for other missions. Until we can have a wall in proper security, we're going to be guarding our border with the military. That's a big step.
Let's talk about Pete Hegsef, Donald Trump's nominee for defense secretary. He says he doesn't think the U.S. should be fighting forever worse, like the one sitting rock in Afghanistan. What do we know about what he might mean for the Department of Defense if he's confirmed?
There are things that are consistent with any nominee we would expect from President Trump. And then there are things that are specific to potential confirmation of Secretary Haggs' death. So on the one hand, we would expect that any Secretary of Defense who is serving under President Trump, some of the first policies we'll expect are a rollback of the DOD abortion travel policy that was put in place by the previous administration.
where we saw some of the commentary from Pete Heggseth moving forward that might not align with all nominees are his views on women in combat units and in specific military occupational specialties. Because I'm straight up just saying we should not have women in combat roles.
In his opinion, women in combat put other troops at risk, put male troops at risk. Everything about men and women serving together makes the situation more complicated. And complication in combat means casualties are worse. This has been an area of contention even within the military services since women have been allowed to serve in all combat positions. I've been impressed with the fact that everyone
Everyone, men and women alike. Everyone is committed to doing the job. They're fighting and they're dying together. And the time has come for our policies to recognize that reality.
It's not that we can't carry the weight, we can carry the weight, but it's the pace. You're looking at our size and we have males that are almost six foot with longer strides and it's hard to catch up with them and keep up with them. So, one way that Heg Seth could move forward on the outcome he is after without banning women from frontline combat units would be to have a single standard for particular units or roles.
The Wall Street Journal had a blockbuster story last week. Donald Trump's transition team is crafting an executive order that would establish a warrior board. What is this and what would it do? The initial warrior board occurred after World War II, examining the performance of sitting general officers against their jobs.
There was a belief that they were staying on too long and they weren't opening up positions for junior officers who needed to promote through the ranks, who were bringing a lot of vigor and vitality to the job. This warrior board is something a bit different. It appears to not be focused on performance in the job, but rather partisan loyalty.
The reporting indicates that Trump will ask for the resignation of all general officers who were involved in the withdrawal from Afghanistan. He should have fired every military man that was involved with that Afghan, the Afghanistan horror show, the most embarrassing moment in the history of our country. Holding general officers accountable for operational outcomes.
is something that has been called upon multiple presidents to do and something we haven't necessarily seen in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. But on the flip side with this executive order also lays out is essentially loyalty tests for those who are currently in senior
general officer positions. Senior military officers serve careers upwards of 40 years across multiple administrations and you want to see the continuity and that uniform leadership that will carry the nation's security regardless of the partisan issues that happen in transitions between administrations.
For the skeptics in the audience, for the people who voted for Donald Trump because they like the way he operates, what problems could arise if a president is allowed to fire generals because he doesn't think that they're loyal enough to him? The biggest challenges from a national security perspective is that particularly with your chairman and your joint chiefs of staff, so the leaders of the uniform leaders of each of the individual services, their role is to
seek out the blind spots the president might not be seeing. And so if the president prefers to install yes men into these positions, there's the potential that plans, operational plans, the next national security strategy,
that there are real risks that are not being identified, particularly if the perspectives of senior military officers are either disregarded or if the individuals who are appointed to those positions don't feel comfortable sharing bad news. What effect might this move have on the way Americans think about the military and trust the military?
Yes, so I think one of the biggest challenges is that the military and general officers in particular, they are political instruments. They interact with foreign leaders. They interact with the civilians on the National Security Council.
They interact with Congress. They interact with the other departments and agencies. But they are not partisan tools. They are not tied to the agendas of a given administration. They don't set policy. They implement policy that is set by the commander in chief.
One of the biggest challenges is that the way Trump has spoken about general officers over the last eight or nine years has referred to them as though they are partisan tools. So the use of the term my generals versus, you know, Biden's woke generals misunderstands the role of senior military leadership and drives a narrative that general officers are themselves partisan actors.
Kate Kuzminski of the Center for a New American Security. Peter Balanon-Rosen and Victoria Chamberlain produced today's show. Miranda Kennedy edited. Grant Chamberlain turned four. Happy birthday to him. Patrick Boyd and Mr. Rob engineered and Laura Bullard checked the facts. I'm Noelle King. It's Today Explained.
