Hegseth EXPOSED on Unlawful Orders, Secret Deployments, and Mismanagement

💰 The $134 Million Political Stunt: Gross Mismanagement of US Defense 💰

Representative Derek Trann’s confrontation with the Secretary-Designate was a comprehensive indictment of the Department of Defense’s (DoD) transition from a disciplined strategic institution to a political tool for domestic purposes. The exchange centered on the decision to deploy thousands of combat-ready Marines and National Guardsmen to Los Angeles to manage a protest, exposing a reckless disregard for strategic priorities, taxpayer money, and constitutional limits.

💸 Cost and Strategic Erosion: Sacrificing Readiness for Optics

The most immediate and tangible criticism leveled by Rep. Trann was the staggering cost and the detrimental impact on U.S. global readiness.

The Financial and Human Cost

Financial Waste: The deployment of 700 active-duty Marines and 4,000 California National Guardsmen was projected to cost the American taxpayer at least $134 million for a 60-day operation. This figure, later cited by the Pentagon’s budget chief, represents a massive diversion of funds for a purpose not requested by local authorities.

Human Disruption: The deployment severely disrupted the lives of thousands of service members, pulling them from their families and scheduled missions. Trann, a veteran, called this a “disgrace” and a “slap in the face” to those whose lives were upended for what he characterized as a political publicity stunt.

Diverting Critical Assets

The deployment’s strategic cost is immeasurable. Trann outlined the global threats from which these combat-ready troops were diverted:

Indo-Pacific: Diverted from the region where China is rapidly expanding its influence.

Europe: Pulled away from NATO support amid growing Russian aggression.

CENTCOM: Taken from the command where tensions are escalating so critically that a senior general had to cancel his testimony to Congress.

The nominee’s justification—that concrete blocks were thrown—failed to explain why a small domestic protest zone (around one square mile in a county of over 4,700 square miles) warranted a military response that compromised U.S. posture across three global combatant commands. This constitutes gross mismanagement, as it risks long-term security for short-term political optics.

⚖️ The Constitutional Crisis: Unanswered Questions on Command

Trann’s line of questioning systematically probed the Secretary-Designate’s commitment to the fundamental principles governing the military’s role in a democracy.

Disregard for Constitutional Limits

Trann asked a paramount question that requires an unequivocal answer from any DoD leader: “Does the DoD have any plans to allow the military to follow the orders of President Trump when his order violates the Constitution? Yes or no?”

Instead of affirming that constitutional limits always prevail and illegal orders will not be followed, the nominee rejected the premise, stating, “I reject the premise of that question, which is that President Trump is ordering unconstitutional orders.”

This refusal to plainly affirm the military’s obligation to the Constitution over any presidential order signals a deeply concerning, even dangerous, erosion of the principle of civilian control under the rule of law.

Bypassing Civilian Authority

The decision to deploy forces without consulting state and local authorities further exposed the nominee’s disregard for collaborative governance.

When asked if LAPD Police Chief McDonald or LA Sheriff Luna asked for military help, the nominee deflected, refusing to answer and confirming that local law enforcement did not request the military deployment.

The nominee dismissed Governor Newsom’s objection to the deployment as “grandstand[ing]” and an “obstruction,” suggesting the federal government has the authority to secretly deploy troops without coordinating with state or local civilian leadership.

Effective military action within American cities requires coordination and requests through proper civilian channels. Bypassing the Governor’s office and local law enforcement is not a procedural oversight; it is a breakdown in the chain of command that politicizes the military and endangers the established norms that protect the civil-military relationship.

🏛️ A Culture of Deflection and Disdain

The exchange was characterized by the nominee’s repeated deflection and disdain for congressional oversight, a pattern previously observed in his non-answers on sexual misconduct and extremism. He refused to provide a detailed plan for housing and feeding the troops, instead offering vague assurances and accusing Trann of asking a hypothetical question about forcibly removing a member of Congress. The nominee’s final smirk, noted by Senator Rosen in a previous exchange, underscores a failure to grasp the gravity of his role and the seriousness of the concerns raised.

This hearing was a profound check on accountability, confirming that the DoD’s leadership under the nominee appears more concerned with political optics and executive loyalty than with strategic readiness and constitutional adherence.