Pete Hegseth, President Trump’s nominee for Secretary of Defense, is facing a relentless smear campaign that ranges from the petty to the absurd. Chief among these efforts are allegations from a disgruntled former employee of Concerned Veterans for America (CVA), where Hegseth served as CEO—claims that lack credibility and have resurfaced years after her brief tenure.
Meanwhile, critics have seized on other manufactured controversies, including Hegseth’s Christian tattoo, which has been assailed as extremist. This attack on his faith—and on traditional Christian imagery—reveals a deep hypocrisy, as such scrutiny would never be applied to other religious traditions. But these efforts to discredit Hegseth obscure the larger issue: his qualifications and commitment to reform, which make him the right choice to lead the Pentagon.
Civilian Oversight: A Foundational Principle
The criticism of Hegseth often boils down to the claim that he lacks sufficient military credentials, with detractors pointing to Lloyd Austin as the ideal model of leadership. But this argument undermines a foundational principle of American governance: civilian control of the military.
Since the nation’s founding, civilian leadership of the armed forces has been a safeguard against the concentration of military and political power. While the position of Secretary of Defense has existed only since 1947, its roots lie in the role of Secretary of War, which dates to the earliest days of the republic. To reinforce this principle, U.S. law prohibits individuals who have recently served as active-duty officers from holding the position, with exceptions granted only three times—for George C. Marshall, James Mattis, and Lloyd Austin.
Hegseth’s critics, however, imply that only a retired general can effectively lead the Pentagon. This view is not only ahistorical but also misguided. Some of America’s most effective defense secretaries were civilians, including James Forrestal, the nation’s first Secretary of Defense. A former Wall Street banker, Forrestal was instrumental in modernizing the military during the postwar transition. Even figures like Robert McNamara, despite his polarizing legacy, showed the value of managerial ability in defense leadership.
The idea that Hegseth is unqualified because he did not reach the rank of general officer ignores his decorated service as an Army officer in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as his leadership at CVA. His record speaks to his ability to manage large, complex organizations and advocate for reform—qualities sorely needed in the Pentagon.
The Double Standard of Lloyd Austin
Critics often cite Lloyd Austin as a contrast to Hegseth, yet Austin’s tenure has been marred by significant failures. Under his leadership, the Pentagon oversaw a disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan, ongoing recruitment shortfalls, and accountability lapses. Most glaringly, Austin disappeared for a medical procedure without informing the Commander-in-Chief—a breach of the chain of command so significant that is analogous to being AWOL.
Yet these same critics claim Hegseth is unqualified, not because of his record but because he challenges the entrenched defense establishment. The double standard is glaring.
Manufactured Controversies
As noted earlier, the opposition to Pete Hegseth’s nomination has been fueled by misleading claims and baseless allegations. Chief among them are grievances from Kat Dugan, a former CVA employee whose eight-month tenure ended after an inferior performance review. Following her resignation in December 2014—preceded by disability filings—Dugan has resurfaced years later with uncorroborated accusations. According to The Washington Free Beacon, she has been contacting former CVA colleagues and urging them to submit anonymous complaints to the Senate Armed Services Committee in an attempt to derail Hegseth’s confirmation.
Adding to the absurdity, several Senate Democrats have claimed they lack sufficient information to vote on Hegseth’s nomination because they do not have access to his FBI background check. This argument ignores the long-standing tradition of the FBI briefing only the chair and ranking member of Senate committees on the findings of background checks for Cabinet nominees. During these sessions, both Democrat and Republican leaders are allowed to review findings and ask questions, but no copies of the report are provided. This procedure has been followed for decades, yet these senators now pretend it is a lack of transparency.
Such manufactured controversies are nothing more than attempts to stall Hegseth’s confirmation and distract from his qualifications. The Senate owes it to the American people to rise above this partisan theater and focus on Hegseth’s record—a record that proves his commitment to accountability, reform, and the men and women in uniform.
The Tattoo Non-Issue
Perchance the most absurd criticism of Pete Hegseth centers on his tattoo—a depiction of the Jerusalem Cross and the phrase Deus Vult (“God wills it”). This centuries-old Christian symbol, featuring a central cross surrounded by four smaller crosses and paired with a Latin phrase tied to spiritual journeys and divine guidance, reflects a deeply rooted tradition of faith.
Critics, spearheaded by Senator Elizabeth Warren, have twisted this sacred imagery into something sinister, absurdly framing it as a signal of extremism. Such logic is both flawed and dangerous: the act of an extremist co-opting a symbol does not make the symbol itself extremist. This attack on Hegseth’s faith and his expression of it reflects a cultural hostility toward traditional religious values—one that would never be applied to other faiths or traditions.
Such attacks not only reveal a deep-seated hostility toward religious orthodoxy but also risk setting a dangerous precedent where mere expressions of personal belief are weaponized through a partisan lens, undermining the long-held principle that one’s faith should remain beyond the bounds of political assault.
At stake is not just fairness but the preservation of a core American value: the right to express one’s faith without fear of partisan persecution.
This cudgel against Hegseth is not only unfounded but also deeply concerning. It mirrors the far-left’s efforts to vilify Justice Samuel Alito for displaying the “Appeal to Heaven” flag, misrepresenting its meaning entirely. These repeated distortions reveal a troubling pattern of cultural ignorance weaponized for partisan purposes, undermining legitimate debates over governance and qualifications.
Imagine the outrage if a nominee were attacked for displaying a widely recognized symbol of another faith tradition. Such scrutiny would rightly be condemned as religious intolerance. Yet because Hegseth is unapologetically Christian, his expression of faith is treated as fair game.
Warren’s criticisms are particularly hypocritical given her own history of controversial claims of significant Native American ancestry, which were later debunked by DNA evidence. This hypocrisy is further exemplified by her radical political activism, which reveals her tendency to distort facts for political gain. Her concerns about who leads the Department of Defense ring hollow, as her record shows she views the Pentagon not as a vital institution for national security but as a piggy bank to fund her various political gimmicks. Whether misrepresenting her heritage or attacking Hegseth’s Christian faith, Warren’s actions make her an unlikely arbiter of what constitutes extremism.
Why Pete Hegseth Is the Right Choice
Hegseth is by no means perfect, but come to think of it, none of us are. What matters is his record of service, his proven leadership, and his unwavering commitment to the military personnel who serve this country.
The Pentagon needs a leader who will challenge the status quo, prioritize the needs of service members, and demand results. Hegseth’s record proves he is uniquely suited to addressing these challenges.
A Test of Principles
The debate over Pete Hegseth’s nomination is not just about one man. It is a test of whether America still values civilian oversight of the military and respects religious freedom. By implying that only retired generals can lead the Pentagon—and by attacking Hegseth’s Christian faith—his critics are undermining two of the core principles of American governance.
Hegseth represents an opportunity to reaffirm these principles while bringing bold, innovative leadership to the Department of Defense. The Senate must rise above partisan theater, honor the principles of civilian leadership and religious liberty, and confirm Pete Hegseth as Secretary of Defense without delay.
Charlton Allen is an attorney and former chief executive officer and chief judicial officer of the North Carolina Industrial Commission. He is the founder and editor of The American Salient and the host of the Modern Federalist podcast.
CC BY-SA 2.0, via Wikimedia Commons, unaltered.
Jesus Christ is King
