Connect with us

News

'Wild childs': Republican senators brush aside Pete Hegseth misconduct allegations after meeting with him

Published

on

'Wild childs': Republican senators brush aside Pete Hegseth misconduct allegations after meeting with him

Republican senators who met Monday with Pete Hegseth, President-elect Donald Trump’s pick for defense secretary, brushed aside sexual assault and other allegations against him.

Sen. Cynthia Lummis, R-Wyo., called the allegations a “side issue” while lauding Hegseth’s ability to lead the Defense Department.

“Again, they’re throwing disparaging remarks at someone who has earned a great deal of credibility. Are soldiers sometimes wild childs? Yeah, that can happen,” Lummis said when she was asked whether the allegations concern her, “but it is very clear that this guy is the guy who, at a time when Americans are losing confidence in their own military, in our ability to project strength around the world, that Pete Hegseth is the answer to that concern.”

Around 10 to 12 senators on the Republican Steering Committee, a group of conservative senators led by Mike Lee, of Utah, met with Hegseth behind closed doors in the Capitol for less than an hour Monday.

Hegseth, an Army National Guard veteran and former Fox News host, has faced several misconduct allegations since he was named as Trump’s pick to lead the Defense Department (he has denied any wrongdoing). Most recently, a New Yorker article published Sunday revealed the contents of a previously undisclosed 2015 whistleblower report from a veterans’ organization Hegseth ran, which claimed he was repeatedly intoxicated on the job.

Advertisement

NBC News has not independently verified the report. Hegseth’s attorney declined to comment. In a statement to The New Yorker, an adviser said that the claims were “outlandish” and that they came from a “petty and jealous disgruntled former associate.”

The Trump transition team referred NBC News to a previous statement in support of Hegseth. Hegseth did not respond to shouted questions from NBC News about the New Yorker article and other allegations.

Senators offered their full-throated support to Hegseth after the meeting, downplaying the accusations.

“I’ve known Pete for a while, so in my experience with him has always been positive. I think he’s clearly committed to making sure we have a lethal military that scares the crap out of our enemies, is respected by our allies and is somebody that our allies can rely on,” said Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla.

Lee did not say whether the senators had discussed any of the allegations with Hegseth, saying they discussed his vision for the Pentagon. 

Advertisement

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, said the media was “obsessed” with personal allegations against Hegseth and told reporters that each Cabinet nominee will be subject to a background check but potentially not from the FBI — a new point of contention among lawmakers, as some Republicans say the FBI should not be in charge of carrying out the background checks, breaking with the usual practice. 

A woman told police that Hegseth sexually assaulted her in 2017 after a Republican women’s convention in California, according to official records of a police investigation released last month. Hegseth has denied the accusations and was not charged. He acknowledged having paid his accuser an undisclosed amount as part of a settlement.

Last week, The New York Times reported that Hegseth’s mother sent him an email calling him an “abuser of women” amid his contentious divorce in 2018. She told the Times later that she regretted the email, which NBC News has not obtained.

Hegseth’s lawyer declined to provide a statement but passed along a statement from the Trump transition team that said: “It is shameful but not surprising that the NYT is publishing a story about one out of context snippet from an illegally obtained private conversation between a mother and her son. The entire purpose of this exercise is to malign Mr. Hegseth.”

Speaking to reporters Monday after the meeting with Hegseth, Cruz referred to the New York Times story as “shameful.”

Advertisement

Senators also cited Hegseth’s ability to raise retention and recruitment levels in the military among young men and women, despite his having previously suggested that women should not serve. Asked about those comments, Lummis said they do not concern her. 

“I think when he gets some fighter pilots that are women, that are, you know, the best of the best, he might, he might think twice about that,” she said.

In a podcast interview last month, Hegseth said women should not be allowed to fight on the front lines, claiming their presence has made fighting “more complicated.”

“I’m straight up just saying that we should not have women in combat roles,” Hegseth said on “The Shawn Ryan Show” podcast last month. His remarks drew swift backlash from female veterans and service members.

The Trump transition team did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the Republican senators’ remarks.

Advertisement

News

After 2 failed votes, Mike Johnson unveils new plan to extend key U.S. spy powers

Published

on

After 2 failed votes, Mike Johnson unveils new plan to extend key U.S. spy powers

Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, R-La., takes questions at a news conference at the Capitol on Tuesday.

J. Scott Applewhite/AP


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

J. Scott Applewhite/AP

Speaker Mike Johnson, R.-La., is forging ahead with his latest proposal to renew a key American spy power. His bill, revealed Thursday, is largely unchanged from a previous plan which failed in a series of overnight votes earlier this month.

The program at center of the debate, Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), is set to expire on April 30.

FISA 702 allows U.S. intelligence agencies to intercept the electronic communications of foreign nationals located outside of the United States. Some of the nearly 350,000 foreign targets whose communications are collected under the provision are in touch with Americans, whose calls, texts and emails could end up in the trove of information available to the federal government for review.

Advertisement

For almost two decades, privacy-minded lawmakers from both parties have sought to require specific court approval before federal law enforcement can conduct a targeted review of an American’s information gathered through the program. The lack of any such warrant requirement helped sink an effort last week to extend the program for 18 months, as well as a separate vote on a five-year renewal. 

Trump officials, like those in past administrations, have argued that such a warrant requirement would overburden law enforcement and endanger national security. Johnson’s latest proposal would reauthorize the program for three years, but does not include a warrant requirement. Instead, the bill calls for the FBI to submit monthly explanations for reviews of Americans’ information to an oversight official as well as criminal penalties for willful abuse, among other tweaks.

“I am willing to risk the giving up of my Rights and Privileges as a Citizen for our Great Military and Country,” the president wrote on Truth Social last week, advocating for the program to be extended without changes. “I have spoken with many in our Military who say FISA is necessary in order to protect our Troops overseas, as well as our people here at home, from the threat of Foreign Terror Attacks. It has already prevented MANY such Attacks, and it is very important that it remain in full force and effect.”

Glenn Gerstell, who served as general counsel at the National Security Agency during the Obama and first Trump administration, says Johnson’s reforms look like an attempt to find a middle ground.

“There’s not a lot of really substantive changes to the statute, but some gestures are made to people who are worried about privacy and civil liberties,” Gerstell said. “It seems like a pretty reasonable compromise that is going to be satisfactory to the national security agencies and yet at the same time represents some gesture to the privacy advocates.”

Advertisement

“This is not a reform bill and it’s not a compromise,” Elizabeth Goitein, a privacy advocate and senior director of the Liberty and National Security Program at the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University, wrote on X. “It’s a straight reauthorization with eight pages of words that serve no serious purpose other than to try to convince members that it’s NOT a straight reauthorization.”

A bipartisan reform deal is still out of reach

Connecticut Rep. Jim Himes, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence committee, told NPR on Wednesday, before the release of Johnson’s new proposal, that lawmakers were working on a bipartisan solution. He said House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., was in touch with Johnson on the issue.

“There’s a lot of work being done here,” Himes said. “We’re sort of working out a process that will be inclusive rather than exclusive.” Himes said he was negotiating with Rep. Jamie Raskin, a Maryland Democrat and constitutional law scholar, on a reform proposal they hoped could preserve and reform the program — reauthorizing it with bipartisan support.

But Johnson’s new bill appears to fall short of the inclusive approach Himes hoped for.

NPR obtained a memo written by Raskin to his colleagues urging them to oppose the bill, which he said “continues the disastrous policy of trusting the FBI to self-police and self-report its abuses of Section 702 and backdoor searches of Americans’ data.”

Advertisement

“FBI agents can still collect, search, and review Americans’ communications without any review from a judge,” Raskin wrote.

FBI agents must receive annual training on FISA and are generally barred from searching for information about people in the U.S. if the goal of the search is to investigate general criminal activity, rather than find foreign intelligence information, and those searches need approval from a supervisor or an attorney. 

Republican hardliners — who sunk Johnson’s last reauthorization attempt — also don’t all appear to be on board for Johnson’s latest revision. Rep. Scott Perry of Pennsylvania, a past chair of the Freedom Caucus, said “we’re not there yet” in a video he shared to X on Thursday.

“I didn’t take an oath to defend FISA, I didn’t take an oath to defend the intelligence community,” Perry said. “We can’t have them spying on American citizens and, when they do, there has to be accountability and I haven’t seen any that I’m satisfied with yet.”

The House Rules committee meets Monday morning, the first step toward advancing the renewal bill toward a vote.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Trump Says Israel and Lebanon Agree to Extend Cease-Fire by Three Weeks

Published

on

Trump Says Israel and Lebanon Agree to Extend Cease-Fire by Three Weeks

President Trump announced a three-week extension of a cease-fire between Israel and Lebanon that had been set to expire in a few days, after hosting a meeting between Israeli and Lebanese diplomats at the White House on Thursday.

Hezbollah, the Iranian-backed militant group that has been attacking Israel from southern Lebanon, did not have representatives at the meeting and did not immediately comment on the announcement. The prime minister of Israel and the president of Lebanon also did not comment.

A successful peace agreement would hinge upon Hezbollah halting attacks, which Lebanon’s government has little power to enforce because it does not control the militia. Lebanon’s military has mostly stayed out of the fighting and is not at war with Israel.

The cease-fire, which was scheduled to end on April 26, would last until May 17 if it takes effect as Mr. Trump described it. Before the cease-fire was brokered last week, nearly 2,300 people were killed in Lebanon and 13 in Israel. Since then, the number of Israeli airstrikes and Hezbollah attacks have been dramatically reduced, though the two sides have continued exchanging fire.

The Lebanese Ambassador to the United States, Nada Hamadeh, credited Mr. Trump for extending the cease-fire, saying that “with your help and support, we can make Lebanon great again.” Mr. Trump replied, “I like that phrase, it’s a good phrase.”

Advertisement

Asked about the potential of a lasting peace agreement between Israel and Lebanon, Mr. Trump said that “I think there’s a great chance. They are friends about the same things and they are enemies on the same things.”

But Lebanon and Israel have periodically been at war since Israel’s founding in 1948. Israel has invaded Lebanon for the fifth time since 1978, incursions that have destabilized the country and the delicate balance of power between Muslim, Christian and Druze communities.

In the hours before the president’s announcement on social media, Israel and Hezbollah were trading attacks in southern Lebanon, testing the existing cease-fire.

Mr. Trump said the meeting at the White House had been attended by high-ranking U.S. officials, including Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and the U.S. ambassadors to Israel and Lebanon.

Earlier on Thursday, an Israeli strike near the southern Lebanese city of Nabatieh killed three people, according to Lebanon’s health ministry. Hezbollah claimed three separate attacks on Israeli troops who are occupying southern Lebanon, though none were wounded or killed.

Advertisement

Hezbollah set off the latest round of fighting last month by attacking Israel soon after the start of the U.S.-Israeli bombing campaign in Iran. Israel responded to Hezbollah’s attacks by launching airstrikes across Lebanon and widening a ground invasion of the country’s south.

Continue Reading

News

U.S. soldier charged with suspected Polymarket insider trading over Maduro raid

Published

on

U.S. soldier charged with suspected Polymarket insider trading over Maduro raid

Smoke rises from Port of La Guaira in Venezuela on Jan. 3, 2026 after U.S. forces seized the country’s president, Nicolas Maduro and his wife.

Jesus Vargas/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Jesus Vargas/Getty Images

Federal prosecutors on Thursday unsealed an indictment against a U.S. Army soldier, accusing him of using his insider knowledge of the clandestine military operation to capture Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro in January to reap more than $400,000 in profits on the popular prediction market site Polymarket.

The Justice Department says Gannon Ken Van Dyke, 38, who was stationed at Fort Bragg, in North Carolina, was part of the team that planned and carried out the predawn raid in Caracas earlier this year that resulted in the apprehension of Maduro.

The Department of Justice and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission filed the actions against Van Dyke, the first time U.S. officials have leveled criminal charges against someone over prediction market wagers.

Advertisement

According to the indictment, Van Dyke now faces counts of wire fraud, commodities fraud, misusing non-public government information and other charges.

Trading under numerous usernames including “Burdensome-Mix,” Van Dyke allegedly traded about $32,000 on the arrest of Maduro, resulting in profits exceeding $400,000.

“Prediction markets are not a haven for using misappropriated confidential or classified information for personal gain,” said U.S. Attorney Jay Clayton for the Southern District of New York. “Those entrusted to safeguard our nation’s secrets have a duty to protect them and our armed service members, and not to use that information for personal financial gain.”

Van Dyke’s defense lawyer is not yet publicly known. Polymarket did not return a request for comment.

The charges against Van Dyke come at a sensitive time for the prediction market industry, which has been growing exponentially, despite calls in Washington and among state leaders for the sites to be reined in.

Advertisement

Van Dyke is the first to be charged in the U.S. for suspected Polymarket insider trading, but Israeli authorities in February arrested several people and charged two on suspicion of using classified information to place bets about military operations in Iran on Polymarket.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending