Pete Hegseth, the former Fox News host and Army veteran told Megyn Kelly on her Sirius/XM radio show that he would stop drinking alcohol completely if confirmed as Doanld Trump’s Secretary of Defense. He referenced “general order number 1,” which prohibits military personnel from consuming alcohol during deployment, saying, “This is the biggest deployment of my life, and there won’t be a drop of alcohol on my lips while I’m doing it.” He continued, “That’s how I view this role as Secretary of Defense is, I’m not going to have a drink, at all. And it’s not hard for me because it’s not a problem for me.”
This is an issue because along with allegations that he has engaged in sexual misconduct in the past and the uncovered email in which his mother accused him of abusing women, CBS News has reported that when Hegseth accepted a six-figure severance payment and signed a non-disclosure agreement in his 2016 exit from Concerned Veterans of America, there had been reports (from unnamed sources, of course) that he was intoxicated on the job more than once.
I find Hegseth’s pledge more than a little strange. It is like a man being accused of beating his wife saying, “I have never beaten my wife and if you give me this job, I promise that I will never beat her again.”
“A drinking problem” typically suggests alcoholism, though there are non-alcoholic alcohol abusers. The latter can, in fact, just decide not to drink any more and do so successfully. Alcoholics, in contrast, have metabolic and psychological disorders that make sobriety a lifetime battle that they are likely to occasionally lose.
We have had several Presidents who were recovering (or not recovering) alcoholics: Franklin Pierce, Andrew Johnson, Ulysses S. Grant and George W. Bush we know about, and the odds are there are several more that we don’t know about. Alcoholism in the military is a continuing problem, though not as much of one as alcohol abuse in some other professions, like the law. Grant swore off alcohol when he was elected President, and subjected himself to a detox regimen without medical assistance: h easily could have died. By all accounts, Ulysses never touched a drop of liquor again after locking himself in a room for several days. That’s remarkable, if true, but Grant was remarkable in many respects. Another alcoholic colleague of Grant’s was less fortunate: it is believed by many historians that the Union’s disastrous defeat at Chancellorsville in the Civil War war caused in part because the head of Union forces, Gen. Hooker, had decided to quit drinking cold turkey when Lincoln gave him the top job and as a result was incapacitated during the battle. Lloyd Bridges’ running gag in “Airplane!,” “I guess I picked the wrong day to quit drinking!” can be deadly serious in real life.
In the interests of making it easier for alcoholics to seek help, our society has decided that the illness can be kept private by sufferers if they wish, even if an individual is in a position of great responsibility requiring absolute trust. I have always seen ethical problems with this. Alcoholism is a bit like having epilepsy, but perhaps worse: an alcoholic can literally have a relapse any time, and while one can be responsible in managing the disease, relapses are impossible to predict. I have long believed, after extensive experience with alcoholics, that sufferers should have to disclose the condition to prospective employers.
That, in turn, will result in prejudice and discrimination, but there is no avoiding the consequences. Those under consideration for sensitive positions must explain past statements and positions that raise questions about their trustworthiness, yet it is much easier for someone to change their opinions that it is for them to change their metabolism.
I don’t believe the alcohol abuse controversy should sink Hegseth’s nomination, because I think he should be rejected anyway: if I were a Senator, I wouldn’t vote to confirm him. His handling of the alcohol abuse question is just another reason to doubt the wisdom of his nomination. What should he have said in response to the allegations? Just this: “I have never abused alcohol since I entered the workforce as an adult, and I challenge anyone to come forward and state when and where they say that I have, if such an individual exists.”
Ethics Alarms 
As someone who had an alcoholic family member it would be easy to determine if someone abuses alcohol. Over time, the the smell of alcohol is persistent in close proximity to that person.
Someone getting a 6 figure severance package is unlikely to have lost their job for being intoxicated at work. That is a fireable offense everywhere and you don’t need to give a big severance package when it happens. I have to ask, is this another claim from the past like Kavanaugh suffered through. Why are these allegations coming to life now? Once again unnamed sources are being used to smear someone. I categorically dismiss unnamed sources because they cannot be verified. If that person cannot stand up to scrutiny they cannot be believed.
I also wonder how did a personal email find its way to the New York Times. What is missing is that his mother claims she retracted her opinions within two hours of the exchange. Why is that left out.
I understand you feel Hegseth is unqualified and you would not confirm. Ok, you have made your case but I do believe you are appear to me to giving credence to the veracity of unnamed sources who have demonstrated their own unethical behavior by suggesting an unsubstantiated reason for his leaving Concerned Vets and the use of a personal email that was either stolen or provided by his mother. If it was his mother that should be made known as should her claimed retraction.
If not Hegseth then who is better suited to make the service branches ready and able to win and win quickly. Without another candidate I have nothing to compare him to.
Joanie Ernst who appears to want the job. Senators who would vote on a nominee should be barred from seeking positions needing confirmation. She also supports the inclusion of trans men a women who cannot be deployed because of ongoing medical needs. The military is not the place to push social experiments. Moreover, how is it fair to non-trans soldiers who enter the service with the idea they could be in harm’s way when trans service members who will never be in harm’s way get the same post service benefits. I consider support for programs that distract from the actual mission to be a disqualifier.
BTW. The link to CBS News relies on statements from unnamed sources who were unauthorized to speak, The NewYorker’s reporting and PBS’s Margaret Hoover. That all seems really fair and objective.
Senator Ernst represents me, and she got a terse email this morning regarding Hegseth’s nomination.
Do note that 1) My problem is with Hegseth’s weird response the drinking allegations. Don’t you find it odd? If he has n probelb, why say he’ll stop drinking? 2) I’m not giving any credibility to the sources. I’m questioning Hegseth’s response to them. 3) I have seen too many examples of high ranking execs in for- and non-profit settings being given golden parachutes despite firings for cause, often in exchange for keeping them quiet and avoiding bad publicity or lawsuits.
Jack,
I guess I don’t find it odd or suspicious. “Look, I’ll show you that all these alcoholism accusations (especially showing up on Fox News drunk) are baseless. I won’t touch a drop while SecDef, even though there’s no expectation of going completely dry in that position. And it will be easy for me, because it isn’t a problem. Unlike giving up sex will be for those 4B liberals…”
Okay, I may have made up that last sentence…
I understood the gist was on his pledge but it seemed to me that you were accepting the allegations as fact based on the amount of ink dedicated to describing people with alcohol problems. It came across as simply another reason to dismiss Hegseth’s nomination which you have been quite clear about.
I believe you have made a well reasoned argument for your thinking about Hegseth. I may not fully agree with it but I respect it. I worry that when we rely on unproven anonymous allegations that buttress our initial reasoned analysis we will allow unscrupulous actors to exploit that behavior by floating more unproven anonymous allegations that we will use to shoot ourselves in the foot.
I read GO1 and his use of it in his pledge might sound quite differently to those who served and subject to that order than civilians with limited exposure to military norms.
Others who have weighed in have made a reasonable case for such a worded pledge. I could make the same pledge because I have never had a drinking problem but have driven the porcelain bus before. Nonetheless I can count on two hands the number of alcoholic drinks I’ve had over the last 5 years.
I don’t believe anonymous sources either. My experience with alcoholics, however, does make be suspicious about Hegseth’s response. My late wife fought alcoholism all 43 years of our marriage, and I’m pretty sure it was at the root of her sudden death. She was a wonderful human being, but she would look me in the eye and say she hadn’t touched a drop in months, and it would be an absolute lie. Hegseth’s pledge set off all my alarms, and brought back some memories I would rather leave buried.
I fully understand your position having been there myself.
I also know that it is easy to project in cases like these. Such projection can do serious damage to the target of the accusation.
I’ve fortunately not been exposed to addiction to the same degree, but the phrasing of the pledge definitely gives me the same vibes.
I wonder, too, how did they get private emails? No one ever asks when emails are used to attack people.
The answer to that was part of the NYT article about the emails. When Hegsheth’s mom sent him the email, she either CC’d or forwarded his ex, presumably to show support for her daughter-in-law.
My understanding is that the ex-wife provided the emails.
he made a pledge to the service members, that he considers himself on deployment. Which is a way of keeping the faith that his job is to serve them and the country.
I agree that he found a clever way to explain that pledge, but someone with no history of alcohol abuse would, I think, as I would, say: sorry, I don’t have a drinking problem and nobody will come forward to say I do. I enjoy a beer or two socially, or some wine now and then, and intend to keep on enjoying it. Bite me.”
He referenced “general order number 1,” which prohibits military personnel from consuming alcohol during deployment …
That sentence is inaccurate. It implies that GO1 is a blanket prohibition applying to all military personnel during any deployment. That is not true — it is an order applying to one unit for a specific deployment.
Many of his coworkers at Fox have gone on record saying he showed no signs of any drinking problem.
And if I looked like he does, and been as famous, my ability to resist the advances of women who wished to treat me as a self propelled sex toy would have been woefully insufficient.
I think we have to discount the Fox News chorus. I just watched, after avoiding it for years, “Bombshell” about the Roger Ailes sexual harassment scandal. He was guilty as hell, but lots of Fox New workers swore that the allegations were all lies.
I think he looks too much like Christian Slater, who is creepy.
I think we have to discount the Fox News chorus. I just watched, after avoiding it for years, “Bombshell” about the Roger Ailes sexual harassment scandal. He was guilty as hell, but lots of Fox New workers swore that the allegations were all lies.
The situations are not analogous. Roger Ailes could fire anyone on a moment’s notice.
I suspect that Hegseth didn’t enjoy anything like that privilege.
Consequently, your assertion that the Fox News chorus can be discounted is not well grounded. I listened to Mollie Hemingway on the Federalist’s “You’re Wrong” podcast today. Mollie Hemingway, who still appears on Fox, was firmly contradicted charges of his abusive drinking.
Full disclosure: Except for Gutfeld, I do not watch Fox News; indeed, save for Gutfeld, I do not watch TV at all. (Youtube fabrication porn excepted.)
Agree, not exactly analogous, but Hegsie is still seen as part of the “team,” there is loyalty there, and gee, won’t it be nice if he isconfirmed and Fox News has an insider running the Pentagon.