Closing summary
After more than four hours, the Senate armed services committee has wrapped up its confirmation hearing for Pete Hegseth, Donald Trump’s nominee as defense secretary. Hegseth’s selection was controversial from almost the moment it was announced, after reports emerged that he had been accused of sexual assault, had been unfaithful in his marriages and was known for drinking to excess. Democrats have vowed to oppose him, and some Republicans, who hold the majority in the Senate, have seemed uneasy as well. But as the hearing came to a close, there was no sign from GOP lawmakers on the panel that they were willing to vote against confirming him, particularly after Hegseth walked back previous statements he had made against women serving in military combat roles.
Here’s a look back at what else happened today.
Hegseth admitted “I’m not a perfect person” in his opening statement, but decried the reports about his misconduct as part of a “coordinated smear campaign” intended to hurt himself and Trump. He also described himself as a “change agent” who would make the Pentagon more responsive to global threats.
Joni Ernst, a Republican senator and combat veteran, was among those who signaled skepticism about Hegseth after his nomination was announced, but at the hearing said she had “many productive conversations” with the nominee in the weeks since.
Mazie Hirono, a Democratic senator, tried to nail down Hegseth’s views on invading Greenland, staying sober and shooting protesters, but the nominee largely refused to answer. Fellow Democrat Tim Kaine aggressively questioned him over his infidelity and alleged sexual assault, the latter of which Hegseth called a “false claim”.
Jack Smith, the justice department special counsel who led a fruitless prosecution of Trump for attempting to overturn the 2020 election, defended his decision to bring the charges and called claims of bias “laughable” in a report.
Flags will fly at full-staff at the Capitol for Trump’s inauguration next week, House speaker Mike Johnson said. They’ll return to half-staff the following day for the remainder of Jimmy Carter’s mourning period.
Updated
US flags were lowered to half-staff for 30 days after Jimmy Carter died, but Mike Johnson, the Republican speaker of the House of Representatives, has ordered them raised at the Capitol for Donald Trump’s inauguration on Monday.
“On January 20th, the flags at the Capitol will fly at full-staff to celebrate our country coming together behind the inauguration of our 47th President, Donald Trump. The flags will be lowered back to half-staff the following day to continue honoring President Jimmy Carter,” Johnson said in a statement.
Former special counsel Jack Smith’s report into his failed attempt to prosecute Donald Trump began with a letter to the outgoing attorney general Merrick Garland that serves as something of a requiem for what would have been one of the biggest criminal trials in American history. The Guardian’s Robert Tait takes a closer look at what Smith had to say:
A forlorn note from Jack Smith to Merrick Garland, the attorney general, provides a poignant epitaph into the unfulfilled and ultimately fruitless two-year criminal investigation into Donald Trump.
“While we were not able to bring the cases we charged to trial, I believe the fact that our team stood up for the rule of law matters,” the special prosecutor wrote in a letter attached to the 137-page report, which concludes that the president-elect would have been criminally convicted for his efforts to overturn the 2020 election if he had not been re-elected four years later.
“I believe the example our team set for others to fight for justice without regard for the personal costs matters.”
With Trump less than a week away from returning to the White House after having tried to stay there by resorting to foul play, there is a certain pathos to Smith’s insistence that his endeavours were not in vain.
There is also an irony that his incongruously hopeful message should be addressed to Garland.
The Democratic National Committee said Pete Hegseth was “dodging and flailing” in his confirmation hearing, which the group called “disastrous”.
“The confirmation hearings for Trump’s Cabinet kicked off today with an embarrassing showcase of the unfitness and incompetence of Trump’s nominees,” DNC communications director Rosemary Boeglin said in a statement.
“Pete Hegseth dodged straightforward questions about the appalling allegations against him – including sexual assault and inappropriate workplace behavior – and made it clear he lacks an understanding of the role and basic qualifications to run the Pentagon. Hegseth still owes the American people answers.”
Updated
Charlie Kirk, the leader of conservative youth organization Turning Point, threatened to run election challenges against any Republican who votes against Pete Hegseth for defense secretary.
“If anyone in the Senate GOP votes against confirming Pete Hegseth after his stellar performance today, there will be a primary challenge waiting for you. You can take that to the bank,” Kirk wrote on X.
Elon Musk, the owner of X and a megadonor to Trump, responded to Kirk with the “100” emoji, indicating he agreed – a sign that Musk would probably provide financial backing to challenge any Republican lawmakers who came out against Hegseth.
Updated
Trump floats new agency to collect foreign income, calling it External Revenue Service
Donald Trump announced he would create an “External Revenue Service” agency, a riff on the Internal Revenue Service that collects taxes.
The proposed new agency would “collect our Tariffs, Duties, and all Revenue that come from Foreign sources”, Trump wrote on Truth Social. It’s unclear what the new agency would entail or how it would be structured, but it appears to be part of Trump’s trade plans for increasing tariffs.
“We will begin charging those that make money off of us with Trade, and they will start paying, FINALLY, their fair share. January 20, 2025, will be the birth date of the External Revenue Service,” he wrote.
Democratic senator Ron Wyden of Oregon, the ranking member on the Senate finance committee, said in a statement that “no amount of silly rebranding will hide the fact that Trump is planning a multi-trillion-dollar tax hike on American families and small businesses to pay for another round of tax handouts to the rich.”
Updated
Incoming vice-president JD Vance weighed in during the confirmation hearing for Pete Hegseth, Trump’s defense secretary nominee, saying Democrats were “grandstanding”.
“I find this grandstanding from Senate Democrats over the Hegseth confirmation perplexing,” Vance wrote on X. “We haven’t won a war in three decades and we have a major recruitment challenge. Hegseth is assuredly NOT more of the same, and that’s good!”
Later, Vance called a point Hegseth made about there being too many generals and not enough emphasis on warfighters on the ground a “powerful point”.
Updated
Tense confirmation hearing for defense secretary nominee Hegseth ends with no signs of GOP defections
After more than four hours, the Senate armed services committee has wrapped up its confirmation hearing for Pete Hegseth, Donald Trump’s nominee as defense secretary. Hegseth’s nomination was controversial from almost the moment it was announced, after reports emerged that he had been accused of sexual assault, been unfaithful in his marriages and was known for drinking to excess. Democrats have vowed to oppose him, and some Republicans, who hold the majority in the Senate, seemed uneasy as well. But as his first confirmation hearing came to a close, there was no sign from GOP lawmakers on the panel that they were willing to vote against confirming him, particularly after Hegseth walked back previous statements he had made against women serving in military combat roles.
Here’s a look back at the highlights from the hearing:
Hegseth admitted “I’m not a perfect person” in his opening statement, but decried the reports about his misconduct as part of a “coordinated smear campaign” intended to hurt himself and Trump. He went on to describe himself as a “change agent” who would make the Pentagon more responsive to global threats.
Protesters interrupted Hegseth’s opening remarks, and were carried out by police.
Jack Reed, the top Democrat on the committee, said the FBI’s report into Hegseth’s background is “insufficient”, and unsuccessfully requested that it be shared with the full committee. He also told Hegseth he did not think he was qualified for the job.
Joni Ernst, a Republican senator and combat veteran, was among those who signaled skepticism about Hegseth after his nomination was announced, but at the hearing said she had “many productive conversations” with the nominee in the weeks since.
Mazie Hirono, a Democratic senator, tried to nail down Hegseth’s views on invading Greenland, staying sober and shooting protesters, but the nominee largely refused to answer. Fellow Democrat Tim Kaine aggressively questioned him over his infidelity and alleged sexual assault, the latter of which Hegseth called a “false claim”.
Democratic senator Elissa Slotkin, who in November won election in Michigan even as the state’s voters supported Donald Trump, attempted to nail down Pete Hegseth’s views on deploying active duty-troops for law enforcement duties in the United States.
Such a decision is something Trump advocated during his first term, particularly during the George Floyd protests of 2020. “If Donald Trump asked you to use the 82nd Airborne in law enforcement roles in Washington DC, would you also convince him otherwise?” Slotkin asked.
“I’m not going to get ahead of conversations I would have with the President. However, there are laws and processes inside our constitution that would be followed,” Hegseth replied.
Slotkin made other attempts to learn his views on the question, but Hegseth demurred, or brought up border security.
Hegseth says stories of excessive drinking are 'anonymous smears'
Democratic senator Mark Kelly is asking Pete Hegseth to respond to various stories of public drunkenness that have emerged about him since he was nominated as defense secretary.
“On Memorial Day, 2014 at a [Concerned Veterans for America (CVA)] event in Virginia, you needed to be carried out of the event for being intoxicated?” Kelly said, requesting answers of true or false from Hegseth. “Senator, anonymous smears,” he replied.
“Summer of 2014, in Cleveland, drunk in public with the CVA team?” Kelly asked. “Anonymous smears,” Hegseth replied.
“December of 2014 at the CVA Christmas party at the Grand Hyatt at Washington DC, you were noticeably intoxicated and had to be carried up to your room. Is that true or false?” the senator asked. Hegseth, again: “Anonymous smears”.
He reacted particularly strongly when Kelly asked: “In 2014, while in Louisiana on official business for CVA, did you take your staff, including young female staff members, to a strip club?”
“Absolutely not, anonymous smears,” Hegseth replied.
During this hearing, Hegseth has repeatedly admitted to making unspecified mistakes in his past, while simultaneously rejecting specific allegations against him as lies. Kelly accused the defense secretary nominee of trying to have it both ways:
You say you’ve had personal issues in your past, yet, when asked about issues, you blame an anonymous smear campaign, even when many of these claims are not anonymous. Which is it, have you overcome personal issues? Or are you the target of a smear campaign? It can’t be both.
It’s clear to me that you’re not being honest with us or the American people, because you know the truth would disqualify you from getting the job. And just as concerning as each of these specific disqualifying accusations are, what concerns me just as much is the idea of having a secretary of defense who is not transparent.
Updated
Under questioning from Republican senator Eric Schmitt, Pete Hegseth said he would reinstate the 8,000 active duty service members discharged under Joe Biden for refusing to get vaccinated against Covid-19.
“Senator, I will commit to this, because the commander in chief has committed to this, that not only will they be reinstated, they will receive an apology, back pay and rank that they lost because they were forced out due to an experimental vaccine,” Hegseth said.
Schmitt closed by saying that Hegseth’s nomination was indicative of the “disruptors versus the establishment” dynamic that fueled Donald Trump’s election victory:
I just want to say for all the talk of experience and not coming from the same cocktail parties that permanent Washington is used to, you are a breath of fresh air. And, again, if you weren’t paying attention to what this election was all about, it was about the disruptors versus the establishment. And the American people have had enough of business as usual for the same people that we line up for these same jobs who give us the same results.
We need somebody who’s going to go in there and fight for innovation, fight for change. I think you’re that person, and I appreciate your willingness to sit here and listen to some of these undignified attacks. It’s ridiculous.
Duckworth pressed her attack on Hegseth, reciting from the US army soldier’s creed.
“I will always place the mission first, and I am disciplined, physically and mentally tough, trained and proficient in my warrior task,” Duckworth said.
Hegseth has repeatedly said during this confirmation hearing that, despite earlier statements to the contrary, he is not opposed to women serving in combat roles, but rather worried that standards in the military have been eroded in an effort to make it more inclusive.
“Our troops already meet the standards,” Duckworth said, referring to his arguments. “We ask troops to man that ship, fight that fire, fly that helicopter … toward their very last breath. And they do that every single day. They cannot be led by someone who’s not competent to do the job. How can we ask these warriors to train and perform the absolute highest standards when you are asking us to lower the standards to make you the secretary of defense, simply because you are buddies with our president-elect?”
She closed with an attack on the defense secretary nominee’s competence:
You can’t seem to grasp that there is no US military as we know it, without the incredible women that we serve, women who’ve earned their place in their units. You have not earned your place as secretary of defense. You say you care about keeping our armed forces strong and that you like that Armed Forces meritocracy, then let’s not lower the standards for you. You, sir, are a no-go at this station.
Combat veteran Duckworth accuses Hegseth of being unqualified to lead Pentagon
Democrat Tammy Duckworth began by asking Pete Hegseth what qualifications he possesses to lead the Pentagon’s massive bureaucracy, zeroing in specifically on if he has ever supervised an audit.
“Senator, in both of the organizations I ran, we were always completely fiscally responsible,” Hegseth began, before Duckworth cut him off.
“Yes or no? Did you lead an audit? Do you not know this answer?” the senator said, her voice rising to speak over Hegseth.
She went on to accuse the nominee of being unqualified for the role:
Look, the secretary of defense is required to make quick decisions every single day that well with high-level information that’s being provided for them. A secretary of defense has to have breadth and depth of knowledge. Right now, I am concerned that you have neither.
Updated
Up now to question Pete Hegseth is Democratic senator Tammy Duckworth, an army veteran who lost both of her legs when the helicopter she was piloting was shot down in Iraq.
The Illinois lawmaker has been critical of Hegseth since his nomination was announced, particularly over his opposition to women serving in the military:
Elizabeth Warren accuses Hegseth of 'nomination conversion' over women in combat roles
Democratic senator Elizabeth Warren demanded to know why Pete Hegseth changed his views on women serving in combat roles.
“What I see is there’s a 32-day period in which you suddenly have another description about your views of women in the military. I just want to know what changed in the 32 days that the song you sang is not the song you come in here today to sing,” Warren said.
“Senator, the concerns I have, and the concerns … many have had, especially in ground combat units, is that, in pursuit of certain percentages or quotas, standards have been changed,” Hegseth began to reply.
Warren interrupted:
I’ve heard of deathbed conversions, but this is the first time I’ve heard of a nomination conversion. And I hope you understand that many women serving in the military right now might think that if you can convert so rapidly your long-held and aggressively pursued views in just 32 days, that 32 days after you get confirmed, maybe you’ll just reverse those views and go back to the old guy who said straight up, women do not belong in combat.
Updated
Asked about Ukraine, Hegseth says war 'needs to come to an end'
Independent senator Angus King asked Pete Hegseth for his views on assistance to Ukraine, noting that he did not mention the conflict in his opening statement.
“That’s a presidential-level policy decision. He’s made it very clear that he would like to see a end to that conflict. We know who the aggressor is. We know who the good guy is. We’d like to see it as advantageous for the Ukrainians as possible. But that war needs to come to an end,” Hegseth replied.
“You talk a lot about deterrence of China, I would submit that Xi Jinping is watching what we do very carefully. If we abandon Ukraine, that would be the strongest signal possible to Xi Jinping that he can take Taiwan without significant resistance from this country,” the Maine lawmaker said.
Tim Kaine then accused Pete Hegseth of not being forthcoming with Donald Trump’s transition team about the sexual assault allegation against him.
“You didn’t reveal any of this to President Trump or the transition team as they were considering you to be nominated for secretary of defense,” Kaine said. “You didn’t reveal the action, you didn’t reveal the criminal complaint, you didn’t reveal the criminal investigation, you didn’t reveal the settlement, you didn’t reveal the cash payment. Why didn’t you inform the commander-in-chief of the transition team of this very relevant event?”
“Senator, I’ve appreciated every part of the process with the transition team. They have been open and honest with me. We’ve had great conversations between the two of us,” Hegseth said.
“But you chose not to reveal this, right? Because you knew it would hurt your chances. So, you chose not to reveal this really important thing to the commander in chief and the transition team because you were worried about your chances, rather than trying to be candid with the future president of the United States. Are there any other important facts that you chose not to reveal to the president-elect and his team, as they were considering you to be secretary of defense?” Kaine said.
“Senator, I sit here before you, an open book,” the nominee replied. Kaine butted in, saying that Hegseth was constrained by “multiple non-disclosure and confidentiality agreements tying the hands of many people who would like to comment to us”.
Updated
Hegseth decries 'false claim' as Democrat presses him on sexual assault allegation, infidelity
Democratic senator Tim Kaine has lobbed a volley of questions at Pete Hegseth, demanding answers from him about a sexual assault allegation and instances of marital infidelities.
“I want to return to the incident that you referenced a minute ago that occurred in Monterey, California, in October 2017. At that time, you were still married to your second wife, correct?” Kaine asked.
“I believe so,” Hegseth replied.
“And you had just fathered a child by a woman who would later become your third wife, correct?” the senator asked. Hegseth replied that he is innocent: “Senator, I was falsely charged, fully investigated and completely cleared.”
“So, you think you are completely clear because you committed no crime. That’s your definition of cleared? You had just fathered a child two months before by a woman that was not your wife. I am shocked that you would stand here and say you’re completely cleared. Can you so casually cheat on a second wife and cheat on the mother of a child who’d been born two months before, and you tell us you were completely cleared?
“Her child’s name is Gwendolyn Hope Hegseth, and she’s a child of God, and she’s seven years old,” Hegseth said.
Kaine pressed on: “You have admitted that you had sex while you were married to wife two, after you just had fathered a child by wife three. You’ve admitted that. Now, if it had been a sexual assault, that would be disqualifying to be secretary of defense, wouldn’t it?”
“It was a false claim then, and a false claim now,” he said.
Kaine’s questioning grew personal: “I assume that in each of your weddings, you’ve pledged to be faithful to your wife. You’ve taken an oath to do that, haven’t you?”
“Senator, as I’ve acknowledged to everyone in this committee, not a perfect person,” Hegseth said.
Updated
Hegseth dodges questions on invading Greenland, shooting protesters, drinking on the job
Democratic senator Mazie Hirono is now trying to nail down Pete Hegseth’s positions on issues ranging from his drinking to his willingness to obey an order from Donald Trump to invade Greenland and the Panama canal.
“Since you became a legal adult, have you ever made unwanted requests for sexual favors or committed any verbal or physical harassment or assault of a sexual nature?” Hirono replied. “No, senator,” Hegseth replied.
“Have you ever faced discipline or entered into a settlement relating to this kind of conduct?” Hirono asked.
“Senator, I was falsely accused in October of 2017, it was fully investigated and I was completely cleared,” he replied.
“I don’t think completely cleared is accurate, but the fact is that your own lawyer said that you entered into a [non-disclosure agreement], paid a person who accused you of raping her a sum of money to make sure that she did not file a complaint,” the senator said.
The Hawaii lawmaker tried and failed to get Hegseth to commit to resigning if he drank alcohol, after telling senators during meetings last year that he would stay sober, if confirmed.
Hirono then asked if Hegseth would abide by an order to have the military shoot protesters in the legs. Trump reportedly gave such an order to then-defense secretary Mark Esper in 2020 after protests broke out outside the White House after George Floyd’s death.
Hegseth dodged, saying, “I saw Secret Service agents get injured by rioters trying to jump over the fence.” The senator then cut him off: “That sounds to me that you will comply with such an order. You will shoot protesters in the leg.”
She then asked if he would have the military invade Greenland, or take over the Panama canal. Hegseth again dodged, recounting instead how Trump won the November elections.
Hirono concluded her questioning by saying that she believes Hegseth is unqualified:
Mr Hegseth, I have noticed a disturbing pattern. You previously have made a series of inflammatory statements about women in combat, LGBTQ service members, Muslim Americans and Democrats. Since your nomination, however, you have walked those back on TV and in interviews, and, most recently, in your opening statements.
You are no longer on Fox & Friends. If confirmed, your words, actions and decisions will have real impacts on national security and our service members’ lives. There are close to three million personnel in the department of defense, $900bn budget. I hardly think you are prepared to do the job.
Updated
Republican Joni Ernst made clear she wanted to hear Pete Hegseth’s views on two topics: whether women should be able to serve in combat roles, and whether he would appoint a top-level official to deal with the issue of sexual assault in the military.
“Yes, women will have access to ground-combat roles, combat roles, given the standards remain high, and will have a review to ensure the standards have not been eroded in any one of these cases. That will be part of one of the first things we do at the Pentagon is reviewing that in a gender-neutral way,” Hegseth replied to the first question.
Asked by Ernst if he would “appoint a senior-level official dedicated to sexual assault prevention and response”, Hegseth said:
Senator, as we have discussed, yes, I will.
At that point, Ernst’s time expired.
Key Republican senator notes 'many productive conversations' with Hegseth after early hesitancy
Now questioning Pete Hegseth is Joni Ernst, the combat veteran and Republican senator from Iowa who initially appeared skeptical of his nomination.
That prompted threats from Donald Trump’s allies to support a primary challenge to Ernst, and in recent weeks, the senator has signaled more support for Hegseth.
She began her questioning by entering into the congressional record a letter of support for Hegseth, and noted that they had “many productive conversations” and “very frank conversations” in recent weeks – further signs she has warmed to his nomination.
Updated
Republican senators have generally been giving Pete Hegseth opportunities to defend himself, or asked for his views on specific defense department policies.
South Dakota Republican Mike Rounds asked Hegseth to respond to a question, asked by Democrat Kirsten Gillibrand during her time to speak, about his views on liberals, a group he has criticized, serving in the military.
“As far as politics, senator,it has been the joy of my life to lead men and women in military outfits. When you’re in combat or in training, there’s a lot of conversations that happen, and you start to realize that a lot of people you’re serving with share your political ideas or they don’t. You find out there’s Republicans, there’s Democrats, there’s Democrats, there’s libertarians, there’s independents, there’s vegetarians, everything in between. None of that matters,” Hegseth said.
Updated
Democratic senator Kirsten Gillibrand pressed Pete Hegseth further on his objections to women serving in military combat roles.
“Please explain these types of statements because they’re brutal and they’re mean and they disrespect men and women who are willing to die for this country,” the New York senator asked.
“I would point out I’ve never disparaged women serving in the military. I respect every single female service member that has put on the uniform past and present,” Hegseth said.
Updated
Hegseth walks back comments criticizing women in combat roles
Democratic senator Jeanne Shaheen took Pete Hegseth to task for comments he has made criticizing the ability of women to serve in military combat roles.
The New Hampshire senator noted that as recently as November of last year, Hegseth said in an interview: “I’m straight up saying that we should not have women in combat roles. It hasn’t made us more effective.”
“Senator, I would like to clarify when I’m talking about that issue, it’s not about the capabilities of men and women, it’s about standards,” Hegseth told Shaheen.
“And this committee has talked a lot about standards, standards that we, unfortunately over time, have seen eroded in certain duty positions, certain schools, certain places, which affects readiness, which is what I care about the most.”
Shaheen noted that after being nominated as defense secretary, Hegseth walked back his comments criticizing women serving in combat roles. “What do you have to say to the almost 400,000 women who are serving today about your position on whether they should be capable to rise through the highest ranks of our military?” the senator asked.
“Our differences are not what define us. Our unity and our shared purpose is what define us, and you will be treated fairly, with dignity, honor and respect, just like every man and woman in uniform, just like the men and women that I’ve worked with in my veterans organizations,” Hegseth said.
Updated
Democratic ranking member says FBI report into Hegseth is 'insufficient'
The Democratic ranking member Jack Reed said the FBI’s report into Pete Hegseth’s background was “insufficient”, and wants to have it shared with all lawmakers on the armed services committee.
“You and I have both seen the FBI background investigation into Mr Hegseth, and I want to say for the record, I believe the investigation was insufficient. Frankly, there are still FBI obligations to talk to people they have not had access to,” Reed said.
However, the committee chair Roger Wicker said he planned to keep the report just to himself and Reed:
What I intend to do is follow the exact precedent that we’ve had for the last two hearings with regard to secretaries of defense, not only Secretary Austin, but Secretary Mattis, eight years ago, and that was for the chair and the ranking member to see the report, and so that is my intention as chair of this committee.
Updated
Hegseth says 'I'm not a perfect person', but attacks reports of misconduct as 'coordinated smear campaign'
Pete Hegseth is now taking questions from senators, beginning with Republican armed services committee chair Roger Wicker, who asked him to respond to reports of his personal misconduct.
Hegseth has been accused of sexual assault, which he denies. Reports have also emerged that he had a reputation for drinking excessively, cheated on his wives and mismanaged finances at two veterans-related charities.
While he acknowledged some personal flaws, Hegseth said the reports were false and intended to hurt him and Donald Trump.
“There was a coordinated smear campaign orchestrated in the media against us that was clear from moment one, and what we knew is that it wasn’t about me. Most of it was about President Donald Trump, who’s had to endure the very same thing for much longer amounts of time, and he endured it in incredibly strong ways,” Hegseth said.
He went to allege that people who could refute these stories were not quoted in the “leftwing media”:
From story after story in the media, leftwing media, we saw anonymous source after anonymous source based on second- or third-hand accounts. And time and time again, stories would come out, and people would reach out to me and say, you know, I’ve read, I’ve spoken to this reporter about who you really are, and I was willing to go on the record, but they didn’t print my quote. They didn’t print any of my quotes.
Or, I’ve worked with you for 10 years, or I was your accountant, or I was your chief operating officer, or I was your board member, or I was with you on 100 different tour stops for Concerned Veterans for America, no one called me. No one asked about your conduct on the record or off the record.
Instead, a small handful of anonymous sources were allowed to drive a smear campaign and agenda about me, because our left wing media in America today, sadly, doesn’t care about the truth. All they were out to do, Mr Chairman, was to destroy me.
Hegseth admitted some unspecified faults, but said he has changed:
I’m not a perfect person, but redemption is real, and God forged me in ways that I know I’m prepared for, and I’m honored by the people standing and sitting behind me and look forward to leading this Pentagon on behalf of the war fighters.
Updated
Calling himself 'change agent', Hegseth says his combat experiences make him qualified to lead Pentagon
Pete Hegseth told senators that his combat experience overseas gave him the skills to lead the defense department.
“Now, it is true, and has been acknowledged, that I don’t have a similar biography to defense secretaries of the last 30 years. But, as President Trump also told me, we’ve repeatedly placed people atop the Pentagon with supposedly the right credentials, whether they are retired generals, academics or defense contractor executives, and where has it gotten us?” Hegseth asked.
“He believes, and I humbly agree, that it’s time to give someone with dust on his boots the helm. A change agent, someone with no vested interest in certain companies or specific programs or approved narratives.”
Hegseth continued:
My only special interest is the war fighter, deterring wars, and if called upon, winning wars by ensuring our warriors never enter a fair fight. We let them win and we bring them home. Like many of my generation, I’ve been there. I’ve led troops in combat. I’ve been on patrol for days. I’ve pulled a trigger down range, heard bullets whiz by, flexcuffed insurgents, called in close air support, led medevacs, dodged IEDs, pulled out dead bodies and knelt before a battlefield cross. This is not academic for me. This is my life. I led then, and I will lead now.
Updated
Protesters interrupt Hegseth's opening remarks
Pete Hegseth is making his opening statement, but has been repeatedly interrupted by protesters.
“To all the troops and veterans watching and here in the room, Navy Seals, Green Berets, soldiers, pilots, sailors, marines, gold stars and more, too many friends to name, officers, enlisted, black and white, young and old, men and women, all Americans, all warriors, this hearing is for you,” Hegseth said.
A few seconds later, a protester began shouting, but was quickly escorted out by police. It was not clear what the protester said.
Hegseth attempted to continue, but a second protester interrupted him.
“Let me just say this, the Capitol police are going to remove immediately individuals that are disrupting the hearing. I see a pattern attempted to be inflicted on the committee, and we’re simply not going to tolerate that,” committee chair Roger Wicker said.
Not long after, yet another protester began shouting. He was carried out by police.
Updated
Hegseth is being introduced by two supportive witnesses.
The first is Norm Coleman, a Republican former senator from Hegseth’s home state, Minnesota:
Pete was a brave soldier, has been an able communicator, and I believe is about to begin a great second act as our secretary of defense.
He has struggled and overcome great personal challenges. Please don’t give into the cynical notion that people can’t change. We need the ones who can change to lead us to be beacons of hope and to remind us that grace can lead us home.
Four years ago, President Biden’s nominee, Lloyd Austin, a good and honorable man, received 97 votes on the floor of the Senate, and we went through the debacle of the Afghanistan withdrawal. Putin invaded Ukraine. The Houthis endanger our shipping lanes. We witnessed Israeli miracles against America’s enemies in the Middle East, where the United States was more of an impediment than a help.
Our recruitment numbers have sunk dramatically, and our southern border has suffered a slow but dangerous invasion. Yes, Pete Hegseth is an out of the box nominee, and I say it’s high time to get out of the box.
The second is the Republican congressman Mike Waltz, who Trump nominated as his national security adviser:
This is a man who can reinvigorate that warrior ethos, and this is a man that will lead. I can’t imagine having a more capable partner in my position as national security adviser. Pete is a man of family, of faith, and he’s committed to making our country stronger again, and most importantly, brother, I know this in my core. He will always have as a first principle the service members that are out there on the frontlines for all of us, at the heart of every decision he makes.
So, senators, I urge you to support this confirmation. It is critical that President Trump has his national security team in place for the challenges ahead.
Updated
Reed took issue with Hegseth’s advocacy against diversity issues in the military, as well as his calls to pardon soldiers accused of war crimes.
A former army officer, Reed recounted how when he joined the military in 1970, it “was rife with racial tension”.
Today, “Our military is more diverse than it has ever been, but more importantly, it is more lethal than it has ever been,” Reed said.
He then said he would ask Hegseth to explain his opposition to issues to make the US armed forces more inclusive.
I hope you’ll explain why you believe such diversity is making the military weak, and how you propose to undo that without undermining military leadership and harming readiness, recruitment and retention.
Mr Hegseth, another reason I’m deeply concerned about your nomination is your disregard for the law of armed conflict and your support for service members who have been convicted of war crimes. You have championed the pardoning of military members who were turned in by their fellow soldiers and Seals, and let me emphasize that they weren’t discovered by reporters. They were turned in by fellow soldiers and fellow Seals, and also pardoning of military contractors convicted of killing 14 Iraqi citizens without course.
You have also advocated for the restitution of interrogation methods like waterboarding that have been defined as torture, and you have belittled the advice and counsel of judge advocates general while on deployment.
Updated
Ranking Democrat Jack Reed tells Hegseth 'I do not believe that you are qualified' for defense job
Now speaking is Jack Reed, the committee’s Democratic ranking member, who quickly told Pete Hegseth that he does not think he is qualified to serve as defense secretary.
“Mr Hegseth, I do not believe that you are qualified to meet the overwhelming demands of this job,” said Reed, who represents Rhode Island.
“We must acknowledge the concerning public reports against you. A variety of sources, including your own writings, implicate you with disregarding the laws of war, financial mismanagement, racist and sexist remarks about men and women in uniform, alcohol abuse, sexual assault, sexual harassment and other troubling issues. I reviewed many of these allegations and find them extremely alarming. Indeed, the totality of your own writings and alleged conduct would disqualify any service member from holding any leadership position in the military, much less being confirmed as the secretary of defense.”
Updated
Wicker referred to the many allegations of misconduct made against Hegseth, saying they were “anonymous sources” that he did not find credible.
“Much has been made of both Mr Hegseth’s personal life and some of his policy pronouncements regarding his personal conduct. Mr Hegseth has admitted to falling short, as we all do from time to time,” Wicker said.
“It is noteworthy that the vast majority of the accusations leveled at Mr Hegseth have come from anonymous sources. Contrast these anonymous accusations with the many public letters of support and commendation we have seen letters from people who served with Mr Hegseth. These individuals have worked with him professionally. They really know him and his character. These patriotic Americans have been willing to put their names and reputations on the line to support Mr Hegseth. I look forward to sharing these testimonials with the American people.”
Updated
The Republican chair went on to acknowledge that Pete Hegseth is an “unconventional” choice to lead the Pentagon, but said he believed the nominee is the right one to turn around a defense department that is not prepared for today’s conflicts.
“Today’s department of defense is no longer prepared for great power competition. It is not a national defense institution ready to achieve and sustain technological supremacy across the range of operations,” Roger Wicker said.
“Admittedly, this nomination is unconventional. The nominee is unconventional, just like that New York developer who wrote down the escalator in 2015 to announce his candidacy for president. That may be what makes Mr Hegseth an excellent choice to improve this unacceptable status quo that I just described.”
Updated
The committee’s Republican chairman Roger Wicker politely told Pete Hegseth’s supporters in the audience – and anyone else – that they will not allow disruptions during their hearing.
“We had a very appropriate expression of approval by the members of the audience as our nominee and his family walked in. The distinguished ranking member and I sincerely hope that that is the last signal of approval or disapproval in today’s hearing,” said Wicker, who represents Mississippi.
As Pete Hegseth entered the hearing room, supporters in the audience began clapping and cheering.
Some chanted “USA! USA!” Hegseth shook hands with a few people in the crowd.
Senate committee to consider Pete Hegseth's nomination to lead Pentagon
The Senate armed services committee will soon begin its confirmation hearing for Pete Hegseth, the army national guard veteran and former Fox News host who Donald Trump has nominated to lead the defense department.
Since his nomination was announced, reports have emerged of Hegseth drinking excessively and engaging in marital infidelity. He also has faced an accusation of sexual misconduct, which he denies.
During the hearing, he will undoubtedly be asked about these reports, as well as whether he has the experience to lead the massive military bureaucracy.
Follow along as we cover it live.
Despite the supreme court’s immunity ruling, Jack Smith wrote that he believes the charges he filed against Donald Trump still held water.
He notes that his team was able to secure a superseding indictment from a grand jury after the top court handed down its ruling, which gave Trump immunity for official acts taken as president.
Referring to his original indictment handed down by a grand jury in August 2023, Smith wrote:
Because of the unprecedented facts and the variety of legal issues that would be litigated in this case, the Office was aware that the case would involve litigation risks, as would any case of this scope and complexity. However, after an exhaustive and detailed review of the law, the Office concluded that the charges were well supported and would survive any legal challenges absent a change in the law as it existed at the time of indictment.
He then recounts how he was able to again indict Trump on the same charges, but using evidence that was admissible under the supreme court’s ruling:
The Supreme Court’s decision required the office to reanalyze the evidence it had collected. The original indictment alleged that Mr. Trump, as the incumbent president, used all available tools and powers, both private and official, to overturn the legitimate results of the election despite notice, including from official advisors, that his fraud claims were false and he had lost the election.
Given the supreme court’s ruling, the office reevaluated the evidence and assessed whether Mr. Trump’s non-immune conduct-either his private conduct as a candidate or official conduct for which the office could rebut the presumption of immunity-violated federal 33 law. The office concluded that it did. After doing so, the office sought, and a new grand jury issued, a superseding indictment with identical charges but based only on conduct that was not immune because it was either unofficial or any presumptive immunity could be rebutted.
Donald Trump’s return to the White House led Jack Smith to dismiss the charges he brought against the former president, but in his report, he notes that he never intended his case to affect the 2024 election.
“The office’s exceptional working pace ensured that its investigative work could be completed, charging decisions could be made, and any necessary indictments could be returned by the summer of 2023, long before the election,” Smith wrote.
“The office had no interest in affecting the presidential election, and it complied fully with the letter and spirit of the Department’s policy regarding election year sensitivities.”
Smith succeeded in handing down his indictment of Trump in 2023, but legal wrangling in the case prevented it from going to trial before the November 2024 election.
A major aspect of that delay was the supreme court’s consideration of Trump’s argument that he was immune from prosecution, which put the case on pause for months. The court ultimately handed down a decision that narrowed Smith’s case, only for it to end entirely after Trump won re-election.
Jack Smith wrote that Donald Trump knew his allegations of fraud in the 2020 election were false, but continued to make them anyway.
“Mr Trump’s false claims included dozens of specific claims regarding certain states, such as that large numbers of dead, non-resident, non-citizen, or otherwise ineligible voters had cast ballots, or that voting machines had changed votes for Mr Trump to votes against him. These claims were demonstrably and, in many cases, obviously false,” Smith said in his report into his attempt to prosecute Trump on election subversion charges.
He continued:
The Office investigated whether Mr Trump believed the claims he made. Evidence from a variety of sources established that Mr Trump knew that there was no outcome-determinative fraud in the 2020 election, that many of the specific claims he made were untrue, and that he had lost the election. He knew this because some of the highest-ranking officials in his own Administration, including the vice-president, told him directly that there was no evidence to support his claims. Mr Trump’s private advisors, both within and outside of his Campaign, told him the same.
Updated
Jack Smith defends decision to prosecute Trump, calls claims of political interference 'laughable'
In his report detailing his attempt to prosecute Donald Trump for allegedly trying to overturn his 2020 election defeat, former special counsel Jack Smith hit back at claims by the president-elect that he pursued the charges for political reasons.
“While I relied greatly on the counsel, judgment, and advice of our team, I want it to be clear that the ultimate decision to bring charges against Mr Trump was mine. It is a decision I stand behind fully,” wrote Smith, who resigned from the justice department last week.
He added that “nobody within the Department of Justice ever sought to interfere with, or improperly influence, my prosecutorial decision making”.
“And to all who know me well, the claim from Mr Trump that my decisions as a prosecutor were influenced or directed by the Biden administration or other political actors is, in a word, laughable,” Smith wrote.
Updated
Trump says Hegseth will make 'great' defense secretary
Donald Trump has started his morning off by posting on Truth Social a message of support for Pete Hegseth, his nominee for the post of defense secretary.
The president-elect wrote:
Pete Hegseth will make a GREAT Secretary of Defense. He has my Complete and Total support. Good luck today, Pete!
Updated
Biden Trump-proofs $74bn in climate funding but $20bn remains vulnerable
The Biden administration has raced to allocate $74bn of funding for climate initiatives before Donald Trump’s inauguration, leaving $20bn vulnerable to potential rollback by the incoming president, new figures reveal.
As the inauguration of Trump looms, the outgoing administration has been accelerating its allocation of cash for climate change and clean energy programs before they are throttled by the incoming US president.
Laden with funds from the landmark Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), the Biden administration is rushing to lock in support for renewable power, electric vehicles, batteries and other initiatives aimed at combating the climate crisis in a way that Trump cannot easily axe.
Trump has vowed to kill off what he calls the “green new scam and rescind all of the unspent funds” once he becomes president on 20 January. “That will be such an honor,” the president-elect said on the campaign trail, calling the climate bill “the greatest scam in the history of any country”.
While Trump will be able to stymie unallocated spending, funding already committed will be difficult to claw back. The Biden administration has therefore been racing to push out money to make it Trump-proof, having now allocated $74bn of IRA funding, according to figures provided by Atlas Public Policy.
You can read the full story, by Oliver Milman and Aliya Uteuova, here:
As we reported in an earlier post, special counsel Jack Smith wrote in a partially released report that Donald Trump would have been convicted of illegally trying to overturn the result of the 2020 presidential election if he had not been successfully re-elected four years later.
Trump had been indicted in August 2023 on charges of working to overturn the election, but the case was delayed by appeals and ultimately significantly narrowed by a conservative-majority supreme court that held for the first time that former presidents enjoy sweeping immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts.
Though Smith sought to salvage the indictment, the team dismissed it entirely in November because of longstanding justice department policy that says sitting presidents cannot face federal prosecution.
In a post to Truth Social this morning, Trump wrote:
To show you how desperate Deranged Jack Smith is, he released his Fake findings at 1:00am in the morning. Did he say that the Unselect Committee illegally destroyed and deleted all of the evidence.
Trump has suggested, without evidence, that the bipartisan House select committee that investigated the effort to subvert the 2020 result – which the president elect falsely claimed was rigged against him - had destroyed evidence because it it showed how “totally innocent” he was.
In the end, Trump calculated correctly that he could outrun the law by staging a spectacular political comeback and regaining the White House, as my colleague David Smith notes in this story.
Updated
What executive orders may Trump issue after he is sworn in as president next week?
Donald Trump plans to issue a flurry of executive orders and directives after he is sworn in as president on Monday. Sources have told Reuters this could be as much as 100 for day one and beyond. Transition advisers have been preparing orders for the president-elect to choose from. Decisions still need to be made on which ones will be released on Monday – inauguration day - and which will come out afterwards.
The Reuters news agency has compiled the following breakdown of what these orders, which range from immigration to the economy, may look like:
Immigration
Many of the actions that the Republican plans on his first day as president are aimed at ramping up immigration enforcement and following through on his pledge to deport record numbers of immigrants in the U.S. illegally. The executive actions would give federal immigration officers more latitude to arrest people with no criminal records, send more troops to the US-Mexico border, and restart construction of the border wall, Reuters reported in November.
Trump is expected to declare illegal immigration a national emergency to unlock military funds for border wall construction. He also signaled in a Truth Social post in November that he would shift military resources to assist with his deportation plans.
Energy
Trump is reportedly considering a suite of executive orders to roll out within days of taking office targeting everything from electric vehicles to withdrawing again from the Paris climate agreement, a move he took in his first administration. Members of his transition team are recommending sweeping changes to cut off support for electric vehicles and charging stations and to strengthen measures blocking the import of cars, components and battery materials from China, according to a document seen by Reuters.
Tarrifs
Trump could follow through on his threats to increase tariffs on imported goods from America’s biggest trading partners. He thinks tariffs would help boost economic growth in the US, although opponents warn that the costs would likely be passed down to consumers.
Pardons
Trump has said he will take action immediately on taking office to issue pardons for some of the hundreds of people convicted or charged in connection with the US Capitol attack in early January 2021. Although JD Vance, the incoming vice-president, has said Trump supporters who carried out violence during the riot should not be pardoned by him after he begins his second presidency.
Updated
We are leading today’s blog on the upcoming Senate confirmation hearing for president-elect Donald Trump’s pick for defense secretary, former Fox News host Pete Hegseth (see post at 08.53 for more details).
Elizabeth Warren, a Democratic senator from Massachusetts, has written a letter to Hegseth ahead of the hearing, expressing her concerns about his suitability for the high-profile role.
In the letter, she wrote:
I have serious concerns about your qualifications to serve in this role given your past history, including mismanagement of two non-profit organizations you ran, accusations of sexual assault and drinking problems, your blatant disregard for the contributions of female servicemembers, support for war crimes and torture, threats to politicize the military, advocating for ‘war’ against political enemies, threats to undermine DoD readiness and diversity, and contempt for veterans receiving benefits they earned.
“We cannot have a defense secretary whose fellow servicemembers feel concerned enough about to report as a potential insider threat,” she wrote in the letter (Hegseth was branded an “insider threat” by a fellow member of the Army National Guard over his tattoos. He said the incident led him to be pulled from Guard duty in Washington during Biden’s inauguration).
Warren, who has been a vocal opponent of Trump, co-sponsored the Presidential Transition Enhancement Act of 2019 to strengthen the ethics requirements that govern presidential transitions. In recent weeks, Trump’s party has coalesced around his pick for defense secretary. “I look forward to discussing (Hegseth’s) plans to shake up DoD (Department of Defense) and protect the warfighter,” Republican Senator Markwayne Mullin said yesterday. Cabinet nominees almost never lose Senate votes, so it is likely, looking at it in a historical context at least, that Hegseth will be confirmed.
Updated
The Biden administration is in its final week before Trump returns to the White House. Foreign policy dominated his term. Wars are raging in the Middle East (with Washington backing Israel’s assault on Gaza while conducting targeted airstrikes in Syria, Yemen and Iraq), Russia’s war on Ukraine is continuing, and there is growing tensions between China and Taiwan. Biden was much criticised for the chaotic withdrawal of the US military from Afghanistan in 2021. Of course there are many more conflicts around the world but these areas have been the main ones Washington has focused on. Andrew Roth, the Guardian’s global affairs correspondent, has written this analysis about whether or not the Biden administration has been successful on foreign policy issues after the outgoing president said the US is “winning” on the world stage. Here is an extract from his story:
On paper, few US presidents could boast the foreign policy bona fides of Joe Biden, a veteran statesman with nearly a half-century of experience before he even stepped into office.
But as his term comes to an end, critics have said that the president will leave a legacy of cautious and underpowered diplomacy, as even allies have conceded that the administration is still grasping for a cornerstone foreign policy success.
That hasn’t stopped the Biden administration from declaring victory in its final days – and scrambling to secure a last-minute ceasefire in Gaza that could potentially salvage that legacy before Trump steps into office.
“Thanks to our administration, the United States is winning the worldwide competition,” Biden said in a final foreign policy speech on Monday delivered at the state department. “Compared to four years ago, America is stronger, our alliances are stronger, our adversaries and competitors are weaker.”
If this is winning, many Americans may struggle to imagine what losing would look like.
Biden’s administration has spent much of its time and political capital abroad attempting to contain a series of foreign wars and crises in which it has seemed impotent to impose its will.
Donald Trump will come in to power with a “trifecta” of governmental control after his Republican party won the House of Representatives, the Senate and the presidency in the 2024 US election. It will give Trump significant power to enact his agenda on the economy, immigration and other major issues.
House Democrats are said to be prioritising taking control of Congress in 2026 over everything else, with Axios reporting that the House Democrats’ two largest ideological factions – the Progressive Caucus and the centre-left New Democrat Coalition – are trying to smooth over any disagreements ahead of Trump returning to the White House on 20 January. The two factions contain roughly 100 House Democrats. Who was to blame for the loss in the presidential election and the Biden administration’s policy towards Israel during its war on Gaza are among the topics of disagreement between some House Democrats.
Republicans won 220 House seats in the November elections, while Democrats won 215, an extremely narrowly divided House. Republicans currently have 219 sitting members (due to the resignation of former Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz), one more seat than the minimum 218 required to pass legislation in the House.
“Across the board, I think all of us in the Democratic Caucus want to focus on taking back the majority,” Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash), the former chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, told Axios.
Progressive Caucus chair Greg Casar (D-Texas) told Axios there are “conversations being had about trying to make sure that we’re unified and cordial and understanding of everybody.”
Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin are expected to have a call in the coming days or weeks, US Congressman Mike Waltz, the incoming national security adviser, told ABC on Sunday.
“Everybody knows that this has to end somehow diplomatically,” Waltz, a Trump loyalist who also served in the National Guard as a colonel, told ABC.
“I just don’t think it’s realistic to say we’re going to expel every Russian from every inch of Ukrainian soil, even Crimea. President Trump has acknowledged that reality, and I think it’s been a huge step forward that the entire world is acknowledging that reality. Now let’s move forward.”
The Biden administration has provided tens of billions of dollars’ worth of US military and economic aid to Ukraine since Russia launched its full-scale invasion in February 2022, funding that Trump has repeatedly criticised and characterised as a drain on American resources. The president-elect has promised to end the war quickly when he returns to the White House next week, and has said Putin would never have invaded if he were president at the time.
During a media briefing on Tuesday, Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov declined to offer any fresh comment after Trump said he would meet Putin “very quickly”. The Kremlin has already said it is open to such a meeting after Trump is sworn in on 20 January. The Russian president’s apparent calculation is that the new US administration will end US military assistance to Kyiv, leading to more Russian gains.
Trump's defense secretary pick faces crucial test at confirmation hearing
President-elect Donald Trump’s pick for secretary of defense, Pete Hegseth, will face a potentially combative confirmation hearing later today as senators question whether the former Fox News host is fit to lead the US military.
The Department of Defense is one of the nation’s largest employers, with roughly 3 million military and civilian employees and had a budget of $820bn in 2023.
The hearing at the Senate Armed Services Committee will be the first in a week in which senators will scrutinise Donald Trump’s choices for more than a dozen senior administrative positions.
The Republican-led Senate is in a hurry to have some of Trump’s picks ready to be confirmed as soon as Inauguration Day on January 20, despite potential opposition to some from both sides of the aisle.
Hegesth will be forced to confront allegations of sexual assault, which he has denied, and will have to answer for his comments that women should “straight up” not be in combat roles in the military, a view he has tried to walk back recently. Two former female combat veterans, Republican Joni Ernst of Iowa and Democrat Tammy Duckworth of Illinois, are among those who will be questioning him.
Many senators have not yet met with Hegseth, a former co-host of Fox News Channel’s “Fox & Friends Weekend,” and most do not have access to his FBI background check, as only committee leaders are briefed on its findings. The background check on Hegseth did not appear to produce new information beyond what is already in the public realm about him, the Associated Press reports.
Hegseth, 44, attended Princeton and served in the Army National Guard from 2002 to 2021, deploying to Iraq in 2005 and Afghanistan in 2011. But he lacks senior military and national security experience. He has also faced scrutiny amid reports of excessive drinking when he worked at a veterans’ organisation. But as he began meeting privately with GOP senators ahead of the hearing, he promised he would not drink if confirmed to the post.
Updated
Chinese officials are in preliminary talks about a potential option to sell TikTok’s operations in the US to billionaire and Donald Trump ally Elon Musk, should the short-video app be unable to avoid an impending ban, according to Bloomberg. TikTok faces a ban in the US unless it is sold by its Chinese parent company ByteDance by 19 January, a day before Trump’s inauguration.
TikTok’s US operations could either be sold through a competitive process or an arrangement by the government, the report said, suggesting that the future of the app is no longer solely in ByteDance’s control.
China’s government has a “golden share” in ByteDance, which several members of Congress have said gives the government power over TikTok.
Under one scenario, Musk’s social media platform X would take control of TikTok US and run the business together, the report said. Officials are, however, yet to reach a consensus about how to proceed. You can read more on the story below:
Updated
This latest development comes less than a week after Trump, who will be inaugurated as the 47th president on Monday, learned he will avoid jail time for his felony conviction in the New York hush-money case.
The judge who presided over Trump’s criminal trial, Juan Merchan, issued a sentence of “unconditional discharge”, meaning the president-elect will be released without fine, imprisonment or probation supervision for his conviction on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records. While the sentence makes Trump a convicted felon, he will face no penalty other than this legal designation.
Trump, whose presidential inauguration is scheduled for 20 January, is the first US president – former or sitting – to face a criminal trial, let alone a guilty verdict and subsequent sentencing.
Addressing the court via video shortly before receiving his sentence, Trump called the case “a very terrible experience”, an “injustice” and a “political witch-hunt”.
You can read more on that here:
Updated
Jack Smith also laid out the challenges he faced during the investigation, including Trump’s assertion of executive privilege to try to block witnesses from providing evidence, which forced prosecutors into sealed court battles before the case was charged, AP reports.
Another “significant challenge” was Trump’s “ability and willingness to use his influence and following on social media to target witnesses, courts, prosecutors,” which led prosecutors to seek a gag order to protect potential witnesses from harassment, Smith wrote.
He added:
Mr Trump’s resort to intimidation and harassment during the investigation was not new, as demonstrated by his actions during the charged conspiracies.
A fundamental component of Mr. Trump’s conduct underlying the charges in the Election Case was his pattern of using social media — at the time, Twitter — to publicly attack and seek to influence state and federal officials, judges, and election workers who refused to support false claims that the election had been stolen or who otherwise resisted complicity in Mr Trump’s scheme.
Smith also for the first time explained the thought process behind his team’s prosecution decisions, writing that his office decided not to charge Trump with incitement in part because of free speech concerns, or with insurrection because he was the sitting president at the time and there was doubt about proceeding to trial with the offence — of which there was no record of having been prosecuted before.
Smith, who left the justice department last week, dropped both cases against Trump after he won last year’s election, citing a longstanding department policy against prosecuting a sitting president. Neither reached a trial.
Trump pleaded not guilty to all charges.
Regularly assailing Smith as “deranged,” Trump depicted the cases as politically motivated attempts to damage his campaign and political movement.
Trump and his two former co-defendants in the classified documents case sought to block the release of the report, days before Trump is set to return to office on 20 January. Courts rebuffed their demands to prevent its publication altogether.
Updated
Jack Smith asserts that he believed the evidence was sufficient to convict Trump in a trial if his success in the 2024 election had not made it impossible for the prosecution to continue.
Smith wrote:
The department’s view that the Constitution prohibits the continued indictment and prosecution of a president is categorical and does not turn on the gravity of the crimes charged, the strength of the government’s proof or the merits of the prosecution, which the office stands fully behind.
Indeed, but for Mr Trump’s election and imminent return to the presidency, the office assessed that the admissible evidence was sufficient to obtain and sustain a conviction at trial.
Volume two of the report, dealing with Trump’s alleged mishandling of classified documents, is under seal due to ongoing legal proceedings against Trump’s co-defendants. A hearing is scheduled for Thursday to determine whether it will be released to Congress or kept under seal.
Trump and his legal team have characterised the report as a “political hit job” aimed at disrupting the presidential transition.
Trump 'would have been convicted' over 2020 election - special counsel
Donald Trump would have been convicted of crimes over his failed attempt to cling to power in 2020 if he had not won the presidential election in 2024, according to the special counsel who investigated him.
Jack Smith’s report detailing his team’s findings about Trump’s efforts to subvert democracy was released by the justice department early on Tuesday.
Following the insurrection on 6 January, 2021, Smith was appointed as special counsel to investigate Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election. His investigation culminated in a detailed report, submitted to the attorney general, Merrick Garland.
Volume one of the report meticulously outlines Trump’s actions, including his efforts to pressure state officials, assemble alternate electors and encourage supporters to protest against the election results.
Here is the first take from our Washington DC bureau chief, David Smith.
Congress receives Jack Smith report on Trump investigation
The former US justice department special counsel Jack Smith has said his team “stood up for the rule of law” as it investigated Donald Trump’s efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election – writing in a much-anticipated report released on Tuesday that he stands fully behind his decision to bring criminal charges against the president-elect.
The report, which comes just days before Trump’s return to the White House on 20 January, focuses fresh attention on his frantic but failed effort to cling to power in 2020. With the prosecution foreclosed thanks to Trump’s election victory, the document is expected to be the final justice department chronicle of a dark chapter in American history that threatened to disrupt the peaceful transfer of power, a bedrock of democracy for centuries.
The justice department transmitted the report to Congress early on Tuesday after a judge refused to block its release.
Though most of the details of Trump’s efforts to undo the election are already well established, the document includes for the first time a detailed assessment from Smith about his investigation, as well as a defence by Smith against criticism by Trump and his allies that the investigation was politicised.
“While we were not able to bring the cases we charged to trial, I believe the fact that our team stood up for the rule of law matters,” Smith wrote in a letter to the attorney general, Merrick Garland, attached to the report. “I believe the example our team set for others to fight for justice without regard for the personal costs matters.”
