Pete Hegseth, a prominent figure in conservative media and a Fox News host, has faced considerable scrutiny throughout his career. While often celebrated for his military service and outspoken commentary, a closer examination reveals a series of controversies and allegations that raise serious questions about his conduct and character. This article delves into the key events and accusations that have shaped the narrative around “What Has Pete Hegseth Done,” providing a comprehensive overview of the issues that have dogged his public life.
Recent attention has been drawn to a previously undisclosed financial settlement Hegseth made to a woman who accused him of sexual assault in 2017. This revelation has reignited debate about his suitability for positions of authority, particularly after reports suggested that then President-elect Donald Trump considered him for Secretary of Defense. While Hegseth has denied any wrongdoing and has not been charged with a crime, as highlighted in a statement by Trump’s communications director, Steven Cheung, these allegations are just one facet of a broader pattern of concerning behavior detailed by former colleagues and documented in internal reports.
Prior to his full-time role at Fox News starting in 2017, Hegseth held leadership positions at two non-profit veterans advocacy groups: Veterans for Freedom and Concerned Veterans for America (CVA). It is during his tenure at these organizations that a significant trail of allegations emerged, painting a picture of financial mismanagement, sexual impropriety, and general personal misconduct. These accusations ultimately led to his forced departure from both groups and cast a shadow over his professional reputation.
A particularly damning document is a previously undisclosed whistleblower report concerning Hegseth’s time as president of Concerned Veterans for America from 2013 to 2016. This seven-page report, compiled by multiple former CVA employees and submitted to senior management in February 2015, details a pattern of highly inappropriate behavior. According to the report, Hegseth was frequently intoxicated while performing his official duties, often to such an extent that he needed physical assistance to be removed from events.
Alt text: Pete Hegseth discussing veterans issues on Fox News, highlighting his media presence and focus on veteran-related topics.
One particularly disturbing incident described in the whistleblower report involves a team outing to a Louisiana strip club. The report alleges that a drunken Hegseth had to be physically restrained from joining the dancers on stage. Furthermore, it claims that Hegseth, who was married at the time, along with other members of his management team, engaged in sexually predatory behavior towards female staff members. These women were reportedly categorized into “party girls” and “not party girls,” creating a divisive and unprofessional atmosphere.
The report goes further, asserting that under Hegseth’s leadership, CVA fostered a hostile work environment. Serious complaints of misconduct were allegedly ignored, including a disturbing allegation from a female employee stating that another staff member under Hegseth’s command attempted to sexually assault her at the same Louisiana strip club. These accusations paint a picture of an organization where accountability was lacking and the well-being of female employees was jeopardized.
In another separate complaint, sent to CVA in late 2015, a different former employee recounted an incident from May 29, 2015, in Cuyahoga Falls, Ohio. According to this complaint, Hegseth was observed at a bar in the early morning hours, during an official tour, drunkenly chanting “Kill All Muslims! Kill All Muslims!” This deeply offensive and Islamophobic outburst further underscores concerns about Hegseth’s judgment and temperament, particularly in a leadership role.
Alt text: The logo of Concerned Veterans for America (CVA), the organization where Pete Hegseth faced significant allegations of misconduct during his presidency.
When contacted for comment regarding these allegations, Tim Parlatore, a lawyer representing Hegseth, provided a statement attributed to an “advisor.” The statement dismissed the claims as “outlandish” and the product of a “petty and jealous disgruntled former associate,” accusing The New Yorker (where the original report was published) of lacking “actual journalism.” This response avoided directly addressing the specific allegations and instead resorted to ad hominem attacks and dismissals.
Senator Richard Blumenthal, a Democrat from Connecticut and a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, expressed serious alarm about the reports of Hegseth’s drinking and behavior, deeming them “disqualifying” for high-level positions, especially within national security. Blumenthal, who at the time was in a position to review potential nominations, stated, “Much as we might be sympathetic to people with continuing alcohol problems, they shouldn’t be at the top of our national-security structure.” He emphasized the immense responsibilities of the Secretary of Defense, including decisions on nuclear weapons and military actions, arguing that entrusting such critical roles to someone potentially “incapacitated” due to alcohol is an unacceptable risk.
Blumenthal drew a parallel to the case of Senator John Tower, President George H.W. Bush’s nominee for Secretary of Defense in 1989. Tower’s nomination was rejected by the Senate due to concerns about his drinking and womanizing. This historical precedent highlights the long-standing recognition that personal conduct and judgment are crucial considerations for individuals in positions of national security leadership, transcending partisan lines. “John Tower went down for these same kinds of issues,” Blumenthal noted, emphasizing the non-partisan nature of such concerns.
In January 2016, Hegseth resigned from Concerned Veterans for America amidst mounting pressure. While initial reports in Military Times described the resignation as “mutual” and attributed it to “rumors of a rift,” sources with direct knowledge of the situation, including a contributor to the whistleblower report, revealed a different reality. According to these sources, Hegseth was forced to step down primarily due to concerns about financial mismanagement and his alcohol abuse while on the job.
Alt text: An excerpt from a news report detailing Pete Hegseth’s “quiet resignation” from Concerned Veterans for America, hinting at underlying issues.
An email with the subject line “Congratulations on Removing Pete Hegseth,” sent to Hegseth’s successor, Jae Pak, on January 15, 2016, further underscores the circumstances of his departure. This email, sent pseudonymously by a whistleblower, included a copy of the report and conveyed the widespread “disgust for Pete” among CVA staff. The email alleged that Hegseth had a “history of alcohol abuse” and had misused organizational funds “like they were a personal expense account—for partying, drinking, and using CVA events as little more than opportunities to ‘hook up’ with women on the road.”
While Jae Pak declined to comment on the matter, a spokesman for Americans for Prosperity, the umbrella organization overseeing CVA, confirmed Hegseth’s resignation but offered no further details regarding personnel matters. Attempts by Breitbart News to discredit the initial reporting as a “screed” from a “jealous former coworker” were refuted by the fact that multiple critical memos and letters circulated within CVA, reflecting widespread discontent during Hegseth’s leadership.
The whistleblower report details numerous instances of excessive drinking by Hegseth and other top managers at CVA events, including incidents at casinos and Christmas parties. Hegseth was reportedly “seen drunk at multiple CVA events” between 2013 and 2015, a period when the organization was actively engaged in a nationwide campaign to mobilize veterans for conservative political causes. This extensive travel provided opportunities for Hegseth and his team to operate away from headquarters, raising further concerns about oversight and accountability.
Two individuals who identified themselves as contributors to the whistleblower report spoke about witnessing Hegseth’s repeated intoxication. One stated, “I’ve seen him drunk so many times. I’ve seen him dragged away not a few times but multiple times.” Expressing alarm at the prospect of Hegseth holding a high-level position like Secretary of Defense, they added, “When those of us who worked at C.V.A. heard he was being considered for SecDef, it wasn’t ‘No,’ it was ‘Hell No!’ ”
Specific incidents detailed in the report include a CVA event in Virginia Beach during Memorial Day weekend in 2014, where Hegseth was described as “totally sloshed” and had to be carried to his room. Another incident in Cleveland involved Hegseth being “completely drunk in a public place” at a bar near their hotel, reportedly causing disappointment among “several high profile people” attending the CVA event.
In response to these issues, CVA implemented a “no alcohol” policy at its events in October 2014. However, the report alleges that Hegseth and another manager subsequently lifted this policy during a get-out-the-vote operation in North Carolina in November 2014. The report describes an incident where Hegseth was found “completely passed out” in a van after a night out with female staff members, requiring assistance from staff to be taken to his hotel room. These incidents, occurring in public and during official CVA operations, reportedly caused widespread shock and disgust among staff members who witnessed them.
In conclusion, the allegations surrounding Pete Hegseth’s conduct, particularly during his leadership at Concerned Veterans for America, paint a troubling picture. From accusations of sexual impropriety and fostering a hostile work environment to repeated instances of public intoxication and financial mismanagement concerns, the documented issues are substantial and raise legitimate questions about his judgment and suitability for positions of public trust. While Hegseth has consistently denied wrongdoing, the detailed accounts from multiple sources and internal reports present a compelling case for serious scrutiny of “what Pete Hegseth has done” and its implications for his public persona and potential future roles.
