In Washington D.C., Pete Hegseth, a figure known for his conservative commentary and military background, faced a significant hurdle in his nomination process amidst swirling allegations regarding his past conduct. While questions about his professional qualifications were anticipated, a recently surfaced affidavit from his former sister-in-law has thrust his personal life into the spotlight, specifically focusing on his second marriage and alleged behavior during that time. This development has prompted intense scrutiny from the Senate and raised serious questions about his suitability for a high-ranking government position. As senators grapple with this new information, understanding the timeline of Hegseth’s marriages becomes crucial context, alongside the disturbing claims detailed in the affidavit.
Pete Hegseth has been married three times. His second marriage, to Samantha Hegseth, is central to the current controversy. Pete Hegseth married Samantha Deering in 2010. This marriage, which ended in divorce in 2018, produced three children and is now the subject of intense examination due to allegations of misconduct. Prior to Samantha, Hegseth was married to Meredith Schwarz, although less public information is readily available about this first marriage. Following his divorce from Samantha, Hegseth married Jennifer Rauchet in 2019. It is the period of his marriage to Samantha that is now under a microscope, triggered by the affidavit submitted by Danielle Hegseth, his former sister-in-law.
The affidavit, delivered to senators on Tuesday, originated from Danielle Hegseth, the former sister-in-law of Pete Hegseth. Danielle, previously married to Pete’s brother, detailed a series of alarming behaviors she allegedly witnessed or was told about during Pete’s marriage to Samantha. Responding to a formal request from Senator Jack Reed, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, Danielle Hegseth provided sworn testimony concerning Pete Hegseth’s fitness for a significant government role. Senator Reed’s January 18th letter specifically sought information on instances of abuse or threats and mistreatment within Hegseth’s family.
Senator Reed expressed serious concerns, stating, “As I have said for months, the reports of Mr. Hegseth’s history of alleged sexual assault, alcohol abuse, and public misconduct necessitate an exhaustive background investigation. I have been concerned that the background check process has been inadequate, and this sworn affidavit confirms that fact.” He further emphasized the gravity of the allegations, suggesting that such behavior would disqualify any military leader, let alone someone being considered for Secretary of Defense.
Danielle Hegseth’s affidavit paints a disturbing picture of Pete Hegseth’s conduct during his second marriage. According to the affidavit, Samantha Hegseth reportedly lived in fear of her then-husband’s volatile and threatening behavior. Among the specific allegations, Danielle Hegseth claims Samantha confided in her about hiding in a closet to escape Pete Hegseth and developing elaborate “escape plans.” These plans, allegedly involving a code word, were to be activated if Samantha felt the need to flee from Hegseth. Danielle asserts that Samantha even put these escape plans into action on at least one occasion.
Pete Hegseth.
As of Tuesday afternoon, at least fifteen senators, including several Republicans, had reviewed the affidavit, indicating the bipartisan seriousness with which these allegations are being considered. Prior to the affidavit reaching Congress, NBC News had approached Samantha Hegseth for comment on the emerging details. In her email response, Samantha Hegseth stated, “First and foremost, I have not and will not comment on my marriage to Pete Hegseth. I do not have representatives speaking on my behalf, nor have I ever asked anyone to share or speak about the details of my marriage on my behalf, whether it be a reporter, a committee member, a transition team member, etc.” She initially disputed the accuracy of the information, but in a subsequent response, she clarified, “There was no physical abuse in my marriage. This is the only further statement I will make to you, I have let you know that I am not speaking and will not speak on my marriage to Pete. Please respect this decision.”
Tim Parlatore, Pete Hegseth’s lawyer, strongly refuted the allegations. Parlatore dismissed Danielle Hegseth’s claims, highlighting Samantha Hegseth’s own statements and court documents from 2021 where she denied domestic abuse. He characterized Danielle Hegseth as a disgruntled former sister-in-law with a political axe to grind, labeling her an “anti-Trump far left Democrat” still embittered from a divorce from Pete’s brother. Parlatore asserted that Danielle Hegseth admitted to not witnessing any abuse directly and is now falsely accusing Samantha of lying. He emphasized that Samantha herself has consistently denied any abuse, including in an FBI interview.
Danielle Hegseth, in her affidavit, explained her decision to come forward despite personal risks. She stated her “deep concern” about Hegseth’s potential confirmation and its implications for the military and the nation. She also indicated that she was motivated by the assurance that her public statement could influence senators still undecided on Hegseth’s confirmation. Danielle mentioned that she had previously shared these allegations with the FBI in a December 30, 2024 interview, part of Hegseth’s background investigation. However, sources suggest that the Senate committee’s Republican chair and Democratic ranking member were not informed about this information during a briefing by the Trump transition team. Danielle Hegseth further stated that she provided additional information to the FBI just days after Hegseth’s Senate Armed Services Committee hearing.
Arthur Schwartz, an advisor to Hegseth and a volunteer for the Trump transition, downplayed the allegations, suggesting that even Senate Armed Services Committee Democrats found them too weak to raise with Hegseth or their Republican colleagues. He questioned NBC’s standards for publishing the claims. In her affidavit, Danielle Hegseth acknowledged that much of her information came from Samantha Hegseth during the time of the alleged events. However, she affirmed her trust in Samantha’s accounts, citing their consistency with her own observations of Pete Hegseth’s “erratic and aggressive behavior over many years.” Danielle Hegseth also stated her belief that Hegseth has an alcohol abuse problem and was emotionally abusive to Samantha.
The affidavit further details the alleged “escape plans” Samantha Hegseth devised. These plans reportedly involved family and friends and included a “safe word/code word” to signal Pete Hegseth being in a volatile state and needing help. Danielle Hegseth claims Samantha used this code word once around 2015-2016. She also alleges Samantha told her about hiding in a closet out of fear for her safety. Beyond her sister-in-law’s experiences, Danielle Hegseth also detailed instances where she personally witnessed or was a victim of Pete Hegseth’s emotional abuse and alcohol abuse. She recounted a 2009 incident where Hegseth allegedly drunkenly yelled at her for walking away during a story he was telling, which she found racially insensitive. She also claimed to have heard him make misogynistic statements, including that women shouldn’t vote or work. Another incident described involved Hegseth allegedly becoming heavily intoxicated at a bar in 2013 and repeatedly shouting “No means yes!” and another unconfirmed incident in 2009 where he was allegedly found drunk at a strip club in his military uniform.
Pete Hegseth’s lawyer, Tim Parlatore, dismissed these specific allegations as “clearly and obviously false to any objective observer.” Despite these denials, the timing and nature of these allegations raise serious questions as Hegseth’s nomination moves forward. Democratic staffers reportedly heard Danielle Hegseth’s information directly for the first time just days after Hegseth’s confirmation hearing. Concerns about Hegseth’s drinking habits have been previously reported by NBC News and other outlets. His potential confirmation to a high-level position overseeing the Department of Defense amplifies the significance of these allegations.
The emergence of this affidavit also brings renewed scrutiny to the FBI’s background check process for Hegseth. Questions are being raised about the thoroughness of the investigation, what information was known by the Armed Services Committee and the Trump transition team, and when they knew it. A source familiar with the FBI background check process expressed frustration, suggesting limitations imposed by the requesting organization, in this case, the Trump transition team. Senator Reed criticized the background check as “woefully inadequate,” alleging neglect in contacting critical witnesses and whistleblowers. The FBI declined to comment on specific questions about Hegseth’s background investigation.
Following a party-line committee vote to advance Hegseth’s nomination, Chairman Roger Wicker acknowledged “whispers of rumors” but dismissed them as “anonymous, unsubstantiated and contrary to court documents.” Senator Tim Kaine, who questioned Hegseth at the hearing, countered that Danielle Hegseth’s affidavit directly refuted the claim of anonymous smears. Kaine highlighted issues of behavior, honesty with the committee, and honesty with the Trump transition team. A Senate vote on Hegseth’s nomination is anticipated soon. While Hegseth requires only a simple majority for confirmation, these serious allegations add a layer of complexity and uncertainty to his path forward.
