It is stunning how little dissent we have heard about some of Donald Trump’s most-controversial nominations from those within the MAGA movement. Obviously, we were never likely going to approve of any of the choices – that is sort of the point in opposition. But it is nice to think that many of the nominations, such as Gaetz, Gabbard, and Hegseth, would leave even MAGA’s mouth’s aghast – or are they ready to admit that there are no better qualified true believers? We certainly haven’t heard that much dissent in conservative media, not as much as one would expect, and that makes Newsmax’s Gene Kelly’s recent comments on Peter Hegseth that much more notable and, that much more bizarre, when seen in a wider light. Kelly took Trump to task for Hegseth and did so in a particularly “Newsmaxy’ way – condemnation that sounds a little too positive.
To appreciate Kelly’s statement below we have to go in noting that Kelly approved of Matt Gaetz (and Bondi) as nominee to Attorney General based on the fact that Gaetz had proven to have done enough “for MAGA” in his life to be a good nominee. I am not exactly sure how one does enough “for MAGA.” On that scale, Mitch McConnelll – having ushered through two impeachment trials on Trump’s behalf, would be the leader in the clubhouse. Regardless, Kelly thinks Hegseth hasn’t yet sufficiently earned the MAGA meter. As Mediaite transcribes:
Pete Hegseth is no Matt Gaetz. He hasn’t done nearly enough for MAGA to warrant a Department of Defense job, and he’s got serious baggage. Serious baggage. It happens sometimes. Not every pick is perfect. Where do I get this stuff, by the way? Not from the fake news, but from this guy. Tim Parlatore is Hegseth’s attorney and he’s been making all kinds of statements I don’t think are particularly helpful to Hegseth.
Is it possible that the statements are not “helpful” because if Hegseth actually spoke about the problems it would be outright damning? And again, when he says that Hegseth is no Matt Gaetz, he is speaking as if that is a negative! Matt Gaetz was feeding drugs and sex to girls my daughter’s age. Meanwhile, Hegseth paid off a woman who very credibly accused him of rape. Neither is qualified to do anything near a government job until having proven that none of the alleged conduct happened – a radical proposition and neither one is jumping up and down to make such a proffer. And yet Kelly goes on to explain why only Hegseth has a problem:
According to Pete’s lawyer, Pete is blackmailable. Two years before that email was sent, Pete Hegseth was conferring with President Trump at Trump Tower about high-level political appointments, maybe even as Secretary of Veterans Affairs. He was at the Trump Tower, he had that conversation, and that’s fine, right? But two years later, he is blackmailed by a woman who falsely accuses him, but he pays money to her anyway. Is he a new man? Anybody can be forgiven, I know that. I know that. If you ask for forgiveness, of course. Is Hunter Biden a new man? Okay, is he?
Yes, it does sound as though Kelly is assuming nothing happened during the night of the sexual assault and that means that Hegseth is susceptible to “blackmail” because he chose to pay the woman off anyway. Of course, Kelly likely doesn’t believe it but – this is kind of important – if one does believe that Hegseth didn’t sexually assault the woman then yes – yes he is subject to black mail because he chose to pay off an accuser rather than fight the challenge. But even Kelly seems to understand that sounds dumber than ham. So he moves on to talk about the fact that Hegseth shouldn’t be appointed for a different reason:
“When you’re in the military, there are unique rules. Uniform Code of Military Justice. That’s a special kind of set of laws that govern people in uniform, and one of them pertains to adultery,” he explained. “So with Pete, who has told people quite openly that he’s not good at being married. That’s a situation for the folks in uniform. I speak from experience.”
Yes, the military is very big on discipline and cohesion, if you have a choice between two excellent people and yet one of whom is putting his marriage and thus – stability, in danger, you are going to choose the one who is able to resist temptations and remain true to the original mission, so to speak. But leave it to Kelly to frame even this fault – the inability to be faithful to a wife – as “kind of” a positive in that he’s just that desirable. That is Kelly’s twist on it anyway. “Not good at being married… ”
Kelly never gets around to looking at why Donald Trump would nominate Hegseth when there are just so many other true believers out there with every bit as much MAGA-bona fides and yet without the alcoholic past and at least one sexual assault allegation. Or at least that is our presumption – is it not theirs? It speaks volumes that Kelly cannot stand up and scream “Is this the best we can do?” Is it beyond the imagination that they can find the type of people that Newsmax would eagerly greet but who don’t have obvious reasons to be immediately withdrawn?
He never asks, actually. ‘Wonder why that might be.
