Trump should 'absolutely ditch' Pete Hegseth | Lewis Goodall

Yesterday, the Republican representative Thomas Massie of Kentucky, no less, formally introduced eight articles of impeachment against the U.S. defense secretary or secretary of war, as he renamed himself, Pete Hegseth, setting up a potential House vote on said impeachment. CNN's Caitlin Collins asked the president about whether he stands by his man, his defense secretary, Pete Hegseth. I had great people. You what? Massey's a loser, just like you're a loser at CNN, just like your ratings are a loser. Massey is a loser, stone-cold loser. There you go. Plus ça change. Well, at the beginning of the show, our show, the U.S. Secretary of War, Pete Hegseth, hosted a press conference in the Pentagon, and he addressed the possibility of a vote of impeachment. It's a political spectacle, a personal manifesto driven by ego and resentment. Time for one man's final days in Congress to try to do damage to this president, this country, and most irresponsibly, the warriors who defend it. It's a farce, and it's a stunt, and everybody knows it. It tells our enemies, Iran, the cartels, every adversary watching, that the United States will actually punish its own warriors and its own civilian leadership for successfully executing lawful military operations. It tells them that a single rogue legislator loaded with personal animus for the president can attempt to veto national security decisions made by the duly elected commander in chief. It puts a target on the backs of American warriors by signaling that Congress will undermine their missions in real time. This is not patriotism. This is sabotage. Well, Lewis is here, Lewis Goodall, presenter of Sundays with Lewis Goodall and co-host of Global's podcast, The News Agent. Global's very own Secretary of War. Secretary of War. Sabotage, not patriotism. Warrior in chief. Not patriotism. Look, obviously this is a portent of what is to come, isn't it? Because with the Democrats' new power in Washington having been exiled before this in terms of the ability to actually do anything. When the new Congress, the 121st Congress, takes up the reins in January, because there's always a bit of a lame-duck period. It's not like our system where you lose an election, removal vans around, and you're in by 9 a.m. the next morning. There's a transition period. So the new Congress doesn't take up its office until January. But this is coming, the intriguing thing about this, one of the big questions for that Democratic Congress is how far do they use their power to investigate and to subpoena and potentially to impeach? How far and against whom do they use that power in the Trump administration? Because, of course, the Trump administration has been widely described, not just by its enemies, I should say, as one of the most corrupt, if not the most corrupt, in American presidential history. That's a question and a conundrum they're going to have to grapple with in January, because on the one hand, it's like, well, do we want to kind of get tangled up in all the legal stuff we did last time? We went after Trump. We made him seem like, you know, perhaps persecuted, maybe victim of a witch hunt. He thrives off that sort of narrative and energy. But on the other hand, if wrongdoing has been committed, what's the point of you in this power if you're not pursuing it? And corruption and the war both came up a lot, didn't they? Both came up a lot. And, you know, Pete Hegseth has been accused of committing war crimes in Venezuela for. For example, in firing against unarmed or vessels or naval vessels which weren't engaged in the war. But the intriguing thing about this, and the reason I say that it's a portent, is because this isn't coming from a Democrat or from the New Democratic Congress. This is coming up now from a Republican congressman called Thomas Massey from Kentucky. It is true that, right, that rhymes, isn't it? Thomas Massey from Kentucky, start of a limerick. Almost, almost. I'll leave that to you as the Irish woman here. There was a man called Massey. Yeah, exactly. No, no, stop it, stop it. Um, Massey, this guy, you know, he's been a bit of a thorn in the side of the Trump administration. He has led the push on the Republican side for the release of the Epstein files. It's fair to say, not a fan of Donald Trump, but he is the one. ...leading the charge and laying articles of impeachment, potentially as soon as today, in Washington, against Hegseth. Because he says that Hegseth is the Secretary of Defense, Secretary of War, Secretary for Brillo Cream, whatever he calls himself these days. The reason that they're laying down the articles of impeachment is that this war in Iran has gone on for 90 days without congressional approval, which technically, Massey says, is illegal. And it's, as I say, a portent of what's to come because the Democrats are going to be doing this probably in spades by comparison. And Hegseth will be a particular lightning rod. I doubt that the Democrats are going to go after Trump again unless he does something newly egregious, stages another coup, I don't know. But Hegseth is such a lightning rod for criticism of the Trump administration, particularly over the Iran war, because he's probably been the biggest cheerleader internally and externally for it, that I suspect it won't just be Massey laying down these articles. I think I've got a limerick for you. Oh, go on. I can listen and write limericks all at the same time. She wasn't listening, ladies and gentlemen. I was listening. I was listening. Right. There was a man called Massey who got a little bit sassy against Donald Trump who he wanted to thump. But he realised impeachment was passe. There we go. That is why she is the best in the business, ladies and gentlemen. That's not bad. That's why they pay her the big bucks. That's not bad, is it? I'm going to have to think of one now before we finish, aren't we? There you go, there you go. I'll do that. I struggled with the last line, but then I got passe. Okay, all right, fine. I'll think of one before the end of the show. Back to the actual... This is like being in Dictionary Corner or something. I'm going to get a nine. I'd love to be the Susie Dent of LBC. That'd be great. I'll fight you for it, girl. As clever as Susie Dent. Yeah, not really. Look, the question here about let's focus in on Hegseth for a minute, because he was he was, again, harking back to what Donald Trump has said about this boring around saying, you know, the president said, I'd do it all again and I feel the same. I would do it all again. So the question for lawmakers, I guess, is. Is this a hard yes for impeachment or is it a hell no for impeachment? I don't think it's not going to get anywhere in this because of the period. There's no. Yes. I mean, because at the moment, the Republicans still have a narrow majority in the House of Representatives. And just to remind people of the constitutionality of impeachment, which most people will be familiar with, with Trump and Bill Clinton before him. The House of Representatives, the lower house gets to lay down the articles of impeachment and vote upon them. And of course they impeached Trump. twice. They impeached Bill Clinton once. They would have impeached Richard Nixon. And they impeached Andrew Johnson, Lincoln's successor, back in the 19th century. But then it's down to the Senate whether there is a conviction or not. And, you know, actually, it's quite rare to achieve a conviction of any president or any federal public official. It's only happened, I think, about a score or so times in the whole history of the republic. Because you have to get a two-thirds majority of the senators, 67 senators. Not just a simple majority like you have to have in the House in order to impeach and convict someone, which is why there is this sort of slightly weird trivia that, for example, Bill Clinton was impeached as president, but he wasn't removed from office because he wasn't convicted by the Senate. So the current maths of the current Congress make that impossible. Possibly because of that Senate bit of it, even in the future Congress, I mean, it looks like the Dems might have 57 seats, so they'd still need 10 Republicans to join them on any given impeachment. Hagee is not a popular figure in the Republican Party, particularly in the Senate, so it is conceivable that it could happen. And if Trump thinks it is conceivable, it is credible, and there have been lots of rumors about this in D.C., that perhaps he might move him to another position and then get a different defense slash war secretary in place. But if he's going to do that, he needs to hurry up and do it soon because. When the new Democratic Congress takes over, the number or type of candidate that he could put into that job is going to be much more limited because the Dems will have a majority. In the Senate. And can they veto? Can they veto? Yeah, if they don't get it, absolutely. You need a majority in the Senate, so it's entirely possible. If they've got a majority, they've got 57, they will basically have a power of veto over that. So if he wants to do it, he should do it while there is currently a Republican Senate who can probably put in place, maybe not someone completely to his liking, but someone more to his liking than the Dems would accept. Why are they going for Hegseth and not Trump? Is it because they've had their fingers burned already? I think, well, look, There's one very simple reason, Sheila, why they might not want to go for Trump, which is that if they were to succeed, there's two reasons, I think. One, I think there is a muscle memory of what happened last time, as I say, which is that particularly when he was out of office, but even when he was in office, the first impeachment, which people will remember involved Vladimir Zelensky and a rather sort of obscure story about the Biden family or the Biden crime family, as Trump likes to call them. There was a feeling that with the two impeachments, the second clearly completely deserved over the events of January, January 6th, that that coupled with all the legal processes out of office allowed Trump to weave, as he likes to do, a narrative of persecution and of a witch hunt, on which, as I say, he thrived. And I think they'll be wary about doing that again, not least because, of course, they know that Trump only has two years in office. He's not going to be the opponent in 2028. And if they were to succeed, of course, in impeaching and convicting him, who would become president? J.D. Vance, who would then be running for the presidency as an incumbent president with all of the advantages that that can have. So the Dems, I think, unlikely to go unless Trump does something especially egregious. Of course, he might do. It is Donald Trump. Although he did say today or yesterday, overnight, didn't he, that he's another assault on Iran is unlikely. Yes, he did. But I'm talking perhaps about other things, maybe not about Iran. Right, So, look, and I think that there is a possibility. Look, he's going to I'm thinking that he might do something. right, I mean, look, his appointment of Stephen Miller on Friday. His former deputy chief of staff, now the chief of staff. right, Possibly the most hard-line figure in the administration. right, He has been described, I think, with some justification as being a far-right figure. That's a good figure. right, That implies to me that with all this speculation, will Trump try and get on with the new Congress? Actually, you know, in many ways, he's not a typical Republican. right. There are deals he could try and strike with Democrats in Congress. I think that implies that, actually, no, it's going to be a war. It's going to be a war because Stephen Miller wants to send a message. He wants to get the MAGA base back together. He wants to do things to bring the MAGA coalition back together. I think Trump will see Trump will be running against Congress, which again is an energy he likes to have. He likes to have an adversary. He likes to have an enemy. And the new speaker in the new House majority leader, Hakeem Jeffries and Chuck Schumer, will be a good foil for him. If miraculously he listened to someone, if you were advising him on this, would you say ditch Hegseth or stay with him? I absolutely would because I think there's a possibility of the Dems doing it anyway with the new Congress, so you might as well get your man in. That said, he is good allies or strong allies with Stephen Miller, the new chief of staff, so I think it's possible that... He'll want to fight. And before you go on, we must talk about Dana White. Donald Trump made a rare appearance at the White House briefing room lectern and introduced the MMA mogul a day after posting that he wanted him to be his next press secretary. He said he was joking. What's going on, Lewis, with this Dana White thing? It is an extraordinary thing. I mean, you know, you can see why Trump brought in Dana White, can't you, Sheila? You need someone who can describe a man being comprehensively battered as a terrific knight. So he is a kind of like, you know, he's this guy who is basically, you know, involved in this world of, you know, fighting and wrestling. There was a suggestion that there was a bit of confusion, that there was a young press spokesperson called Dana White, and this was left on his desk as a potential list of names, and Trump saw it and thought, great, Dana White, fantastic, not confusing or not realizing that it was the wrong Dana White. Nonetheless, Trump has run with the idea. Let's just listen to him talking to him in the White House briefing room yesterday. So let me ask you the big question. Dana, would you like to be press secretary of the United States of America? Look at the sign, you'd have this behind you all the time, the White House Washington. Would you like that, or do you just want to stay with this ridiculous UFC? I don't know what you're saying. Thank you for the offer, sir. For the offer, I have no... No, no, I do not want to be in politics now. I am devastated to hear this. Goodbye, everybody. God, Sheila. God, Sheila. Dana White and Pete Hegseth, it's a stag party from hell, isn't it? I know, honestly, oh my God. Dear, oh, dear. Hey, I've got one before you go. I've got a limerick. Have you been limericking in your brain? Go on, I love it. There was once a war chief named Pete who insisted he'd never retreat, but the prospect of votes had him checking his notes. Can't we settle this out on the street? We should do this for a living. Thanks very much, Lewis. You don't get. I'll tell you what, you don't get that with Tom Swarbrick, do you? You don't get that with Tom Swarbrick. He'll kill me for that later when he comes in. Love you, Tom. Lewis Goodall, thank you. Presenter of Sunday's Lewis Goodall on LBC. Co-host of Lewis Podcast News. And limerick writer extraordinaire. Comme moi.