‘That does not exist. It does not exist’: Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand exposes Pete Hegseth’s false claims that the military lowers standards for women

Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) grilled Secretary of Defense nominee Pete Hegseth over his stance on women in the military and called him out for his false and misleading claims that the military lowers its standard for women.

Hegseth is the first of Donald Trump’s cabinet picks to sit for his Senate confirmation hearing. The confirmation hearing has been quite contentious due to his lack of experience and controversial history. Members of the Senate Committee on Armed Services have grilled him on everything from his alleged sexual assault to his history of infidelity. One topic that has repeatedly cropped up, especially among the female committee members, is his misogynistic and degrading view of women in the military. Hegseth advocated in the past for barring all women from combat zones in the military. He accused the brave women serving in combat zones of being less “capable” than men and making fighting “more complicated.” It was only after his nomination for Secretary of Defense that Hegseth radically changed his tune, claiming he supported women in all areas of the military, including combat.

He has continued insisting he supports women in the military throughout his confirmation hearing. However, many remain suspicious of whether his change is genuine, with Sen. Elizabeth Warren remarking of his “conversion” on the topic, “I’ve heard of death bed conversions, but this is the first time I’ve heard of a nomination conversion.” Gillibrand cast further scrutiny on Hegseth’s supposed conversion when she exposed his false claims about women in the military.

Kirsten Gillibrand slams Pete Hegseth’s claim of female ‘quotas’ in the military

Gillirband offered one of the most fierce grillings of Hegseth over his misogyny. She stated that he would completely have to change how he views women but expressed doubt he was capable of doing so. In reference to his book The War on Warriors, where he stated that mothers don’t belong in combat zones in the military, Gillibrand demanded, “What’s wrong with a mom?” She denounced his stance on mothers in combat as “silly” and “beneath” the position he’s seeking. However, the most significant moment was when she exposed him for pushing misconceptions about women in the military during the same hearing he claimed to have changed.

During his hearing, he tried to excuse his past statements by claiming he was never against women serving in combat and was solely against the military lowering its standards to put women in combat zones. As he went on a tangent insisting that “standards have been changed,” Gillibrand interrupted him to ask a vital question. She told him, “Give me one example. Please give me an example.” Accusing the military of lowering standards and women currently in combat zones of being undeserving of their roles is a huge accusation to make and one that certainly requires evidence. However, Hegseth could not provide a single example.

Instead, he suddenly claimed that commanders “meet quotas to have a certain number of female infantry officers.” Hegseth then feigned outrage that the military, rather than him, “disparages” women with its quotas. The problem is that these quotas don’t exist. Gillibrand stated, “Commanders do not have to have a quota for women in the infantry. That does not exist. It does not exist.” The military has already confirmed that it does not lower standards for women in elite combat roles and requires women to prove they can handle these roles. Additionally, it’s unclear where this idea of quotas for female infantry officers even came from. Gillibrand stated, “And your statements are creating the impression that these exist because they do not.”

Hegseth’s attempt to paint these nonexistent quotas as fact while on the stand for his Senate confirmation hearing is deeply concerning. A willingness to mislead individuals about the standards for women in the military does not align with Hegseth’s claims that he is not biased toward women in the military. The incident also highlights his political bias as, without evidence, he’s repeating common, debunked conservative arguments that the military is prioritizing diversity and forced to hire unqualified candidates. If he’s making these false claims at his Senate hearing, what’s stopping him from continuing to use false claims as Secretary of Defense to excuse removing qualified and deserving women from the military?