Social media users are criticizing a Democratic senator after she claimed that Secretary of Defense nominee Pete Hegseth might lead a military invasion of Greenland if confirmed. During a Senate Armed Services Committee confirmation hearing for Hegseth on Tuesday, lawmakers had the chance to question Trump’s defense pick. One Democrat, Sen. Mazie Hirono of Hawaii, sparked a wave of reactions on social media when she asked Hegseth if he would consider invading Greenland or taking control of the Panama Canal. “Trump never strategically tips his hand. I would never publicly state one way or another to direct the orders of the president,” Hegseth responded to the question.
The question drew immediate ire online. “Hirono was playing judge, jury, and executioner based on lies and stupidity,” Rep. Nancy Mace, R-S.C., wrote in a post on X. Brigette Gabriel, ACT for America founder and chair, wrote that “Mazie Hirono might be the least intelligent Member of Congress, and that’s saying something. This line of questioning is unbecoming of her position as a United States Senator. I stand with Pete Hegseth.”
During the hearing, Hirono claimed that President-elect Donald Trump had ordered guards to “shoot protesters in the legs” during a 2020 protest at Lafayette Square in Washington, D.C., and asked Hegseth if he would be willing to carry out such an order. “I was in the Washington, D.C. National Guard unit that was in Lafayette Square during those events, holding a riot shield on behalf of my country,” Hegseth responded. “I saw 50 Secret Service agents get injured by riot agents.” Hirono also questioned Hegseth about allegations of sexual assault and claims that he was drinking on the job—accusations he has consistently denied, Fox News reported.
“Clown show,” wrote Eric Daughtery, Assistant News Director of Florida’s Voice. “Mazie Hirono peddles the discredited anonymous sources from NBC who claimed that Pete Hegseth was constantly drunk at work,” wrote Greg Price. Watch the video below:
Disclaimer: This article may contain commentary which reflects the author’s opinion.