An ex-prosecutor Friday gave citizens a method she says will determine whether Donald Trump nominee Pete Hegseth is qualified for the job.
Former federal prosecutor Joyce Vance ahead of the weekend flagged a prior story she says is relevant now.
"In early 2021, just days ahead of January 6, every living Secretary of Defense signed onto a letter that ran in the Washington Post. The message: the military doesn't determine the outcome of elections," she wrote on Substack.
ALSO READ: We're watching the largest and most dangerous 'cult' in American history
As Vance tells it, "At the time the Post published their letter, all sorts of alarm bells were already going off for anyone who was paying attention (unlike in FBI headquarters). The former civilian leaders of our military were deeply concerned, so much so that they went to press with it."
It is in this context that Vance argues Trump's nomination of Hegseth "should have been ended by allegations of financial mismanagement—Hegseth denies them—of an organization whose budget ran into tens of millions, not the $783 billion dollar budget he would oversee at the Pentagon."
"And, of course, there are the other criticisms that have been leveled at Hegseth, of misogyny and sexual assault, which he also denies, and of excess drinking, of which he says he won’t drink if he’s confirmed," she added.
But it's one single question that Vance says could show whether Hegseth is viable in that position.
"At his confirmation hearing, Pete Hegseth needs to be asked, among many other things, if he agrees with the sentiment expressed by the men who held the job he aspires to," Vance wrote. "If the answer isn’t an unequivocal yes (and it’s unlikely it will be given the context), it’s just another reason he’s not fit to serve."