Sen. Thom Tillis Discusses Confirmation of Pete Hegseth Amid Last-Minute Allegations
FIRST ON FOX: In a recent interview with Fox News Digital, North Carolina Senator Thom Tillis opened up about the controversial confirmation process of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. Tillis’s vote was pivotal in securing Hegseth’s confirmation amidst swirling allegations linked to President Donald Trump’s nominee.
Due Diligence in the Confirmation Process
Sen. Tillis emphasized the necessity of reviewing any allegations that come through the pipeline, especially when those allegations are supported by sworn testimony. “Anytime you have an allegation and somebody is willing to put it in sworn testimony, you owe it to the process to review it and not just dispose it out of hand,” he remarked.
This statement sets the stage for a deeper understanding of Tillis’s accountability as a senator, underlining his commitment to due diligence. “And that’s exactly what I did. And then I arrived at the conclusion that I’d support Pete’s nomination” he continued, highlighting the rigorous evaluation he undertook before casting his vote.
Tie-Breaking Vote Secures Confirmation
Hegseth was confirmed following a tie-breaking vote from Vice President JD Vance, marking the final count at 51-50. Three Republicans—Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, Susan Collins of Maine, and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska—stood against the nominee. Given the Republican conference’s slim 53-seat majority, any defections carry significant weight, making Tillis’s backing indispensable.
Tillis’s decision to support Hegseth was a closely guarded secret until mere minutes before he cast his ballot. Had he voted against Hegseth, it would have tipped the scales and jeopardized the nomination altogether.
Addressing New Allegations
As the clock ticked down to his confirmation vote, Tillis engaged in further discussions with Hegseth regarding new allegations that surfaced. A letter from the nominee, which addressed these allegations to Tillis’s satisfaction, was made public on social media during the vote.
In his conversation with Fox News Digital, Tillis underscored his approach to due diligence, stating, “I have developed a reputation for completing due diligence, and I take my role seriously.” This ethos appears to have shaped his interactions with individuals involved in the allegational landscape surrounding Hegseth.
An Encounter with Allegations
Specifically, Tillis recounted speaking with Hegseth’s former sister-in-law, Danielle, before she submitted a sworn affidavit. This affidavit included alarming statements alleging that Hegseth made his ex-wife, Samantha, fear for her safety, alongside claims of alcohol abuse.
It’s pertinent to note that Danielle is the former wife of Hegseth’s brother, not his ex-wife’s sister—highlighting the complex web of relationships involved in this narrative. During their call, Tillis discussed the nature of the affidavit and tried to discern whether the claims could be corroborated.
“If that’s true, and it could be corroborated,” Tillis reflected, “then it would carry weight.” However, he concluded that the lack of substantiation rendered the allegations uncredible, stating, “I could never speak directly to a person who could corroborate the testimony of one person.”
Clarity Amidst Controversy
Post confirmation, sources reported that Tillis had assured Danielle her affidavit would hold significant weight in swaying Republican support against Hegseth. When asked to address these reports, Tillis reiterated the necessity of corroboration in his discussions with her.
“Corroboration means at least two people have to be involved, and they have to be involved in the event, not a bystander. And I was unable to get to that point,” Tillis clarified, reinforcing that without concrete evidence from credible witnesses, he had no choice but to proceed with his initial judgment.
Privacy and Confidentiality
Interestingly, when pressed for details about whether Danielle or her attorney suggested she was a witness, Tillis opted for discretion. “I’m not going to get into those discussions because I do know that my conversation was leaked a couple of hours after I had it on Sunday,” he stated, emphasizing the importance of confidentiality in political conversations.
Tillis maintained a steadfast stance against leaking private discussions: “I don’t leak private conversations. I don’t even discuss them at any level of detail,” he asserted, further highlighting the challenges and sensitivities that accompany high-stakes political decisions.
Conclusion
The confirmation of Pete Hegseth as Defense Secretary could be seen as a microcosm of the broader political landscape—where allegations and testimonies become pivotal in shaping bureaucratic outcomes. While Sen. Tillis’s careful deliberation reflects a commitment to thoroughness, it also exposes the complexities of navigating the intricacies of interpersonal relationships in politics. With many in Washington keenly observing, this episode serves as a reminder of the delicate balance between due diligence and the obligations of governance.
