Letters to the Editor: There’s no excusing Pete Hegseth’s ‘Signalgate’ failures

To the editor: Once again, contributing writer Josh Hammer misrepresents the facts, this time in support of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, whom he claims is being smeared by President Trump’s enemies to undermine the administration (“The drumbeat against Hegseth? It’s not really about him,” April 24). He portrays Hegseth as the victim, never mentioning his lack of qualifications to lead America’s largest federal agency.

Hammer dismisses both of Hegseth’s “Signalgate” episodes because of fortunate happenstance: the restricted information did not fall into enemy hands and thus no harm befell U.S. fighting forces. I doubt Hammer would give a Defense secretary a pass for such inexcusably repeated, unprofessional behavior if the sitting president were a Democrat.

Robert J. Switzer, West Hollywood

..

To the editor: Hammer really hit his thumb with his latest op-ed. The problems with Hegseth are not small or insignificant. The fact that he shared military plans with uncleared people is enough to force him out of a job that he never should’ve been allowed to fill. You can weasel-word your way around his incompetence by blaming Democrats for caring about qualifications, but anybody who cares about our nation knows that he needs to go.

Craig Arnold, Long Beach

..

To the editor: Hammer pretends that Hegseth’s troubles are simply the attempts of “Iran doves and anti-Israel provocateurs tendentiously seiz[ing] the opportunity to excise a convenient ‘hawkish’ scalp.” Much of the American public well understands and accepts that any Trump administration would have a more hawkish stance on Iran. What the public cannot accept, however, is a cavalier and careless leadership method from the U.S. Defense secretary. Communicating sensitive military operations on a public, unclassified, insecure group chat that includes your wife and personal lawyer is astoundingly reckless and puts American lives at risk. No, Hammer, this is all about Hegseth.

Johnny Thompson, San Diego

..

To the editor: I’m sorry, but I think Americans can object to the U.S. secretary of Defense using personal devices and unsecured systems to communicate classified information to a random assortment of people. I think people can object to basic operations security being flouted, creating risks for service members and the American people, without it being evidence of some sort of plot by people with differing foreign policy views.

Mehmet Berker, Los Angeles

..

To the editor: It’s often difficult to separate truth from fiction, and in our current political atmosphere, that is often the point. But Hammer makes it somewhat easier. Rather than defending Hegseth’s actions or his ability to do the job, Hammer uses his column space to attack the accusers. It’s an old tactic, a sign of weakness and a sure indication that he has no more faith in Hegseth than anyone else.

Bart Braverman, Indio