A former Pentagon spokesperson says Secretary Pete Hegseth should resign now for harming President Trump’s agenda — and the fight over how the military picks its leaders is at the center of it.
Story Snapshot
- John Ullyot, Hegseth’s former chief Pentagon spokesperson, urged Hegseth to resign in a televised interview.
- Reports say Hegseth’s office intervened in more than a dozen senior-officer promotions, drawing Senate scrutiny.
- Criteria tied to diversity programs, vaccine mandates, Afghanistan, and ties to Gen. Milley were reportedly used to hold back promotions.
- Hegseth rejects the criticism, says the team is effective, and cites President Trump’s support and mission success.
Named Critic Calls for Resignation
John Ullyot, who served as Pete Hegseth’s chief Pentagon spokesperson, publicly called Hegseth “unfit” and said he should resign immediately. Ullyot made the charge during a video interview and argued that Hegseth’s leadership style hurt President Trump politically. Ullyot’s remarks carry weight because he worked inside the building and then stepped down after roughly four months. His push adds fresh fuel to a debate over standards, merit, and politics inside the defense leadership.
Ullyot’s criticism arrives as reports describe a messy promotions process at the top of the ranks. The accounts say Hegseth’s office reviewed officers already cleared by selection boards and then stalled or blocked some from moving up. The reports cite officials familiar with the process and claim the effort targeted more than a dozen senior officers. While no final Inspector General finding has been made public, the picture has prompted lawmakers to ask for a formal review.
Promotion Interventions and Reported Criteria
Multiple outlets reported that Hegseth’s team used new criteria to judge officers after boards did their work. Those criteria reportedly included perceived support for diversity programs, involvement with the COVID-19 vaccine mandate, participation in the Afghanistan evacuation, or associations with former Joint Chiefs Chairman Mark Milley. One outlet described paper files made from internet searches that fed into these decisions. If accurate, that would mark a major shift away from long-standing, board-driven merit systems.
NBC News reported that interventions touched more than a dozen senior officers across services. Senate Democrats Cory Booker and Brian Schatz responded by calling for an independent Inspector General probe into whether politics tainted the process. For conservatives who want a merit-based force with zero woke bloat, the core question is simple: did changes defend standards, or did they cross into ad hoc vetting that risks good order and trust? The answer matters for readiness and recruiting alike.
Hegseth’s Defense and Trump’s Backing
Pete Hegseth pushed back hard on calls to resign. He said critics attack him because his team is effective and because the department is refocused on lethality, merit, and accountability under President Trump’s leadership. He praised mission outcomes and said recent operations were lawful orders from the Commander in Chief that troops carried out with skill. He argued that attacking his leadership is also an attack on those warriors and their success.
President Trump has publicly praised Hegseth’s performance. Reports state Trump said Hegseth is doing a “very good job” and even gave him an “A-plus” grade amid the controversy. That support matters. In our system, the President sets defense policy. If the White House believes the Pentagon is finally ditching distractions and sharpening warfighting focus, expect the administration to hold the line. Hegseth has also vowed to continue serving and “not back down”.
What We Know, What We Do Not
There is clear, named on-the-record criticism from a former senior aide, plus detailed media reports about interventions in promotions. There is also a formal request for an Inspector General investigation by sitting senators. What is not yet public is a completed, independent finding that confirms or rejects the reported criteria or the scope of any bias. Until that arrives, claims about intent and impact remain disputed ground. The facts at issue are document-based and testable.
For conservatives, the stakes are high. A merit-driven military is vital to deterrence, peace through strength, and our sons’ and daughters’ safety. If promotions punished woke favoritism and restored standards, that is a course correction many voters asked for. If, however, ad hoc filters replaced board merit, Congress and the Inspector General should fix it fast. The Constitution puts civilians in charge, but it also demands accountability, transparency, and a fighting force chosen for skill, not politics.
Sources:
mediaite.com, ms.now, politicalwire.com, booker.senate.gov, nbcnews.com
