Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

WOW! Sen. Elissa Slotkin just completely eviscerated Pete Hegseth for refusing to say he will not send the U.S. military to polling places to collect ballots or voting machines. This exchange is telling... Senator Slotkin: “If President Trump asks you to seize ballots or voting machines in states during...

EdKrassen's profile picture

Ed Krassenstein

1,097,702 subscribers

62,124 views • 3 months ago •via X (Twitter)

ComedyNews & PoliticsSports
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

🚨BREAKING: Hegseth refuses to answer if he'd seize ballots in the midterm election. SLOTKIN: If the president asks, will you stand up for the Constitution and say no? HEGSETH: It's another 'gotcha' hypothetical, which is your specialty. SLOTKIN: You and I have done this dance before. It's not hypothetical. You give that answer all the time; get over it, okay? Your boss you're performing for right now told journalists that he wished he signed that executive order for your predecessor in 2020. What are you going to do? Tell the American people... HEGSETH: Are you accusing me of performing? because you're performing for cable news right now. SLOTKIN: Dude, dude, just answer the question. HEGSETH: It's a hypothetical, umm, Joe Biden, umm...
2:17

🚨BREAKING: Hegseth refuses to answer if he'd seize ballots in the midterm election. SLOTKIN: If the president asks, will you stand up for the Constitution and say no? HEGSETH: It's another 'gotcha' hypothetical, which is your specialty. SLOTKIN: You and I have done this dance before. It's not hypothetical. You give that answer all the time; get over it, okay? Your boss you're performing for right now told journalists that he wished he signed that executive order for your predecessor in 2020. What are you going to do? Tell the American people... HEGSETH: Are you accusing me of performing? because you're performing for cable news right now. SLOTKIN: Dude, dude, just answer the question. HEGSETH: It's a hypothetical, umm, Joe Biden, umm...

WWG1WGA🇺🇸♥️

206,311 views • 26 days ago

🚨BREAKING: Hegseth refuses to answer if he'd seize ballots in the midterm election. SLOTKIN: If the president asks, will you stand up for the Constitution and say no? HEGSETH: It's another 'gotcha' hypothetical, which is your specialty. SLOTKIN: You and I have done this dance before. It's not hypothetical. You give that answer all the time; get over it, okay? Your boss you're performing for right now told journalists that he wished he signed that executive order for your predecessor in 2020. What are you going to do? Tell the American people... HEGSETH: Are you accusing me of performing? because you're performing for cable news right now. SLOTKIN: Dude, dude, just answer the question. HEGSETH: It's a hypothetical, umm, Joe Biden, umm...
2:17

🚨BREAKING: Hegseth refuses to answer if he'd seize ballots in the midterm election. SLOTKIN: If the president asks, will you stand up for the Constitution and say no? HEGSETH: It's another 'gotcha' hypothetical, which is your specialty. SLOTKIN: You and I have done this dance before. It's not hypothetical. You give that answer all the time; get over it, okay? Your boss you're performing for right now told journalists that he wished he signed that executive order for your predecessor in 2020. What are you going to do? Tell the American people... HEGSETH: Are you accusing me of performing? because you're performing for cable news right now. SLOTKIN: Dude, dude, just answer the question. HEGSETH: It's a hypothetical, umm, Joe Biden, umm...

CALL TO ACTIVISM

1,319,379 views • 3 months ago

.Sen. Elissa Slotkin: "If the President…asks you to seize ballots or voting machines in states during the 2026 election, will you stand up for the Constitution and say no?" Secretary Hegseth: "It's yet another 'gotcha' hypothetical, which is your specialty."
3:04

.Sen. Elissa Slotkin: "If the President…asks you to seize ballots or voting machines in states during the 2026 election, will you stand up for the Constitution and say no?" Secretary Hegseth: "It's yet another 'gotcha' hypothetical, which is your specialty."

CSPAN

38,557 views • 3 months ago

SLOTKIN: If the president asks you to seize ballots or voting machines in states during the 2026 election, will you stand up for the Constitution and say 'no,' or will you salute and do his bidding? HEGSETH: It's yet another gotcha hypothetical, which is your speciality SLOTKIN: It's not a hypothetical. The guy you're performing for right now says he wishes he signed that executive order in 2020 for your predecessor! HEGSETH: You're performing for cable news right now. By the way, in 2024, 15 states did deploy troops to polling stations SLOTKIN: Under their governor's authority!
2:07

SLOTKIN: If the president asks you to seize ballots or voting machines in states during the 2026 election, will you stand up for the Constitution and say 'no,' or will you salute and do his bidding? HEGSETH: It's yet another gotcha hypothetical, which is your speciality SLOTKIN: It's not a hypothetical. The guy you're performing for right now says he wishes he signed that executive order in 2020 for your predecessor! HEGSETH: You're performing for cable news right now. By the way, in 2024, 15 states did deploy troops to polling stations SLOTKIN: Under their governor's authority!

Aaron Rupar

325,941 views • 3 months ago

🚨 Senate Armed Services Committee hearing just delivered this exchange: Sen. Sen. Elissa Slotkin pressed SecDef Pete Hegseth: “If the President asks you to deploy the uniform military to our polls to collect voter rolls or machines in 2026… will you stand up for the Constitution and say no, or will you salute and do his bidding?” Hegseth called it a “gotcha hypothetical.” Slotkin fired back: “Dude, just answer the question. It’s not hypothetical. It’s never been done in our history.” The same hearing also covered the war in Iran and Pentagon priorities.
5:28

🚨 Senate Armed Services Committee hearing just delivered this exchange: Sen. Sen. Elissa Slotkin pressed SecDef Pete Hegseth: “If the President asks you to deploy the uniform military to our polls to collect voter rolls or machines in 2026… will you stand up for the Constitution and say no, or will you salute and do his bidding?” Hegseth called it a “gotcha hypothetical.” Slotkin fired back: “Dude, just answer the question. It’s not hypothetical. It’s never been done in our history.” The same hearing also covered the war in Iran and Pentagon priorities.

Masu Zafi 🔥🔥

15,906 views • 2 months ago

After posing a hypothetical 'gotcha' scenario, Elissa Slotkin grows visibly flustered and whiny when Pete Hegseth refuses to take the bait: Slotkin: "It's not hypothetical! Tell the American people: Will you deploy the uniformed military to our polls to collect voter rolls or machines?" Hegseth: "You're performing for cable news right now." Slotkin: "Dude, just answer the question." Hegseth: "It's a hypothetical. By the way, in 2024 under the Biden administration, 15 states did deploy troops to polling stations-" Slotkin: "Under their governor's authority, when their governor's asked for it." Hegseth: "What did Joe Biden say about that?" Slotkin: "I don't think anything! Because he needed them for cybersecurity and Covid...It was those governors of the states, under their authorities...It's never been done in our history...Do not send uniformed military to our polls!" Hegseth: "I've never been ordered to do anything illegal, and I won't." Glad she implictly admits her question was hypothetical all along.
2:04

After posing a hypothetical 'gotcha' scenario, Elissa Slotkin grows visibly flustered and whiny when Pete Hegseth refuses to take the bait: Slotkin: "It's not hypothetical! Tell the American people: Will you deploy the uniformed military to our polls to collect voter rolls or machines?" Hegseth: "You're performing for cable news right now." Slotkin: "Dude, just answer the question." Hegseth: "It's a hypothetical. By the way, in 2024 under the Biden administration, 15 states did deploy troops to polling stations-" Slotkin: "Under their governor's authority, when their governor's asked for it." Hegseth: "What did Joe Biden say about that?" Slotkin: "I don't think anything! Because he needed them for cybersecurity and Covid...It was those governors of the states, under their authorities...It's never been done in our history...Do not send uniformed military to our polls!" Hegseth: "I've never been ordered to do anything illegal, and I won't." Glad she implictly admits her question was hypothetical all along.

Julia 🇺🇸

305,178 views • 3 months ago

🚨 JUST IN: SecWar Pete Hegseth is TOYING with insufferable Dem Sen. Elissa Slotkin after she fearmongers that he'd send TROOPS to the polls HEGSETH: "Yet another GOTCHA hypothetical, which is your specialty!" SLOTKIN: "It's not!!" HEGSETH: "You're PERFORMING for cable news right now." SLOTKIN: "DUDE, just answer the question!" HEGSETH: "It's a hypothetical." 😂🔥
1:59

🚨 JUST IN: SecWar Pete Hegseth is TOYING with insufferable Dem Sen. Elissa Slotkin after she fearmongers that he'd send TROOPS to the polls HEGSETH: "Yet another GOTCHA hypothetical, which is your specialty!" SLOTKIN: "It's not!!" HEGSETH: "You're PERFORMING for cable news right now." SLOTKIN: "DUDE, just answer the question!" HEGSETH: "It's a hypothetical." 😂🔥

Eric Daugherty

440,332 views • 3 months ago

Senator Senator Mark Kelly asks Pete Hegseth if he stands by his statement that he would provide no quarter and no mercy to the enemy. Hegseth refuses to answer a simple “yes” or “no” question. Senator Kelly: “I’m going to give you one more chance to address a question here… Your quote was ‘we will keep on pushing, keep advancing, no quarter, no mercy for our enemies,’ and yesterday you did not clarify if you stand by this statement.” Hegseth: [non-answer] Senator Kelly: “You are the Secretary of Defense. The things you say matter and your response here, right now, makes it clear to the American people exactly why you are not right for this job.”
1:38

Senator Senator Mark Kelly asks Pete Hegseth if he stands by his statement that he would provide no quarter and no mercy to the enemy. Hegseth refuses to answer a simple “yes” or “no” question. Senator Kelly: “I’m going to give you one more chance to address a question here… Your quote was ‘we will keep on pushing, keep advancing, no quarter, no mercy for our enemies,’ and yesterday you did not clarify if you stand by this statement.” Hegseth: [non-answer] Senator Kelly: “You are the Secretary of Defense. The things you say matter and your response here, right now, makes it clear to the American people exactly why you are not right for this job.”

Ed Krassenstein

767,252 views • 3 months ago

Slotkin: “Have you given the order to be able to shoot at unarmed protesters in any way? I’m just asking the question. Don’t laugh.” Hegseth: “What is that based on? What evidence would you have that an order like that has ever been given?” Slotkin: “It is based on Donald Trump giving that order to your predecessor, to a Republican Secretary of Defense, who I give a lot of credit to because he didn’t accept the order. He had more guts and balls than you because he said, ‘I’m not going to send in the uniformed military to do something that I know in my gut isn’t right’…I want the answer to be no. Please tell me it’s no. Have you given the order?” Hegseth: “Senator, I’d be careful what you read in books and believing it, except for the Bible.”
1:13

Slotkin: “Have you given the order to be able to shoot at unarmed protesters in any way? I’m just asking the question. Don’t laugh.” Hegseth: “What is that based on? What evidence would you have that an order like that has ever been given?” Slotkin: “It is based on Donald Trump giving that order to your predecessor, to a Republican Secretary of Defense, who I give a lot of credit to because he didn’t accept the order. He had more guts and balls than you because he said, ‘I’m not going to send in the uniformed military to do something that I know in my gut isn’t right’…I want the answer to be no. Please tell me it’s no. Have you given the order?” Hegseth: “Senator, I’d be careful what you read in books and believing it, except for the Bible.”

Republican Accountability

55,757 views • 1 year ago

Sen. Slotkin: If the President of the United States gets you on the phone, and says 'I need you to physically deploy around polling stations,' you will say no? ICE Director: There is no reason for us to deploy now Slotkin: Then you should say no, right?
0:24

Sen. Slotkin: If the President of the United States gets you on the phone, and says 'I need you to physically deploy around polling stations,' you will say no? ICE Director: There is no reason for us to deploy now Slotkin: Then you should say no, right?

Headquarters

422,300 views • 6 months ago

Senator Elisa Slotkin: "Do you agree that there can be some orders given by the Commander-in-Chief that are in violation of the US Constitution?" Hegseth: "I reject the premise that President Trump will be giving illegal orders at all" Slotkin then reads a list of unconstitutional orders that Trump handed down to the military.
2:25

Senator Elisa Slotkin: "Do you agree that there can be some orders given by the Commander-in-Chief that are in violation of the US Constitution?" Hegseth: "I reject the premise that President Trump will be giving illegal orders at all" Slotkin then reads a list of unconstitutional orders that Trump handed down to the military.

Lincoln Square

1,018,969 views • 1 year ago

Senator Elissa Slotkin is really good at putting Pete Hegseth on the hot seat during his Senate confirmation hearing and showing his double speak and inability to answer basic questions about whether or not he will allow Donald Trump to violate the U.S. Constitution.
7:05

Senator Elissa Slotkin is really good at putting Pete Hegseth on the hot seat during his Senate confirmation hearing and showing his double speak and inability to answer basic questions about whether or not he will allow Donald Trump to violate the U.S. Constitution.

Art Candee 🍿🥤

57,248 views • 1 year ago

SLOTKIN: Have you given the order to be able to shoot at unarmed protesters in any way? I'm just asking -- don't laugh HEGSETH: What is that based on? SLOTKIN: It is based on Trump giving that order to your predecessor, who I give a lot of credit to because he didn't accept the order. He has more guts and balls than you.
1:19

SLOTKIN: Have you given the order to be able to shoot at unarmed protesters in any way? I'm just asking -- don't laugh HEGSETH: What is that based on? SLOTKIN: It is based on Trump giving that order to your predecessor, who I give a lot of credit to because he didn't accept the order. He has more guts and balls than you.

Aaron Rupar

526,955 views • 1 year ago

Wow There are actually Veterans who are in support of Mark Kelly and saying f*ck you to Pete Hegseth. Unbelievable If you support the Seditious Six, I don’t care if you are current or former military or not, you are a traitor to this country. That’s just a fact!
1:02

Wow There are actually Veterans who are in support of Mark Kelly and saying f*ck you to Pete Hegseth. Unbelievable If you support the Seditious Six, I don’t care if you are current or former military or not, you are a traitor to this country. That’s just a fact!

Johnny Midnight ⚡️

58,875 views • 8 months ago

.James Talarico to Pete Hegseth in unearthed clip: “You have made a lot of money personally and you've enriched a lot of corporations with advertising by getting on here and spewing lies and conspiracy theories to folks who trust you. I'm asking you to tell your voters right now that Donald Trump lost the election in 2020. Can you admit that?” Hegseth: “I-it’s not your show…” Talarico: “Can you answer the question?” Hegseth: “I-I think I’m answering the questions…” Talarico: “Is this an uncomfortable question for you?”
0:33

.James Talarico to Pete Hegseth in unearthed clip: “You have made a lot of money personally and you've enriched a lot of corporations with advertising by getting on here and spewing lies and conspiracy theories to folks who trust you. I'm asking you to tell your voters right now that Donald Trump lost the election in 2020. Can you admit that?” Hegseth: “I-it’s not your show…” Talarico: “Can you answer the question?” Hegseth: “I-I think I’m answering the questions…” Talarico: “Is this an uncomfortable question for you?”

Team Talarico

1,269,376 views • 5 months ago

Sec. Hegseth: “Boots on the ground...we're not going to foreclose any option. You can't fight and win a war if you tell your adversary what you are willing to do or what you are not willing to do.”
0:46

Sec. Hegseth: “Boots on the ground...we're not going to foreclose any option. You can't fight and win a war if you tell your adversary what you are willing to do or what you are not willing to do.”

Open Source Intel

40,612 views • 4 months ago

Scott Adams asks the simple question 'What's the point of voting machines?': "Does it make things more secure? No. Does it give you results faster? No. Does it reduce your costs? Obviously not. You tell me why we have them. Do you know why Fox News can't do that story? I think you do. I've never heard anybody explain the point of machines unless they are designed for throwing the election. What's the other reason? It's not faster, cheaper, or more reliable. Someone needs to answer the fucking question: Why do they exist? That's all." Voting machines were introduced into the American election system in 1909. The original justification for voting machines was 'efficiency'. If election day continues to turn into election week and election month, there is zero justification for voting machines. Why doesn't Fox discuss this? They have 787 million reasons.
2:54

Scott Adams asks the simple question 'What's the point of voting machines?': "Does it make things more secure? No. Does it give you results faster? No. Does it reduce your costs? Obviously not. You tell me why we have them. Do you know why Fox News can't do that story? I think you do. I've never heard anybody explain the point of machines unless they are designed for throwing the election. What's the other reason? It's not faster, cheaper, or more reliable. Someone needs to answer the fucking question: Why do they exist? That's all." Voting machines were introduced into the American election system in 1909. The original justification for voting machines was 'efficiency'. If election day continues to turn into election week and election month, there is zero justification for voting machines. Why doesn't Fox discuss this? They have 787 million reasons.

Eric Abbenante

1,367,490 views • 2 years ago

SLOTKIN: Do you believe that ICE has the authority to be deployed to US polling places? LYONS: There's no reason for us to deploy to a polling facility SLOTKIN: So if the president gets you on the phone and says he needs you to go and physically deploy around polling places, you'll say no? LYONS: There's no reason for us to deploy, but we do investigate voter fraud
1:59

SLOTKIN: Do you believe that ICE has the authority to be deployed to US polling places? LYONS: There's no reason for us to deploy to a polling facility SLOTKIN: So if the president gets you on the phone and says he needs you to go and physically deploy around polling places, you'll say no? LYONS: There's no reason for us to deploy, but we do investigate voter fraud

Aaron Rupar

96,822 views • 6 months ago