April 22, 2025 • 7 mins
Jon Decker talks to Mendte in the Morning about the latest regarding Pete Hegseth following the latest ‘Signal’ controversy and calls for his resignation.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Let's get to John Decker, who is patiently standing by W. R.
White House correspondent. Interesting days in Washington, John, How are
you good morning.
Speaker 2 (00:09):
I'm doing great. How are you doing today?
Speaker 1 (00:11):
I'm doing fine. Pete hagg Seth isn't doing that well today, No,
he's not. There's calls for his resignation.
Speaker 2 (00:18):
Explain, Well, there's calls for his resignation because of a
news story which has not been denied, put out by
the New York Times, in which we all know about
that signal chat that happened a few weeks ago in
which members of this group chat, members of the National
(00:38):
Security Team invited a journalist into that group chat and
they shared very classified information regarding an impending attack on
booky rebels in Yemen. Well, now we learn that there
was another group chat, but this one, according to the
New York Times, was done over a personal phone of
(00:59):
Pete haggs At and included in that group chat his
wife and his brother. That is the reason why there
are calls for his resignation, even from a Republican Congressman
Don Bacon from Nebraska. But despite all of that, the
President indicating that he supports Pete Haig Seth. You played
(01:20):
a clip of the White House Press Secretary Caroline Levitch,
she too, indicating the support that the President has for
Pete Haig Seth, But there's no question that he is
under fire as it relates to his judgment using these
non secured methods to communicate.
Speaker 1 (01:36):
Is there any confirmation of that story other than leaks
from the Defense Department or wherever they came from.
Speaker 2 (01:44):
Well to me, you know, and I've seen leaks and
stories about leaks for decades, and what's interesting here, and
I think what's telling is that there's no denial actually
coming from the Pentagon about the contents of the story.
The attacks are on the leakers, The attacks are on
the media trying to deflect from the actual story about
(02:08):
the use of this non secure method to communicate with
people that should not really be privy to these conversations. Yes,
Pete Hegsa's wife was included in this conversation. You know,
you question whether or not that was appropriate, given that
this was national security information and impending attack on an
(02:29):
adversary of the United States.
Speaker 1 (02:31):
Were you at the Easter celebration on the lawn of
the White House.
Speaker 2 (02:38):
I was not there. I was still coming back from
some PTO, some vacation time. But you know, I'm very
much aware of what happened when the President was out
there on the south lawn of the White House, and
when Pete Hegsath was out there as well. Both of
them came and spoke to the media.
Speaker 1 (02:55):
Yeah, no, I knew that. I just wanted to ask you.
I was shocked when I saw Pa heg Seth standing there.
I felt sorry for the poor guy because he's answering
these questions and the presses after him, and he has
seven kids. He has seven children. They were all standing
there behind them, looking up right there, looking at his dad,
trying to defend himself. You know, sometimes well maybe it's
(03:18):
not the best time to ask that question.
Speaker 2 (03:21):
Well, you know, you can choose as a public figure
whether or not you want to approach the media. He
decided to that he wanted to do that, that he
wanted to approach their questions in the way that he did,
attacking again, which what he called hoaxters. I don't know
what the hoax is, you know, tell me what the
(03:42):
hoax is. In regards to the story. The story has
not been denied by the White House. It has not
been denied by the Pentagon. So I don't exactly understand
the word that Pete Hegseth used yesterday and addressing the
media yesterday.
Speaker 1 (03:57):
Yeah, he pointed each person that it was asking question,
saying Hoaxter's Hoaxter's Hoaxter's hoaxters it was an interesting defense,
or maybe a non defense. But let's talk about the
Democrats doubling down on going down to l Salvador. It
doesn't seem like I don't know exactly what they're doing,
(04:17):
because it doesn't seem like the best political strategy to
be I would argue on the wrong side of this
issue when it comes to the American public.
Speaker 2 (04:29):
Well, look, this is a political decision they've made to
go down there. And I think what you're referring to,
Larry is when you look at it from the perspective
of going to fight on behalf of individuals, it looks
as if Democrats are going down to El Salvador to
fight on behalf of someone who is not a US citizen.
(04:54):
And that's not a good look. We know it's not
a good look in terms of the way I think
the American public based upon various polls, based upon the
twenty twenty four election feel about the issue of border security.
So if that's what you're firing, yes, absolutely agree with you,
one hundred.
Speaker 1 (05:11):
Absolutely, and so does Gavin Newsom. He said, we fall
for this every single time. This is the fight they want,
and he said the Democratic Party right now, they're sheep.
Speaker 2 (05:21):
Now.
Speaker 1 (05:21):
I understand he's being political as well. He's trying to
remove himself from that and look more like a moderate
these days, but still I don't understand. I thought Van
Holland was a little bit embarrassing on the Sunday morning
shows trying to defend what he was doing. And I'm
surprised now that four members of the House are now
(05:41):
going down there to follow him. They're not going to
get anything done. Them going down to demand him being
released is not going to happen. So they're just doing
this politically. But politically it's not wise.
Speaker 2 (05:56):
Yeah, it's it's not a good move politically. Now, as
it relates to Senator Van Holland, he made a conscious
choice to go down there because this individual was a
resident of Maryland. And you know, obviously he's advocating on
behalf of an individual that was a resident of Maryland,
and that's part of the duty of a US senator.
(06:19):
I don't know about the other members that have traveled
down there. If they don't have this individual as part
of their constituency, then to me, it looks overtly political
to be going down to El Salvador to be advocating
for an individual who, again it's been established as not
a US citizen.
Speaker 1 (06:38):
Well, i'll tell you why. We know it's a bad
political move because Van Holland went down and US taxpayers
paid for his trip. This group has been denied getting
federal funding for their trip. This is coming out of
their pockets. But the Republican Party has stepped up and
offered to pay for their trip and anyone else for
(06:59):
any other Democrat that wants to go down there, as
long as they live stream the whole thing. So I
think that's telling. Yeah, thanks a lot. John Decker, wo
White House Correspondent, Thanks for talking to us today.
Let's get to John Decker, who is patiently standing by W. R.
White House correspondent. Interesting days in Washington, John, How are
you good morning.
Speaker 2 (00:09):
I'm doing great. How are you doing today?
Speaker 1 (00:11):
I'm doing fine. Pete hagg Seth isn't doing that well today, No,
he's not. There's calls for his resignation.
Speaker 2 (00:18):
Explain, Well, there's calls for his resignation because of a
news story which has not been denied, put out by
the New York Times, in which we all know about
that signal chat that happened a few weeks ago in
which members of this group chat, members of the National
(00:38):
Security Team invited a journalist into that group chat and
they shared very classified information regarding an impending attack on
booky rebels in Yemen. Well, now we learn that there
was another group chat, but this one, according to the
New York Times, was done over a personal phone of
(00:59):
Pete haggs At and included in that group chat his
wife and his brother. That is the reason why there
are calls for his resignation, even from a Republican Congressman
Don Bacon from Nebraska. But despite all of that, the
President indicating that he supports Pete Haig Seth. You played
(01:20):
a clip of the White House Press Secretary Caroline Levitch,
she too, indicating the support that the President has for
Pete Haig Seth, But there's no question that he is
under fire as it relates to his judgment using these
non secured methods to communicate.
Speaker 1 (01:36):
Is there any confirmation of that story other than leaks
from the Defense Department or wherever they came from.
Speaker 2 (01:44):
Well to me, you know, and I've seen leaks and
stories about leaks for decades, and what's interesting here, and
I think what's telling is that there's no denial actually
coming from the Pentagon about the contents of the story.
The attacks are on the leakers, The attacks are on
the media trying to deflect from the actual story about
(02:08):
the use of this non secure method to communicate with
people that should not really be privy to these conversations. Yes,
Pete Hegsa's wife was included in this conversation. You know,
you question whether or not that was appropriate, given that
this was national security information and impending attack on an
(02:29):
adversary of the United States.
Speaker 1 (02:31):
Were you at the Easter celebration on the lawn of
the White House.
Speaker 2 (02:38):
I was not there. I was still coming back from
some PTO, some vacation time. But you know, I'm very
much aware of what happened when the President was out
there on the south lawn of the White House, and
when Pete Hegsath was out there as well. Both of
them came and spoke to the media.
Speaker 1 (02:55):
Yeah, no, I knew that. I just wanted to ask you.
I was shocked when I saw Pa heg Seth standing there.
I felt sorry for the poor guy because he's answering
these questions and the presses after him, and he has
seven kids. He has seven children. They were all standing
there behind them, looking up right there, looking at his dad,
trying to defend himself. You know, sometimes well maybe it's
(03:18):
not the best time to ask that question.
Speaker 2 (03:21):
Well, you know, you can choose as a public figure
whether or not you want to approach the media. He
decided to that he wanted to do that, that he
wanted to approach their questions in the way that he did,
attacking again, which what he called hoaxters. I don't know
what the hoax is, you know, tell me what the
(03:42):
hoax is. In regards to the story. The story has
not been denied by the White House. It has not
been denied by the Pentagon. So I don't exactly understand
the word that Pete Hegseth used yesterday and addressing the
media yesterday.
Speaker 1 (03:57):
Yeah, he pointed each person that it was asking question,
saying Hoaxter's Hoaxter's Hoaxter's hoaxters it was an interesting defense,
or maybe a non defense. But let's talk about the
Democrats doubling down on going down to l Salvador. It
doesn't seem like I don't know exactly what they're doing,
(04:17):
because it doesn't seem like the best political strategy to
be I would argue on the wrong side of this
issue when it comes to the American public.
Speaker 2 (04:29):
Well, look, this is a political decision they've made to
go down there. And I think what you're referring to,
Larry is when you look at it from the perspective
of going to fight on behalf of individuals, it looks
as if Democrats are going down to El Salvador to
fight on behalf of someone who is not a US citizen.
(04:54):
And that's not a good look. We know it's not
a good look in terms of the way I think
the American public based upon various polls, based upon the
twenty twenty four election feel about the issue of border security.
So if that's what you're firing, yes, absolutely agree with you,
one hundred.
Speaker 1 (05:11):
Absolutely, and so does Gavin Newsom. He said, we fall
for this every single time. This is the fight they want,
and he said the Democratic Party right now, they're sheep.
Speaker 2 (05:21):
Now.
Speaker 1 (05:21):
I understand he's being political as well. He's trying to
remove himself from that and look more like a moderate
these days, but still I don't understand. I thought Van
Holland was a little bit embarrassing on the Sunday morning
shows trying to defend what he was doing. And I'm
surprised now that four members of the House are now
(05:41):
going down there to follow him. They're not going to
get anything done. Them going down to demand him being
released is not going to happen. So they're just doing
this politically. But politically it's not wise.
Speaker 2 (05:56):
Yeah, it's it's not a good move politically. Now, as
it relates to Senator Van Holland, he made a conscious
choice to go down there because this individual was a
resident of Maryland. And you know, obviously he's advocating on
behalf of an individual that was a resident of Maryland,
and that's part of the duty of a US senator.
(06:19):
I don't know about the other members that have traveled
down there. If they don't have this individual as part
of their constituency, then to me, it looks overtly political
to be going down to El Salvador to be advocating
for an individual who, again it's been established as not
a US citizen.
Speaker 1 (06:38):
Well, i'll tell you why. We know it's a bad
political move because Van Holland went down and US taxpayers
paid for his trip. This group has been denied getting
federal funding for their trip. This is coming out of
their pockets. But the Republican Party has stepped up and
offered to pay for their trip and anyone else for
(06:59):
any other Democrat that wants to go down there, as
long as they live stream the whole thing. So I
think that's telling. Yeah, thanks a lot. John Decker, wo
White House Correspondent, Thanks for talking to us today.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!