Jake Tapper

Well, it's really amazing when someone who describes themselves as your friend, as your supporter, as someone who actually came in to work for you, leaves and writes within 100 days of you taking office, an op-ed in which he describes, as you said, a total meltdown, utter chaos, and frankly, basically says President Trump should fire you.

Well, it's really amazing when someone who describes themselves as your friend, as your supporter, as someone who actually came in to work for you, leaves and writes within 100 days of you taking office, an op-ed in which he describes, as you said, a total meltdown, utter chaos, and frankly, basically says President Trump should fire you.

Well, it's really amazing when someone who describes themselves as your friend, as your supporter, as someone who actually came in to work for you, leaves and writes within 100 days of you taking office, an op-ed in which he describes, as you said, a total meltdown, utter chaos, and frankly, basically says President Trump should fire you.

Now, I'm one who believed, as I think you are, that Secretary Hegseth should never have been nominated and should never have been confirmed in the first place. So all of this in a way wasn't just predictable. It was predicted by a lot of people who said that putting a person like this into this role would result in disastrous leadership at the Pentagon.

Now, I'm one who believed, as I think you are, that Secretary Hegseth should never have been nominated and should never have been confirmed in the first place. So all of this in a way wasn't just predictable. It was predicted by a lot of people who said that putting a person like this into this role would result in disastrous leadership at the Pentagon.

Now, I'm one who believed, as I think you are, that Secretary Hegseth should never have been nominated and should never have been confirmed in the first place. So all of this in a way wasn't just predictable. It was predicted by a lot of people who said that putting a person like this into this role would result in disastrous leadership at the Pentagon.

And that's exactly what we've seen across the board. And we've seen other extraordinary statements from his former senior aides, basically saying we were fired for no good reason. We don't get what's going on. And if Secretary Hegsath can't even run his front office, how can he possibly run the entire Pentagon?

And that's exactly what we've seen across the board. And we've seen other extraordinary statements from his former senior aides, basically saying we were fired for no good reason. We don't get what's going on. And if Secretary Hegsath can't even run his front office, how can he possibly run the entire Pentagon?

And that's exactly what we've seen across the board. And we've seen other extraordinary statements from his former senior aides, basically saying we were fired for no good reason. We don't get what's going on. And if Secretary Hegsath can't even run his front office, how can he possibly run the entire Pentagon?

In your answer to my first question, you listed a bunch of things. And you started off by talking about the damage being done with our allies. From a national security perspective, when Donald Trump has talked about annexing Canada or taking it over, when he attacks our allies in Europe or Australia or elsewhere, from a national security perspective, what are the additional dangers that

In your answer to my first question, you listed a bunch of things. And you started off by talking about the damage being done with our allies. From a national security perspective, when Donald Trump has talked about annexing Canada or taking it over, when he attacks our allies in Europe or Australia or elsewhere, from a national security perspective, what are the additional dangers that

In your answer to my first question, you listed a bunch of things. And you started off by talking about the damage being done with our allies. From a national security perspective, when Donald Trump has talked about annexing Canada or taking it over, when he attacks our allies in Europe or Australia or elsewhere, from a national security perspective, what are the additional dangers that

you know, may not be that obvious. Obviously, we shouldn't be attacking our allies, but from a security perspective, what are you worried about?

you know, may not be that obvious. Obviously, we shouldn't be attacking our allies, but from a security perspective, what are you worried about?

you know, may not be that obvious. Obviously, we shouldn't be attacking our allies, but from a security perspective, what are you worried about?

You know, I think the easiest way to answer that question is to put yourselves in the shoes of the leaders in Beijing, China's leadership. They've spent years, even decades, trying to drive wedges among and undermine the United States' relationship with its alliances because they recognize it's an asset they don't have. Only the United States of America has this network

You know, I think the easiest way to answer that question is to put yourselves in the shoes of the leaders in Beijing, China's leadership. They've spent years, even decades, trying to drive wedges among and undermine the United States' relationship with its alliances because they recognize it's an asset they don't have. Only the United States of America has this network

You know, I think the easiest way to answer that question is to put yourselves in the shoes of the leaders in Beijing, China's leadership. They've spent years, even decades, trying to drive wedges among and undermine the United States' relationship with its alliances because they recognize it's an asset they don't have. Only the United States of America has this network

of strong capable democratic allies and now what president trump is doing is china's work for it he is single-handedly taking away this huge asset and i would say that there are a number of costs to that but one of the biggest ones is that for us to compete effectively with china in the future

of strong capable democratic allies and now what president trump is doing is china's work for it he is single-handedly taking away this huge asset and i would say that there are a number of costs to that but one of the biggest ones is that for us to compete effectively with china in the future