ml-thoughts

LtCol Lohmeier’s Thoughts on Capitol Hill Hearing: This is War

by HearingsMilitary

Former Space Force LtCol Matthew Lohmeier recently spoke at a talk on X about his thoughts regarding the Capitol Hill hearing he testified at, “The Risks of Progressive Ideologies in the U.S. Military”.

Listen to it here or read the transcript below:

TRANSCRIPT

LtCol Matthew Lohmeier
“I was asked several weeks ago to testify at the National Defense Subcommittee hearing that is part of the House Oversight Committee. That committee is chaired by Representative Glenn Grothman from Wisconsin, and, of course, you might be aware that Representative Jim Comer chairs the House Oversight Committee, and Mike Waltz is also a part of the Oversight Committee.

Neither Jim Comer nor Mike Waltz are necessarily required or obligated, as far as I understand it, to be in that subcommittee hearing, but both of them came.

I just wanted to share briefly with the group some dynamics that I didn’t expect and share a few observations. And then I’m happy to answer questions.

I noticed that when the hearing started, I’m sure it’s kind of standard, you had the chairman of the committee, Glenn Grothman, and the ranking member, Robert Garcia, Democrat from California, was in his seat. The committee chairman was in his seat, and literally no more than a handful of other congressmen in the chairs already, a few from the Republican side, one or two from the Democrat side.

I’m not throwing spears just yet, but just to say I was unprepared for that, I figured that some would choose to bow out altogether, like Congresswoman Cori Bush from Missouri, and that, in fact, turned out to be true. She never showed.

But what kind of surprised me is that for a hearing that lasted quite a long time–it was expected to be 90 minutes but it was well over 2 hours.

We had both Republicans and Democrats, predominantly Democrats, show up just a few minutes before they were expecting to give their monologue and maybe ask a few questions, and then they got right back up and left the hearing.

The takeaway for me was that there’s a genuine lack of interest, especially from Democrats, to even confront this issue and hear feedback from those who have been called as witnesses for these hearings.

That was evident also when the ranking member, Robert Garcia, closed his testimony at the very end of this hearing by saying, hey, you’ve already lost this battle. He said, I can’t believe we’re even taking time, wasting time to discuss what you allege is wokism in the military, what you allege is a culture war.

There’s this animus from the Left that shouldn’t surprise anyone.

But here’s an important point that I wanted to make that is, I hope, useful in that it gives us an understanding into their strategy.

I watched what happened both before the hearing, outside of that hearing room where I met General Seidule and his son that he brought to the hearing. I saw him go back into a separate private room with Democrats who would be a part of the hearing, and their staffers, I presume, to discuss a game plan.

Based on how the Democrats approached this entire hearing, if you listened to the entire hearing, one thing that you would have noticed was that they seemed to be deliberately focused on the decades past and not on the present moment.

That was evident in some of the lines of questioning. It was evident in their talking points, and it was evident in what General Seidule was prepared to talk about. He talked about his lengthy 30 plus year military career, and he talked about policies like equal opportunity. They talked about integration of races in the military during the Truman administration.

And it’s like, no one is here to argue these things! No one is here to talk about those progressive policies from early in the Cold War. But that’s what they focused on.

Because, and this is the important point, I get the sense that they recognized ahead of time that if they had remotely competent witnesses show up to attack wokism, to attack Critical Race Theory, to attack DEI initiatives and their consequences, they wouldn’t have much of an argument to make.

So what they wanted to do is shame the witnesses into looking like we were there to fight against women in the military or fight against gays being in the military at all. And of course, that isn’t the case. That was one observation I’ve had as I’ve reflected on what I felt and what I saw in the room.

The other point I want to make, I guess I’ve already hinted at, is I was rather dismayed. I mean, I already don’t like Leftist, Leftism, Progressivism, Neomarxism–pick your label.

But to have the tangible feeling to sit in the room and to feel their disgust for conservatism, Republicans in the room, and to hear them thank General Seidule for his service, but deliberately ignore Will Thibeau and I in their gratitude, I mean, it shows that they’ve got a really vitriolic animosity for our values, our worldview.

Again, I know that’s not surprising to anyone, but I saw firsthand that they are determined to wage a battle and they defend it like it’s a religious worldview.

It shouldn’t surprise you also that the same animus is felt and apparent in some of the Republican members–and in my view, rightly so.

That’s some overall highlights for me, takeaways. I’ll tell you, some of the clips that Jordan has posted on her Twitter feed have received a lot of attention. So thank you for that, both on a personal note as well as just overall for getting the messaging of that hearing out.

The House Oversight Committee has been doing a good job putting out clips from the hearing as well. They’ve gotten a lot of views. I mean, Donald Trump Jr. was saying, hey, everyone needs to watch this stuff.

So we’ve had million plus or millions of views in the last 24 hours on specific issues in that hearing. And I’m under no illusion of thinking that’s going to stay at the forefront of anyone’s minds. I know that there’s all sorts of other news going on that’s equally as important.

So I think that’s probably all I should say.  I’m happy to entertain any questions.

Question 1
Matt, I have a question for you. You mentioned the animosity from the representatives. Did you have any feedback from General Seidule afterward? I mean, did he seem to understand what you were saying?

One of the favorite clips of mine that I posted was where you just completely wrecked whatever he said about how he had never seen CRT at West Point or in his 30 year career. You were able to reference the fact that even in your book, you researched that policy proposal from West Point graduates that quoted him throughout their proposal.

So I’m just curious. I saw his face when you said that. I think a lot of other people saw his face in his reaction to that. What was the feedback or if he even had any after the hearing? Did he say anything to you? Because I think most of us understand that the representatives are not going to meet us halfway. But it is very disconcerting when service members like a general who served 30 years, when they are also projecting that animosity towards our values.

LtCol Matthew Lohmeier
Good question. So I’ll share a couple of thoughts. I went out of the hearing room into the hallway and happened to run into General Seidule before the hearing began and met him and his Army veteran son and we had a cordial exchange. I knew the kind of preparation and research I had done on him and what I was hoping to get to say.

So because he seemed like a kindly fellow and I really don’t have—I mean, I have animosity, I have a really strong disliking and frankly, a hatred for evil, but I just have a tender spot for humans. I couldn’t help but feel bad for the guy even before the hearing started because I was going to attempt to land some blows. I let him know that in advance.

I said, it’s apparent to me, having read your written submission of your testimony, that you and I have a different view on things, and I’m going to make that plain today, but I don’t mean any hard feelings by it, but this needs to be argued. He shook my hand and said, thanks, good to meet you. He didn’t appear nervous whatsoever until–and the reason I point that out is he didn’t appear nervous initially.

But I was sitting in the middle of that table, as you’re aware, and when I got about 30 to 45 seconds into my written oral statement that I wanted to make up front, I noticed he was visibly shaky.

He was picking up his papers and his hands were shaking because I think for the first time it dawned on him that the issues that Will and I were there to directly confront and attack, he didn’t have a good response for.

I think he knew, hey, me and my fellow colleagues up there on the stand have a game plan, but boy, if we go down this road, we don’t really have a good leg to stand on.

And he surely wouldn’t have anticipated that that 40-page policy proposal from West Point graduates was going to come up.

This is kind of a fun anecdote that this group will appreciate. I had spent a little bit of time every day this week preparing for that testimony, trying to turn over new rocks and learn a little bit here and there about things I hadn’t considered for a very long time.

And like a lightning bolt out of a clear sky, I had the thought to go look in my book at that 40-page policy proposal.

Because I saw in my book–it’s only like three pages in my book–that I had quoted a few of these activists. What they were advocating for sounded an awful lot like what General Seidule had been asked to do by Lloyd Austin as recently as a year and a half ago.

So I decided I’d pull up that 40-page proposal and go spend a little bit of time studying it. And I was so glad I did. So I consider that a direct gift from heaven.

I had no thought to look at that, and it just literally was a thought that was planted as clear as day in my mind. So I think we had some help to communicate, some ideas.

My wife was prayerful, others were prayerful. She laughed and teased me after the testimony was over because we have a very conservative family that doesn’t like vulgarity. And I use the word bullshit and something else in the hearing, and my wife said, I was praying for you, that you’d be led by God in what you said, and as soon as I heard you say bullshit, I wondered, God, did you plant that in his mouth as well?

But all of that to say we were prayerful. We took this very seriously.

The feedback I’ve received by private email and through my website and through direct messaging, I’ve been pleased that people who genuinely care about their country and who are patriots in every positive sense of that term and who love God and who desire to see an apolitical military and save their country, they’ve been reaching out, saying, hey, we love you. Thank you. God bless. That means the world to me.

And I’ve got some hate messaging as well, which I don’t really care about very much. So thanks for that question, Jordan.

Question 2
Thank you Colonel Lohmeier, God bless you for what you did. I thought you owned that General to your left. I know that’s not a good operative word, but field grade officer versus general officer, definitely you took the W on that one. But my question is,  the documents. I can’t remember the congresswoman’s name that was questioning you during the clips that I think were shared, probably more than others, but she wanted to take a lot of the documents that you provided, enter them into the records. But she also said she would follow up. Do you know if there’s any plan, tangible, objective plan, for not only the West Point report that you talked about, but also some of the other documents that you had?

LtCol Matthew Lohmeier
My understanding was, and I think they said it at the beginning of the hearing, but I don’t remember the time frame, whether it was 48 hours or 72 hours or two weeks, whatever it was, that members and their staff had a certain time to reach back out to witnesses to bug them for things. I figure probably at the beginning of the next week is when I’m going to look for some follow up.

I did have a follow up call with the chairman of the committee, Glenn Grossman. He wanted to talk for a while after the hearing and share some personal anecdotes and also ask for more clarification on some points that I shared. So that follow up has happened.

I believe it’s possible that it was Congresswoman Virginia Fox  that said perhaps she was going to want to enter some poll data that was compiled by the Heritage Foundation with Congressman Mike Waltz. These folks already have all of this stuff, and I’ll happily submit it again so it can be entered as a part of the record for that hearing. But I’m going to give them the opportunity to reach out so that if there’s multiple items that they’ve requested, I’ll just send everything at once.

I do want to make one more point, though, just for this group. We’ve got warfighters on this call. We’ve got people who are champions. How do I put it? Because I knew that the hearing went fairly well for us, I was asked a number of times how you feel you “owned” the general, is what you just shared.

I’ll tell you, I had really mixed feelings about it. That’s just like the real human element of me.

This is war. This is really a war. It’s not turned violent, but there’s a war that’s ongoing. There’s a lot of rhetoric that’s employed. There’s animosity, there’s hatred.

I feel like I dealt a few blows to a few people who I don’t hate. But it’s easy in civil wars to hate people. In fact, that’s exactly what it turns into.

I left the room feeling like I had done what I was supposed to do and also that I didn’t regret anything.

And that men and women had to go home to their families and live with some wounds for a little while, and that bothered me.

I even reached out to a veteran, in fact, who I respect greatly, and said, yeah, I feel a little bit bad about this. He tried to console me and said, hey, this is necessary, whether any of us like doing some of this or not. Sometimes it’s fun and sometimes we really like it.

That was a reflection of just the nature of conflict, and it gets a lot worse than this. So it’s kind of good to get used to the feeling.

But I do have to run now, and I’m going to jump off and go take a Newsmax call. Will and I are going to join a panel and talk about this very hearing. Thanks for letting me join.

https://starrs.us/matthew-lohmeier-congressional-testimony-statement/

https://starrs.us/west-point-grads-crt-screed-against-usma-influenced-by-former-wp-history-teacher/

11JAN24-hearing1

Hearing Wrap Up: DoD’s Progressive Agenda Hinders U.S. Military Readiness

by HearingsMilitary

(Press Release) The Subcommittee on National Security, the Border, and Foreign Affairs held a hearing titled, “The Risks of Progressive Ideologies in the U.S. Military.”

Members discussed with subject matter experts how politically driven Department of Defense (DoD) priorities infiltrating curriculum and training are affecting military readiness.

Members also discussed the military’s prioritization of progressive Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) programs and other social priorities versus other military needs which are driving down morale and recruiting numbers.

Key Takeaways:

The DoD has infused progressive ideology into the curriculum and training of the U.S. military, which has no relevant purpose to warfighting. Despite recently failing its sixth consecutive audit, the DoD is requesting more funding to expand its unhelpful and non-essential DEI based program.

  • Matthew Lohmeier— Former Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Space Force—broke down the DEI initiatives being pushed on service members and the desire for these initiatives to be removed: “Servicemembers who wear the uniform of their country do not want to see these things in the military workplace or at their bases. In most cases, this is true regardless of their race or political worldview. Despite that reality, Pentagon officials requested $140 million to expand woke Diversity initiatives in FY2024, up from $68 million and $86.5 million in 2022 and 2023, respectively, and all but three members of this subcommittee voted in favor of it. There are few things taxpayers such as myself feel is less essential to the mission of our military than expanding Diversity mandates and indoctrination.”

The DEI agenda being forced into military procedure has opened the door for race and sex-based quotas superseding the merit-based system. This is a direct factor in the growing issue of the U.S. military missing recruiting targets.

  • Will Thibaeu— American Military Project — warned of the threats of continued politicization of the military: “History is littered with examples of militaries whose consideration of political ideology precipitated a collapse in military professionalism, all of which served as a precursor to the collapse of their respective nations. America should not wait to find out if we can outrun the drumbeat of such history.”

Member Highlights:

Subcommittee on National Security, the Border, and Foreign Affairs Chairman Rep. Glenn Grothman (R-Wis.) examined the harmful ideologies being promulgated by military bureaucracy.

Rep. Grothman: “Is this bureaucracy necessary? Could you comment on it? What do they do?”

Mr. Thibaeu: “It’s a good question what they do Mr. Chairman. The problem that I have is the policies that result from such a bureaucracy. And there is, like you alluded to in your opening remarks, a lot of well-intentioned training, perhaps some of which is necessary. But what is not necessary is race and sex-based quotas that are prevalent in at least two branches of the military. And if it’s a bureaucracy that serves to fulfill those policies that I think do more than simply educate people about bias or promote equal opportunity but in fact promote a system of race and sex-based discrimination, that is problematic and they shouldn’t be receiving any money.”

Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-N.C.) zeroed in on the non-mission critical, progressive ideology that does nothing to enhance military warfighting capabilities.

Rep. Foxx: “Would learning about whiteness and white rage help promote unit cohesion or a team centered culture?”

Mr. Lohmeier: “The answer is: anyone who is focused on warfighting doesn’t naturally think to talk about these things in the military workplace. We are focused on a particular mission in defense of the country and to deter conflict and to win our nation’s wars.”

Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.) discussed what has happened in recent years to decrease lethality and morale in the military due to DEI initiatives such as decreased in standards sheerly for diversity’s sake.

Rep. Biggs: “Mr. Lohmeier, what has happened over the last three years that has caused lethality to deteriorate in the military?”

Mr. Lohmeier: “There’s been an overt politicization of the military workplace and the forcing of trainings that are anti-American, that criticize our founding fathers, that allege that white supremacy is a problem within the military ranks which has never been proven and all of that rhetoric that occurred when Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin took office, led to a bunch of moaning and complaining behind closed doors of our service members and I heard it as a commander.”

Rep. Mike Waltz (R-Fla.), who waived onto the subcommittee hearing, discussed how authors of DEI and CRT initiatives describe methods that are inherently racist because they use race to take or give positions within the military away, leading to a zero-sum game.

Rep. Waltz: “What these authors say is that ‘if you are white you are incapable of not being racist’ that in and of itself, is racist sir. And by the way, these [authors] were lecturers at the Air Force academy. That is divisive, destructive, and wrong. Finally, we have data that shows as Mr. Lohmeier has testified to, 62% of active-duty military members are seeing a politicized military. 65% would recommend their child not join, and now we are in a recruiting crisis. This is why these hearings are so necessary.”

Watch the hearing. (Starts at 21:00 mark)

tyse2

West Point grads CRT ‘screed’ against USMA influenced by former WP History teacher

by HearingsMilitary

At the Capitol Hill hearing on progressive ideologies in the military originally had two witnesses, Matt Lohmeier and Will Thibeau.

At the last minute, the Democrat side of the committee brought in as their witness retired Army Brig. General Ty Seidule, former head of the history department at West Point (where he taught for 20 years), author of the book, “Robert E. Lee and Me: A Southerner’s Reckoning with the Myth of the Lost Cause”, and proud member of the DOD Renaming Commission.

The General was rather shockingly naive and unaware in his statements about the radical leftist agenda push in the military and service academies and seemed to be living in a bubble. It appeared he was hearing for the first time the facts that Matt, Will and other Republican politicians were presenting.

For example, he didn’t know the different between equal opportunity and equity (the “E” in DEI). See here.

He said that West Point was not teaching Marxist-rooted Critical Race Theory (CRT), even though so much has been written on this in the past three years, including over 600 pages from FOIAs. See all articles: https://starrs.us/category/west-point/

But the biggest shocker was something Matt brought up about the General’s influence on a 40-page “anti-American, race-baiting, communist screed” that a group of West Pointers wrote right after they graduated, accusing West Point of being institutionally racist. The paper references throughout– as justification for their CRT beliefs–articles and lectures by their history professor, Gen. Seidule.

As background, during 2020 graduation week, several Black Cadets in the 2020 graduating class raised concerns on the state of racism within the Corps of Cadets to the Superintendent.

Shortly following graduation, a group of nine left-wing 2018 and 2018 USMA graduates wrote the paper titled “An Anti-Racist West Point,” and sent this paper to The Secretary of the Army, Chief of Staff of the Army and USMA leadership. Within days of its distribution, it went viral and the paper circulated on social media outlets.

“This is a call to action. The United States Military Academy has not taken the necessary strides towards uprooting the racism that saturates its history. We are calling upon West Point and its leadership to redress three major failures:
1. Systemic racism continues to exist at West Point.
2. Anti-racism is not part of the curriculum at West Point.
3. The conditions for an anti-racist space are not present at West Point. . . . .

Note that according to CRT, it’s not enough to not be racist, you must actively be an “anti-racist” and go along with their CRT agenda–or you are a racist. (See our Resources for many sources to help explain CRT)

In July 2020, USMA Superintendent LTG Darryl Williams directed the Inspector General Office to conduct a special inspection following this complaints of racial misconduct at West Point.

The Report of Special Inspection Assessment of Race or Ethnicity Based Treatment of Cadets at the United States Military Academy (pdf)

The inspector found:

  • There are no structural barriers to reporting EO complaints
  • There are inaccurate perceptions about handling of misconduct, discipline and honor cases for minority Cadets
  • Black Cadets tend to earn lower Military Development grades than their White counterparts
  • There was no evidence found of institutional racism

Watch Matt refute the General’s statement about CRT not being taught at West Point:

Congressman Waltz presses former West Point History instructor to define Equity

(Press Release) On Thursday, U.S. Congressman Mike Waltz (FL-6) questioned Brigadier General Ty Seidule (Ret.), former head of the history department at West Point and House Democrat witness, on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives at U.S. service academies and the definition of equity during the House Oversight & Accountability Committee hearing on the Risks of Progressive Ideologies in the U.S. Military.

Watch the full exchange:

“You testified earlier that you have not seen Marxism, Critical Race Theory, you do not know where it is in the military or where it is at West Point. Is that accurate?” Waltz asked Seidule.

“I had not heard of it until it became a national issue,” responded Seidule.

When asked if he was aware of it being taught at West Point, Seidule said he did not.

Explaining what Critical Race Theory is, Waltz said, “The theme is that white people are enraged, not a hundred years ago, not fourty years ago, which you are talking about with the sixties and seventies. It’s today. White cadets, white people are enraged by Black advancement.”

“I think, Congressman, the great thing about education is you can get a variety of different perspectives. It is not training, which is what some of my colleagues have talked about. I am talking about education. You want to hear the broadest representation of every viewpoint,” said Seidule.

“This is the very clever approach of the Left to conflate history with current day training.” Waltz asked, “would you agree that Critical Race Theory is a foundation for DEI?”

“No, I would not,” Seidule said. “DEI goes back to equal opportunity in the early part of the 1970s.”

Waltz went on to ask what the difference between equity and equality is. Seidule did not directly answer the question, so Waltz asked again, “What is equity?”

Seidule responded, “I don’t know what it is, Congressman.”

“Diversity, equity, inclusion is part of everything. There’s a DEI office in the Pentagon… you don’t know what equity is? You can’t testify to what equity means?” Waltz continued,

“Well, I will tell you since you don’t know, it is equal outcomes for all, which is a hallmark of Marxism. DEI is Marxist based, as is Critical Race Theory.”

“Let’s progress since, I mean, apparently, the expert doesn’t know what equity is in DEI,” said Waltz. “I would like to enter in for the record class composition with racial goals for West Point. You just testified under oath you were in the admissions office.”

Seidule responded, “I wasn’t in the admissions office, I was on the admissions committee for one year and I know there were no quotas, is what I said, Congressman.”

“So, we are going to parse over quotas and goals?” asked Waltz.

Waltz then pointed to the document and said, “This is from the superintendent and here are the goals. It has African Americans, Hispanics, Asians, Women with percentages. We have ‘red’ here for when they missed those goals.”

Seidule countered that “some athletes are there… and the largest number of people that are recruited at West Point are athletes at 25%.”

Waltz continued, “When you say your directive is to advance one group based on the skin color, you have to take those slots from another group based on their skin color. It’s a zero sum… The athletes get broken down by their skin color in this chart that you just said doesn’t exist.”

“Here’s a memorandum from the Secretary of the Air Force with White, Black, Asian, American Indian. I mean, I think my wife, who is an Army veteran and who is Arab, didn’t have a place, I guess, in this chart,” said Waltz. “Here you have current percentages and a mandate to increase those percentages, you have to take those slots from someone else based on ethnicity.”

Waltz pointed to a poster of the “key proponents of CRT” and summarized the quotes, “What these authors say is that if you are white, you are incapable of not being racist. That in and of itself is racist, sir. By the way, these were lecturers at the Air Force Academy. That is divisive and it’s wrong and it’s destructive.”

Waltz continued, “We have data that shows, as Mr. Lohmeier has testified to, 62% of active-duty military members are seeing a politicized military. 65% would recommend their child not join. Now, we’re in a recruiting crisis. This is why these hearings are so necessary.”

“You are right, Mr. Seidule, in that Congress drives change. This Congress has banned Critical Race Theory in the military in this defense bill, we have eliminated the hiring of divisive DEI bureaucrats.”

“WE are going to drive this change to get our military back to a meritocracy with equal opportunity for all.”

“You cannot fight racism with more racism and you have to have data.”

“Do you have any data that shows that a more or less diverse submarine, bomber, brigade, is more or less lethal?” asked Waltz. “I’m talking about the crew.”

Seidule was unable to answer the question.

“Do you have any data that shows by percentage a more or less, let’s say bomber crew, let’s say brigade, whether it’s fifty percent Black, ten percent Black, thirty percent Jewish, any of these societal factors, data that drives readiness?” asked Waltz.

Seidule was unable to provide the data in question.

https://starrs.us/records-show-critical-race-theory-propaganda-at-west-point/

https://starrs.us/west-point-teaching-marxism/

https://starrs.us/teaching-cultural-marxism-at-west-point/

ETC ETC ETC: https://starrs.us/category/west-point/

 

morvid

Video Excerpts from Capitol Hill Hearings

by HearingsMilitary

Videoclips from the Capitol Hill hearing where Matthew Lohmeier presented testimony and answered questions: The Risks of Progressive Ideologies in the U.S. Military

SHOCK MOMENT: Anti-DEI Witness Sounds Off After Fiery Clash With Jamie Raskin

‘Does The Color Of Your Skin Matter When You’re In The Trenches?’: Mace Questions DEI In Military

Comments on video:
“As a Veteran, I’ll say color didn’t mean shit in the Army in the early 2000s while I was in. My Drill Sergeant told us we are all one color, green, and I can tell you that when you’re in a foxhole with someone, that man is your brother and vice versa.”

“Same here bro. I joined the Army in ’81 and 2x a warrior. During my service we look at each other as an American warriors and nothing else. I wouldn’t serve under a WOKE DRAG QUEEN MILITARY TODAY.”

“Being it’s the weekend before we celebrate Dr. King’s birthday, we went from him saying “it’s not the color of your skin, it’s the content of your character” to “the only thing that matters is the color of your skin”. He must be rolling over his grave.”

‘Is That Not A Quota?’: Anti-DEI Witness Slams Air Force Diversity Goals
At last Thursday’s House Oversight Committee hearing, Rep. Pete Sessions (R-TX) questioned witnesses about DEI in the military, and Lt. Col. Matthew Lohmeier (Ret.) slammed the diversity goals of the Air Force.

Pat Fallon Questions Witness About Pervasiveness Of White Supremacism In The Military
At Thursday’s House Oversight Committee hearing, Rep. Pat Fallon (R-TX) questioned witnesses about DEI in the military.

Katie Porter Asks GOP Witness If He Agreed With President Truman’s Action To Integrate The Military
At a House Oversight Committee hearing on Thursday, Rep. Katie Porter (D-CA) spoke about DEI in the military.
(Mixing “Trump” for “Truman” twice, the Congresswoman has Trump living rent-free in her brain)

Scott Perry Takes Shot At Goldman At Hearing On ‘Risks Of Progressive Ideologies’ In The Military
At a House Oversight Committee hearing on Thursday, Rep. Scott Perry (R-PA) spoke about DEI in the military.

Painful, the cluelessness. From a comment on the video: “Never have such loaded softball questions been answered with such obviously scripted political drivel.”

Lawmaker Asks Retired Military General Point Blank If Antifa Is ‘Infiltrating’ The Military
At a House Oversight Committee hearing on Thursday, Rep. Robert Garcia (D-CA) spoke about DEI in the military.

Powerful statement by Congressman Higgins during the hearing on progressive ideologies in the military on Capitol Hill, 11 January 2024:

ml9

Matthew Lohmeier Congressional Testimony Statement

by HearingsMilitarySpeeches

Former Space Force Lt. Col. Matthew Lohmeier gave this statement at the “The Risks of Progressive Ideologies in the U.S. Military” hearing for the Subcommittee on National Security, the Border, and Foreign Affairs on 11 January 2024:

Good morning. My name is Matt Lohmeier and I’m an Air Force Academy graduate, former F-15C fighter pilot, and was a Lieutenant Colonel and commander in the Space Force.

In 2021, I was fired from my command in the Space Force for trying to reverse the trend of the overt politicization of the Uniformed Services.

Specifically, I criticized the military’s diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) trainings, which, at my own base, were illegally occurring despite an executive order from the commander-in-chief.

I watched these trainings divide our troops ideologically and, in some cases, sow the seeds of animosity towards the very country they had sworn an oath to defend.

I submitted a formal written complaint to the Space Force Inspector General (see Exhibit 5) detailing that such violations were occurring, including illegal race-based discrimination, but my complaint was never investigated and was later dismissed by then-Lt Gen Stephen Whiting, whom the Senate just confirmed for his fourth star.

After two months, I received a written dismissal of my complaint from General Whiting (see Exhibit 6).

After my complaint was dismissed, I wrote a book explaining that the DEI industry, which is steeped in critical race theory, is rooted in anti-American, Marxist ideology, and demonstrated its divisive impact on our troops.

I explained that DEI initiatives and trainings were dividing our armed forces precisely because CRT was created by those who harbored the intention to undermine and destroy the fabric of American society.

I warned that our recruitment and retention would plummet if we continued to foist such a divisive ideology on the men and women in uniform.

Personally, I have always advocated for a non-political military work environment.

Today, I’m here to testify about the ongoing Marxist-inspired efforts to subvert and weaken our military and broader American society.

We often refer to these efforts as wokeism; it is a culture war. Yet, even in this committee, there are differing views about whether there is such a thing as a “culture war” under way.

Some members of this committee have been outspoken critics of DEI initiatives, CRT, drag shows on military bases, and LGBTQ pride celebrations and woke military recruiting videos—all things that are components of an ongoing culture war.

Ranking member Garcia, on the other hand, asserted as recently as two weeks ago in a tweet that the culture wars are “phony” and are merely a political talking point of Republicans (see tweet from December 31, 2023).

But I assure you that Congressman Garcia’s view is NOT the view of many men and women in uniform who labor under the constant burden of race identity politics in the military workplace, and what appears to them to be the destruction of the merit- based system, whether deliberate or incidental.

It’s nothing if not incredible for a member of this committee to assert the culture wars are “phony” while another member of this committee is a member of the so-called progressive ‘Squad,’ was herself a Black Lives Matter organizer and activist (an organization whose publicly avowed ideology is Marxist), and whose ambition for a seat in Congress was, in her own words, “to accomplish a mission”—no doubt a social and cultural mission, as she says she “doesn’t need to take off her activist hat to legislate in Congress.” She claims her activism has been her “guiding force.”

Servicemembers who wear the uniform of their country do not want to see these things in the military workplace or at their bases. In most cases, this is true regardless of their race or political worldview. Despite that reality.

Pentagon officials requested $140 million to expand woke Diversity initiatives in FY2024, up from $68 million and $86.5 million in 2022 and 2023, respectively, and all but three members of this subcommittee voted in favor of it.

There are few things taxpayers such as myself feel is less essential to the mission of our military than expanding Diversity mandates and indoctrination.

Such aggressively opposed ideological worldviews competing for institutionalization through policy epitomizes and formalizes what is properly termed a culture war.

It is an American-Maoist culture war.

The fact that these debates now infect the US military workplace is an offense to people like me who love their country and all people—regardless of race, gender, or background.

I’d like to briefly draw attention to two of a handful of exhibits I have submitted for the committee’s review and for entry into the official record of today’s hearing.

THE FIRST of the exhibits is a 100-page document (see Exhibit 1) which includes real-world unsolicited feedback from military servicemembers, veterans, and parents about the consequences of this administration’s Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion initiatives.

It is, I imagine, merely a small part of the overall discontent and disappointment experienced by those who presently serve.

I submit it for the record because to spend even a few minutes with the document is to get a sense for the ways in which the innocuously labeled “DEI trainings” are hurting morale, dividing and distracting troops, disincentivizing Americans from service, and thereby destroying our recruiting and retention efforts.

Further, it is destroying the image of the United States military, which is a critical component of the proper communication of national strength to both allies and enemies alike. We now appear weaker because we are weaker (see Exhibit 7).

THE SECOND exhibit I’d like to mention is a letter signed by 185 retired General and Flag Officers (see Exhibit 2) that is dated May 20, 2023, and was previously sent to then-House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, as well as other House leaders. I have confirmed that those to whom the letter was addressed received it.

For the same reasons as those I’ve previously stated, the letter “requested that Congress, pursuant to its Constitutional powers .. . take legislative action to remove all diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs from the Department of Defense (DoD).”

It also requested that Congress “ensure that no DEI related policies, programs, and funding are included in the 2024 NDAA.”

These leaders warned:

“As our Nation faces looming threats from ‘foreign’ adversaries/enemies, our military is under assault from a culture war stemming from ‘domestic’ ideologically inspired political policies and practices. IF NOT STOPPED NOW, they will forever change the military’s warrior ethos essential to performing its mission.”

Despite their request and warning, and despite some genuine efforts of some members of the House, the Congress ultimately DID NOT use the power of the purse to put an end to DEI policies, programs, and funding in the recently approved NDAA.

The men and women who sent that letter raised the warning voice and tried their best to respectfully influence our Nation’s lawmakers.

Both of these exhibits I have mentioned are publicly available at the STARRS.US website.

I said in my book that if we did not abandon the diversity and inclusion trainings, then we would see unprecedented “recruitment and retention woes.”

That has been true and we have seen as a Nation that it is not getting any better.

I also said that unless we abandon our present hate-filled and divisive path, and repent as a nation, we will destroy ourselves.

I reaffirm that view here today, and I’m grateful to answer any questions the committee may have for me.

Exhibits
1. “What Military Service Members, Veterans and Parents Are Saying: Evidence that the CRT/DEI/Woke agenda being pushed in the military is harming morale, recruitment and retention” (100 pages)
2. Flag Officers 4 America Letter, dated May 20, 2023
3. Lt Col Lohmeier_Summary of Military Record (ranked #1/753 Space Force officers at time of promotion to Lt Col)
4. Lohmeier_Civilian CV
5. Lt Col Lohmeier_Space Force IG Complaint Citing Marxist Teachings
6. Lt Gen Stephen Whiting’s Dismissal of the IG Complaint
7. Heritage Foundation’s 2023 Index of US Military Strength Report

Full Statement with Exhibits (pdf)

 

Watch his statement (starts at 35:48 mark):

11jan23hearing

Matthew Lohmeier Testifying on Capitol Hill on Dangers of CRT/DEI ideology in the military

by EventsHearingsMilitary

Matthew Lohmeier was called to testify at the January 11, 2024 hearing, “The Risks of Progressive Ideologies in the U.S. Military”, which is to explore the politically driven DoD priorities that are affecting military readiness and examine the military’s prioritization of progressive programs such as DEI programs and other social priorities versus critical military needs.

Matthew Lohmeier Congressional Testimony Statement (pdf)

Watch: (jump to 21:00 minute when hearing starts)

BACKGROUND:

Grothman Announces Hearing on Progressive Ideologies in the U.S. Military (January 4, 2024)

WASHINGTON—Subcommittee on National Security, the Border, and Foreign Affairs Chairman Glenn Grothman (R-Wis.) will hold a hearing titled “The Risks of Progressive Ideologies in the U.S. Military.”

The subcommittee hearing will explore the politically driven Department of Defense (DoD) priorities that are affecting military readiness and examine the military’s prioritization of progressive programs such as Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) programs and other social priorities versus critical military needs.

“Our military has one primary function: defend Americans and American interests at home and abroad. At least this was the primary function until the Biden Administration force fed progressivism into the branches of the armed services.

“Due to an avalanche of foreign policy blunders by the Biden Administration, the world is a less safe place.

“The men and women who bravely serve within the military must stay focused on combat readiness, not left-wing objectives which serve no military purpose.

“It is imperative to extract this poisonous and unhelpful thinking from our military and return the armed services to their core functions,” said Subcommittee Chairman Grothman.

WHAT: Hearing titled “The Risks of Progressive Ideologies in the U.S. Military”

DATE: Thursday, January 11, 2024

TIME: 10:00 a.m. ET

LOCATION: 2154 Rayburn House Office Building

WITNESSES:

  • Will Thibeau, Director, American Military Project
  • Matthew Lohmeier, Space Force Veteran, Author

The hearing will be open to the public and press and will be livestreamed online at https://oversight.house.gov/.

.

Hearing Date: January 11, 2024 10:00 am 2154 Rayburn

The Risks of Progressive Ideologies in the U.S. Military

Subject: The Risks of Progressive Ideologies in the U.S. Military
Date January 11, 2024
Time 10:00 am
Place 2154 Rayburn
National Security, the Border, and Foreign Affairs

Witnesses and testimonies:

Lt. Col. Matthew Lohmeier (Ret.)
Document

Brigadier Gen. Ty Seidule (Ret.)
Document

Mr. Will Thibeau
Document

ml8

New Documentary Tells Story of Space Force Commander Who Spoke Out on CRT, Wokeness in Military

by DocumentaryIn the News

Production began last week on a documentary about former Space Force Lt. Col. Matthew Lohmeier, who faced retaliation for exposing claims of “institutional racism” in the military.

In 2021, the Space Force relieved Lohmeier of command of the 11th Space Warning Squadron in Colorado in retaliation for his comments. He said he was compelled to speak up after hearing concerns from those serving under his command.

He said that those serving in his command from “diverse backgrounds, racially and certainly probably politically, religiously, economically” came to him expressing concerns.

“They were concerned about the training we were having that talked to them about [the] falseness of the American idea, that the country wasn’t really what it purported to be,” Lohmeier told The Daily Signal in an interview Monday.

The Heritage Foundation provided seed money for a forthcoming documentary about Lohmeier.

The documentary is based on his book, “Irresistible Revolution: Marxism’s Goal of Conquest & the Unmaking of the American Military,” released in May 2021.

“When they were being exposed to these alternative narratives, [such as the idea] the country was rooted in white supremacy, that was off-putting to them, regardless of their race, regardless of their political upbringing, regardless of what motivated them to join the service,” he added.

“They would sit down with me and say, I’m a black male or I’m a black female and I’m offended by what I’m hearing. Or I’m a white male and I’m offended by what I’m hearing, or I’m an Asian male and offended by what I’m hearing.”

He said race focus “toyed with the psyche” of servicemembers, leading them to doubt one another.

Further, he said that critical race theory is rooted in Marxism, which is dangerous for the military. 

“Marxism as an ideology is intended to divide and breed sufficient hostility for the other, which is sufficient enough to present a violent impulse,” he said. “So I thought that’s worth speaking up about. We need to push back on this because I know the outcome is something that is totally unacceptable for military culture that needs to be unified.”

The production company Root Causes began filming last week, and is expected to wrap up in the first quarter of 2024. The company is aiming for a mid-to-late 2024 release.

Production began in Lohmeier’s hometown of Tucson, Arizona, with on-camera interviews featuring people who knew him early in life. He played basketball at Sahuaro High School, joining a team that won the state championship. From there, the Air Force Academy recruited him to play basketball.

Rep. Jim Banks, R-Ind., the chairman of the House Anti-Woke Caucus, and Rep. Mike Waltz, R-Fla., a member of the House Armed Services Committee, also make appearances in the documentary.

“We need new leadership in the White House, we need new political appointees in the Pentagon that will have our military exclusively focused on lethality, readiness, being the best of the best, and infusing in our service members that it’s about standards, not race, religion, socio-economic background, you leave all that stuff at the door,” Waltz told The Daily Signal in an interview.

“Congress is stepping in. We are banning CRT. We are defunding a lot of this DEI training,” Waltz continued, referring to critical race theory and diversity, equity, and inclusion training.

“I am all for equal opportunity. I want every American to have the opportunity to serve and to hit those standards. But you can’t start artificially turning the dials on different percentages of race, religion.

“The Pentagon has yet to show me data that a more diverse submarine crew—or a less diverse submarine crew—is more or less ready.”

The documentary will also feature interviews filmed at The Heritage Foundation, featuring Heritage staffers Robert Greenway, director of the Center for National Defense, and Michael Gonzalez, senior fellow for international engagement.

In a statement to The Daily Signal before the interview, Lohmeier said:

“I’m incredibly grateful to be working with The Heritage Foundation on this timely project revealing the troubling trends that have been spreading throughout military communities.

“It is with a strong sense of duty and commitment to preserving and defending what is most special about our armed forces that I am working to help tell this story and use my own career as a way to illustrate what is at stake in our country.

“Alongside a group of talented filmmakers, I am honored to share with The Heritage Foundation in the mission that they fight for on a daily basis—that neither America’s exceptionalism nor our future is guaranteed, and each must be defended by both reclaiming our first principles while combating the insidious ideas of today in their more modern expressions.

“I could not ask for better partners on this journey and I am sure our military communities will be proud of the work we accomplish with this film.

First published on The Daily Signal

bright1B

Former US Space Force Commander EXPOSES What’s Really Happening

by Interviews

Matt Lohmeier joined Jimmy Corsetti for a live session on Jimmy’s Bright Insight channel and talked about a lot of things: Matt’s story, the infiltration of Marxism in our country and military, UFO/UAP’s, and many other consequential topics:

or watch the first half on YouTube:

Follow Jimmy on X: @BrightInsight6
Rumble: https://rumble.com/c/BrightInsight
YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@BrightInsight

Excerpt from the interview:

“Communism predates Karl Marx. The Communist League asked Karl Marx if he would pen a declaration or a manifesto for them that would state articulately their views, and Marx published what is now known as the Communist Manifesto.

Marx wrote his young, bright ideas down about how he best thought it was possible to incite the working class in his day to a violent revolution against the bourgeoisie.

He divided up his narrative of human events into two groups: an oppressor class--this is all in part one of the Communist Manifesto–and an oppressed class that was respectively the bourgeoisie and the proletariat.

He gave the proletariat sufficient reason in the manifesto that they needed to unite as workers and if necessary, violently throw off their oppressor, the modern capitalist.

One of the things that I saw when I began to study Marxism, the ideology that was permeating all of the countries across the globe in the late 19th century and surely throughout all of the Cold War, was that there was an emphasis on pitting one class or group of people against each other for whatever reason.

In the mid the late 19th century, it is about economic class stratification. Later it was usurped and today it has been usurped to be about race relations and an oppressor class versus an oppressed group or class of people– the spirit of it all is the same.

But the narrative has been adapted to our modern circumstances in the United States because it’s the best narrative of human events that can be leveraged to create anger and hatred, sufficient to get people to unite together in violence against the other, the evil other. That is what I want to emphasize.

So as a starting point, I’ll say that is Marxist ideology or Marxist thought. The idea in the end is that it brings about a revolution that will allow for a communist state to be established. The first successful revolution, by the way, that led to a successful establishment of a communist state was the Bolshevik Revolution.”

.

More about Matt’s book:

BOOK: Irresistible Revolution

Get a signed copy of Matt’s book

ML1AUG23

Propaganda, Politicization Making Military Service Less Popular

by In the News

Matthew Lohmeier, a former military commander, told NTD that a big reason why the U.S. military is not able to meet its recruitment goals is because of the politicized environment in the army, with the military increasingly being used “to shape the political views of service members.”

NTD spoke to former Space Force Commander Matthew Lohmeier for his insight into the current malaise afflicting the U.S. military.

Watch:

.

TRANSCRIPT

NTD Host

And there is one former military commander who says a big reason why they are not able to meet those goals is because of the politicized environment in the army. I got his take on things.

Matthew Lohmeier

Rather than share my views, I thought I would call a military veteran this morning who’s also a parent and a grandparent. Anticipating this question, I wanted to hear it from a veteran myself this morning and relate that to the American people.

So, fresh off the press this morning, I asked why is it that parents and veterans aren’t interested in recommending military service to the next generation?

His response was that when he served, the military was about fighting, and today it’s not. And in his view, he said, today it’s an environment filled with propaganda that is intended to shape the political views of service members. Then he finished his thought by saying it’s quite offensive.

I think that that line of reasoning is simple and it’s typical of your broader American population.

When I decided I wanted to serve in the military and attend the Air Force Academy in Colorado, I did so because I had both encouragement and wise counsel from parents and active duty and retired military veterans.

NTD Host

Now, can you talk more about what has changed? Because children of military families usually made up the majority of new recruits, so it seems like the sentiment was different a while back. So what happened?

Matthew Lohmeier

A big part of the answer to that question, and it’s also a part of the solution to the problem, is driven by this administration’s policy in particular and the current set of personalities we have in senior military leadership positions.

While the problem of partisan politics plagues the military from top to bottom, it is nevertheless driven by and supported by the current leadership.

I’ll give you a good example of this. We’ve got a Chief of Staff of the Air Force. Four star general, General C Q. Brown, who’s been Biden’s pick and nomination for the chairman of the Joint Chief’s role under the leadership, if you want to call it that, of General Mark Milley.

The American people have lost trust and confidence in him and in the institution writ large because of highly politicized statements of overt public criticism of the former Commander in Chief, President Trump, and because he’s leaked private conversations to journalists and authors to sell books.

There is a consternation and a division and a disagreement about what’s best for the readiness and lethality of the US military.

It will require a new administration at this point, it’s very clear. And it will require a whole cast of new senior military leaders who are willing to act in courage and to put down recent ways and to return to a patriotic, America loving, apolitical military work environment.

NTD Host

Thank you so much for giving those insights and also answering one of my following questions. Already I also want to look at another aspect because in the Military Family Support Programming Survey, they found other issues as well that I also wanted to give a bigger picture.

I want to present them to you here as well. So they were saying that the financial strain, for instance, is an issue.

And then there’s the argument that the Afghanistan withdrawal comes into play as well. So how do you weigh all these?

Matthew Lohmeier

Well, the Afghanistan withdrawal, first off, is a terrible black eye for the administration and our senior military leaders. It showed that it was likely due to highly misplaced priorities, that we made such a botched withdrawal.

Again, their testimony before Congress, which was public and which people who cared paid attention to, showed what looked like incompetence, what looked like infighting, what looked like disagreement with the sitting commander in chief.

No one willing to take responsibility for our actions, for our decisions, and for our lack of strategy. That’s why some people were fired for speaking up against our senior military leaders at the same time, because they demanded accountability, which clearly we didn’t have anymore in our senior military ranks.

As far as for financial reasons, let me say that always, traditionally or historically, men and women have been willing to serve in uniform, and parents have been willing to suggest to the next generation that they serve in uniform.

Despite the fact that pay is not great for military service members, some of our youngest enlisted members actually join because it will help pay for their associate’s degree or their bachelor degree. It helps them further their education.

So they serve for a minimum of maybe four years while they’re having their education paid for, and those incentives remain in place.

NTD Host

Well, thank you so much, Matthew Lohmeier, for giving us your aspect on this. I appreciate your time today.

Matthew Lohmeier

Thanks for having me.

 

swhit2

General nominated for Space Command chief defends firing of colonel who criticized Marxist training in the military

by In the News

The three-star general nominated to head the U.S. Space Command declined to endorse the Biden administration’s diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) policies in the military at a Senate hearing on Wednesday.

Space Force Lt. Gen. Stephen N. Whiting, whom President Biden nominated this month to be the force’s second commander, also defended his firing of an officer who went public with criticisms of the Pentagon leadership’s campaign to impose diversity in the military, calling it Marxist ideological subversion. . . . .

. . . . Sen. Schmitt then raised the case of now-retired Space Force Lt. Col. Matthew Lohmeier, whom Gen. Whiting relieved of duty in May 2021. Gen. Whiting said he acted because Col. Lohmeier criticized DEI training in the military as “rooted in Marxism” during an appearance on a conservative podcast while on active duty. He continued to air his criticisms after being ordered not to do so, officials said.

In addition to his public criticism of DEI training, Col. Lohmeier was removed from command for criticizing “specific political parties,” Gen. Whiting said.

Questioned by Mr. Schmitt, Gen. Whiting said that opposition to DEI policies does not constitute partisan political speech unless the comments advocate for a specific political party or candidate.

Col. Lohmeier’s case “involved a specific quote involving a specific political party,” Gen. Whiting said, adding that the offending podcast was an hour long.

A review of the podcast appearance shows Col. Lohmeier spoke for about 10 minutes on the “Steve Gruber Show” podcast. The colonel was promoting a book he authored, “Irresistible Revolution: Marxism’s Goal of Conquest & the Unmaking of the American Military.”

During the appearance, there were no references to any political party or his chain of command.

Col. Lohmeier, who left the service in September 2021, said in an email that he was fired by Gen. Whiting, then chief of operations at Space Command, for two reasons. One was for political partisanship while acting in an official capacity, and the second was for publicly criticizing his chain of command.

“Those were the reasons Whiting gave me over the phone when he called to fire me,” Col. Lohmeier said. “Both of those reasons are false — never did either of those things.”

Col. Lohmeier said the general’s testimony at the hearing “clearly demonstrated that Whiting himself was unwilling to affirm his support for the [Defense Department’s] DEI initiatives and trainings.”

“He was asked several different ways if he supported DoD’s DEI initiatives and, instead of affirming his support, said something that nobody could disagree with; specifically, he said that he cared about developing a lethal and ready force.”

The comments indicate that Gen. Whiting shares his view that “this woke DEI push” has hurt recruitment, retention and readiness efforts in the military, Col. Lohmeier said.

“It is unfortunate that Whiting felt sufficient institutional and cultural pressure in 2021 to make the decision to fire me for publicly sharing a nonpartisan view that he likely holds himself,” he said.

“It is more unfortunate still that our senior leaders lack the courage to speak their minds despite the damage our current policies are inflicting.”

Bill Gertz/Washington Times

 

Watch:

 

Transcript

Sen. Eric Schmitt

Thank you, Madam Chair. General Whiting, in speaking in support of DEI initiatives, General Brown said that quote, “there’s still a lot to do because this is a cultural shift. This isn’t something you can get done in just a couple of years.” Do you believe that General Brown should be relieved of his command because of those statements?

Lt. Gen. Stephen Whiting

Senator, no, I do not.

Sen. Eric Schmitt

General Milley, in speaking in support of DEI initiatives, said, quote, “it’s diversity to improve the system, improve the military, improve our problem-solving capabilities, and improve our war fighting readiness in order to protect and defend the Constitution. That’s why it’s so important, so fundamental that we have this as one of our elements as we move forward to continue to develop the joint force.” Do you believe General Milley should be relieved of his command?

Lt. Gen. Stephen Whiting

Senator, no, I do not.

Sen. Eric Schmitt

Do you believe that’s partisan political speech?

Lt. Gen. Stephen Whiting

Senator, no, I do not.

Sen. Eric Schmitt

Lieutenant Colonel Lohmeier said, our DEI industry and trainings we’re receiving in the military via the industry are rooted in critical race theory, which is rooted in Marxism. He was relieved of his command for those statements, correct,

Lt. Gen. Stephen Whiting

Senator, that’s correct.

Sen. Eric Schmitt

By you, right?

Lt. Gen. Stephen Whiting

Senator, there were other comments regarding specific political parties that are in addition to what you just quoted.

Sen. Eric Schmitt

This was from the podcast, which was cited by you. So I’m asking, is opposition to DEI partisan political speech?

Lt. Gen. Stephen Whiting

Senator, no, it’s not, unless it advocates for a specific political party or candidate.

Sen. Eric Schmitt

Okay, well, I would agree with that. So your testimony today is Lieutenant Colonel Lohmeier was relieved for something other than these statements on the podcast, or was that part of your consideration?

Lt. Gen. Stephen Whiting

Senator, it involved a specific quote involving a specific political party.

Sen. Eric Schmitt

In his free time or on duty?

Lt. Gen. Stephen Whiting

It was on a podcast where he associated himself or he identified himself as an active duty space force officer and commander.

Sen. Eric Schmitt

Okay, so there were other comments that other than this one I read to you about DEI?

Lt. Gen. Stephen Whiting

Senator I think that podcast was about an hour long.

Sen. Eric Schmitt

Okay, well, we’ll follow up with some of our questions. I want to ask you, do you support DEI initiatives in the military?

Lt. Gen. Stephen Whiting

Senator I support a ready, lethal force that draws from the best talent all across America.

Sen. Eric Schmitt

Okay, that’s not my question. I support that, too, but that’s not what DEI is. DEI is rooted in cultural Marxism. So I’m asking you, do you support DEI initiatives in the military?

Lt. Gen. Stephen Whiting

Senator I support a merit-based approach to finding the best people across this country.

Sen. Eric Schmitt

That’s not DEI either. So do you support DEI initiatives in the military?

Lt. Gen. Stephen Whiting

Senator based on how it is defined, I want to find the best people across anywhere in this country, geographically or any demographic who can support the defense of this nation.

Sen. Eric Schmitt

Do you believe that our brave military men and women should be pitted against one another based solely on their race?

Lt. Gen. Stephen Whiting

No, sir, I do not.

Sen. Eric Schmitt

Do you believe or do you accept the proposition that General Brown, in his August of 2022 memo that we should have racial quotas with officer class?

Lt. Gen. Stephen Whiting

Senator, I am not aware that General Brown has said that.

Sen. Eric Schmitt

If General Brown said that we should have a reduction in number of white officers serving to 67% of officers down from I think it’s a total of 5400 officers. Do you support that?

Lt. Gen. Stephen Whiting

Senator I support that promotion should be based on merit.

Sen. Eric Schmitt

Okay, so you don’t support the idea that we would have racial quotas for the officer class?

Lt. Gen. Stephen Whiting

That’s correct, Senator.

Sen. Eric Schmitt

I do want to ask you also, what role do you think DEI . . . what’s your experience, firsthand for you? What have you seen in these trainings? What have been the trainings that have taken place? I’m not talking about reaching for the best and the brightest. I want to understand because we have a military recruitment problem, right? And so the issue, I think, is if people view–and this is coming from the Department of Defense and it’s been widely talked about in this committee–if people view that politics is being infused in our military, do you think that that would hurt recruitment?

Lt. Gen. Stephen Whiting

Sir, I do. And I think the military must be rigorously apolitical and nonpartisan.

Sen. Eric Schmitt

Do you think infusing abortion politics into our military hurts our recruiting?

Lt. Gen. Stephen Whiting

Sir, we in the military should not be partisan or political.

Sen. Eric Schmitt

Do you think infusing COVID politics into our military hurts our recruiting? Meaning do you think that people should have been fired for not getting the vaccine?

Lt. Gen. Stephen Whiting

Sir, we are required to uphold a legal order.

Sen. Eric Schmitt

Do you think we should actively recruit those 8500 people who were fired for not getting the vaccine?

Lt. Gen. Stephen Whiting

Sir, I would like to see those individuals who can come back apply to come back, yes, sir.

Sen. Eric Schmitt

Do you think we should recruit them to come back?

Lt. Gen. Stephen Whiting

Yes, sir.

Sen. Eric Schmitt

Okay, and then do you believe that . . . Are you familiar with the August memo of 2022 from General Brown?

Lt. Gen. Stephen Whiting

I am not, sir.

Sen. Eric Schmitt

Okay, in some follow up questions we’ll ask you your points of view on that.

Lt. Gen. Stephen Whiting

Thank you, sir. Thank you.

whit

Biden’s Space Force Nominee Previously Fired Service Member For Speaking Out Against Marxism In The Military

by In the News

From The Federalist:

Biden’s newest pick to lead U.S. Space Force Command previously removed a service member from duty for speaking out against DEI efforts and Marxism in the U.S. military.

Nominated by Biden to serve as the next head of U.S. Space Force Command earlier this month, Lt. Gen. Stephen Whiting played a role in the firing of Lt. Col. Matthew Lohmeier.

While promoting his book, “Irresistible Revolution: Marxism’s Goal of Conquest & the Unmaking of the American Military,” during a May 2021 podcast interview, Lohmeier spoke about the increasing presence of Marxist thought permeating the U.S. military, specifically pointing to the embrace of DEI and critical race theory.

“Our diversity, inclusion and equity [DEI] industry and the trainings we’re receiving in the military via that industry are rooted in critical race theory which is rooted in Marxism,” Lohmeier said.

DEI, which stands for “diversity, equity, and inclusion,” is a divisive and poisonous ideology dismissive of merit in order to discriminate based on characteristics such as skin color and sexual orientation.

Meanwhile, critical race theory seeks to fracture society along racial lines by promoting the false concept that all white people are oppressors and all non-white people are oppressed.

Not long after Lohmeier’s podcast interview, a Space Force representative informed Military.com (and later CNN) that Whiting had “relieved” the lieutenant colonel of command due to a supposed “loss of trust and confidence in his ability to lead.”

The representative further confirmed the decision was “based on” Lohmeier’s podcast remarks and that Whiting had initiated an investigation into Lohmeier to determine whether his comments “constituted prohibited partisan political activity.”

During the podcast interview, Lohmeier purportedly took issue with The New York Times’ thoroughly debunked 1619 Project, which attempts to rewrite history by asserting that America’s founding is based upon slavery and racism rather than the premise that “all men are created equal.”

According to Lohmeier, such “anti-American” concepts are being pushed throughout the armed forces.

“It teaches intensive teaching that I heard at my base – that at the time the country ratified the United States Constitution, it codified white supremacy as the law of the land,” Lohmeier said. “If you want to disagree with that, then you start (being) labeled all manner of things including racist.”

During the interview, Lohmeier reportedly went on to make clear that — as described by CBS News — “he doesn’t care about the political views of his fellow service members, whether they’re Democrats or Republicans, but he does not want to see institutions politicized.” Lohmeier confirmed such sentiments to Fox News following his ousting.

In addition to firing Lohmeier, Whiting has a history of advancing DEI ideology throughout the U.S. military. According to a February 26, 2021, Facebook post published by the U.S. Space Operations Command, Whiting participated in a fireside chat with service members where he discussed “diversity and inclusion” in recruiting. . . .  (read more on The Federalist)

li

Matthew Lohmeier – a Tour de Force Supporting our Military Members

by In the News

By James Nault, Legal Insurrection

While I was on vacation I had the pleasure of representing Legal Insurrection at an event in Scottsdale, Arizona produced jointly by Stand Together Against Racism and Radicalism in the Services (STARRS) and the Arizona Women of Action (AZWOA).

Speaking at the event were Kim Miller, Founder and Director of AZWOA, Dr. Ron Scott, PhD, Col, USAF (Ret.), President and CEO of STARRS, and most importantly Matthew Lohmeier, a familiar face around Legal Insurrection.

Last December we held a live seminar with Lohmeier, a former Space Force Lieutenant Colonel squadron commander who was fired, forced to resign, and and subjected to an Inspector General investigation within the Pentagon after publishing his bestselling book, Irresistible Revolution: Marxism’s Goal of Conquest & the Unmaking of the American Military, which tore the lid off the military’s obsession with racist and radical “woke” ideologies.

The seminar we held, definitely worth watching, and titled Saving the Military Service Academies from Wokeness, can be viewed here:

Matthew Lohmeier’s excellent Twitter feed can be found here. . . . .

. . . . . In his speech, Ron gave a run-down of everything STARRS has on its front-burner, and to stay up-to-speed on the latest and greatest, you can subscribe to STARRS’ weekly newsletter here.

Last but not least was the evening’s guest speaker, Matthew Lohmeier.

Matthew began by talking about the drag shows at Nellis Air Force Base in Las Vegas, Nevada, which we reported on here, in 2021, U.S. Air Force Base Asserts Drag Queen Promotes “Readiness of the Military,” and here, in 2022: Air Force Base Hosted Drag Show During its ‘Diversity’ Festival.

As Matthew explained, earlier this year, an Air Force servicemember stationed at Nellis called and informed him that yet another drag show was planned for Nellis in early June 2023 to kick off this year’s “Pride Month” celebration. Lohmeier sprang into action, calling members of Congress and informing them that the drag shows were imminent. This led to the drag show, and others like it, being cancelled.

We had reported on those cancellations here: DOD Cancels On-Base Drag Shows – Leftist Outrage Noticeably Missing.

Matthew Lohmeier during his presentation:

 

Most importantly, Matthew Lohmeier explained to the crowd that there is a full-length motion picture in the works to be released in 2024. He showed a four-minute trailer of the movie, which tells the story of Matthew’s summary dismissal from Space Force after his tell-all book was published, and it was absolutely fantastic. Unfortunately, because the trailer is likely to go through some editing and updating as the movie production continues, it likely won’t be finalized for viewing audiences until later this year.

Matthew also covered many of the disheartening trends we are seeing in the military these days regarding CRT, DEI, and transgender issues. The types of issues Matt discussed are unfortunately becoming common knowledge among Legal Insurrection readers, as we have reported on most, if not all of them. For example, see:

To learn more about Matthew Lohmeier and his story, or to ask him to speak at your local event visit his web page, available here.

wk1

Pentagon’s ‘Woke’ Agenda Dividing, Weakening the Military: Former Space Force Officer

by Media Interviews

Matt was interviewed by J.M. Phelps of The Epoch Times:

Military service members have been increasingly exposed to a “hyper-politicized and sexualized work environment,” according to a former lieutenant colonel, who says the resulting divisiveness is weakening the U.S. Armed Forces.

The Pentagon’s diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies have drawn increased and intense scrutiny in recent years, especially from conservatives, who dubb these moves as part of the “woke” agenda.

Lt. Gen. DeAnna Burt, deputy chief of space operations, said that “anti-LGBTQ+ laws” introduced by state legislatures are affecting hiring decisions. At a recent Pentagon pride event, she said, “Transformational cultural change requires leadership from the top, and we do not have time to wait. Since January of this year, more than 400 anti-LGBTQ+ laws have been introduced at the state level.”

“That number is rising and demonstrates a trend that could be dangerous for service members, their families, and the readiness of the force as a whole,” she added.

The Epoch Times spoke to former Space Force officer, Lt. Col. Matthew Lohmeier, who in 2021 was removed from his command for expressing opposition to Marxist-rooted critical race theory (CRT). According to him, there is no place for this kind of advocacy from Burt in the U.S. military.

“Americans should know that when someone signs up to wear the uniform of their country, they’re trained early on to leave political baggage at the door and to be rather apolitical while acting in an official capacity.”

Service members often avoid discussing political topics, because as Lohmeier pointed out, “there is something that supersedes those topics for men and women in uniform—and that’s a particular mission in support of national security.”

“One can make arguments that the military became more political during the Clinton, or during the Obama administration,” he said. “But something radically, fundamentally shifted under the current administration with Lloyd Austin in the seat as secretary of defense.”

Cultural Dialogue

Lohmeier said, “At the forefront of the cultural dialogue in the military is what has been driven by policy.” Under then-President Donald Trump, in September 2020, federal agencies were banned from conducting diversity and inclusion training in an effort to combat race and sex stereotyping. Such training was referred to in the executive order as “divisive, anti-American propaganda” funded by taxpayers.

When President Joe Biden came into office in January 2021, he rescinded Trump’s order and issued several executive orders promoting DEI in the federal government.

“While the military has always been, by and large, a reflection of broader American society,” Lohmeier said, “there is something very different going on right now in this current administration.”

“Left-wing activists have essentially been given a bully pulpit,” and according to Lohmeier, “it is politically agitating.” Whether it’s the push for CRT, DEI, the LGBT agenda, or trans activism, he said it is “divisive in nature because not everyone aligns with or agrees with those agendas, and instead view them as a distraction from what our military’s priorities ought to be.”

But equally concerning to him is that “these agendas strike at the values of the military and its role in defending the Constitution.” As most service members attempt to remain apolitical, Lohmeier said, “they are finding themselves in a hyper-politicized and sexualized work environment at the moment.”

And if they oppose the environment, “they are labeled as politically partisan and simply ‘part of the problem’ and are ostracized for it.”

Drag Controversy

An active-duty Air Force officer reached out to Lohmeier in May, sharing an advertisement for an upcoming “family-friendly” drag show event to kick off Pride Month. The event was scheduled for June 1 at Nellis Air Force Base in Las Vegas. “The drag show was to be hosted on base at the officer’s club and was sponsored by and funded by the base—which means your taxpayer dollars,” he said.

Lohmeier’s source said his family was concerned about the event and they were not alone. “There were other families on base concerned about the event. Even though attendance at the event wasn’t compulsory, flyers were being posted around base and parents were distressed about their children being subjected to the content of those flyers,”Lohmeier said.

Thus, an effort to stop the event began. “I sent information about the event with the promotional flyer to members of Congress, [and] I tweeted about it,” he said. “A few members of Congress, in particular, Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) took swift action.”

Gaetz sent a letter to Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Mark Milley, “demanding answers as to why these things are still taking place on DOD installations, because [on March 29], the Secretary of Defense in a hearing before Congress said that the Defense Department is not using taxpayer dollars to fund drag shows.” But to the contrary, Gaetz provided evidence of DOD-affiliated drag queen events.

For Lohmeier, the secretary was “either ignorant or being disingenuous,” but he is thankful a policy memorandum was issued in early June to end drag shows at Department of Defense installations around the world.

On June 21, House Armed Services Committee Republicans adopted provisions in the annual defense spending bill to eliminate the chief diversity officer at the Pentagon, end funding for DEI programs, as well as other measures targeting “woke” policies.

Lessons Learned

Lohmeier said there are lessons to be learned through this example of opposition to drag queen events at Pentagon facilities.

“While there are thousands concerned about drag queen shows and story hours, it only took one person to send a request for help and it made all the difference,” he said. “Men and women in uniform need to learn that it’s not off limits to speak up and voice your concern, because you could make changes in policy when you do so.”

There are still thousands of service members who love their country, Lohmeier said. “They take pride in the country and the greatness of the American ideal, and they are willing to fight for and defend that ideal,” he said.

“The best men and women in uniform defend the Constitution for every American, but they need not bow to the political agenda of a select few.”

And as various left-wing movements grow, he said, “We need decent people with traditional American values serving in the police force, in the schools, and in the military to shield us from illegal, unethical, or immoral policies that often stem from political and sexual activism run amok.”

“The LBTGQ+ agenda is every bit as divisive for our military as the Marxist-rooted CRT,” Lohmeier said. “It’s every bit as divisive as the diversity and inclusion training that need to be eliminated.”

“If we are going to be strong, if we are going to be ready, if we are going to be lethal,” Lohmeier said, “it will be because of unity.”

For him, “the strength of the military is in its unity, not in its diversity.”

The Department of the Air Force and Department of Defense did not return requests for comment from The Epoch Times.

First published in the The Epoch Times

 

 

Military ‘hyper-politicized and sexualized’ under Biden admin, former Space Force officer says (Just the News, 27 Jun 23)

The military is a “hyper-politicized and sexualized work environment” that shifted “radically” under the Biden administration, according to former Space Force officer Lt. Col. Matthew Lohmeier, who was removed from his position in 2021 for denouncing Marxism in the armed forces.

“One can make arguments that the military became more political during the Clinton, or during the Obama administration,” Lohmeier told The Epoch Times in a story published Sunday. “But something radically, fundamentally shifted under the current administration with Lloyd Austin in the seat as secretary of defense.”

Lohmeier also said that most service members are attempting to remain apolitical, but “they are finding themselves in a hyper-politicized and sexualized work environment at the moment.” Those who oppose the Defense Department’s initiatives “are labeled as politically partisan and simply ‘part of the problem’ and are ostracized for it,” he also said.

As he promoted his book during a May 2021 podcast, Lohmeier said that Austin was promoting “diversity, inclusion and equity,” which he said was rooted in Critical Race Theory and “Marxism.” He left the military in September of that year after he was punished by officials for his remarks.

Congressional Republicans have been sounding the alarm under the Biden administration about how liberal ideologies such as Critical Race Theory are reportedly harming military readiness.

Recent diversity efforts in the armed forces have included everything from using a non-binary drag queen as a recruitment ambassador to allowing service members to use the bathrooms and showers of the gender they identify with.

dab

Space Force General demonstrates being politically partisan

by Military

LTC Matthew Lohmeier: I was once fired from command in the @SpaceForceDoD for allegedly “being politically partisan while acting in an official capacity.” That allegation was totally false. Lt Gen Burt here demonstrates what being politically partisan while acting in an official capacity really looks like.

The more I reflect on these remarks the more I realize just how foolish they are. Because many of them seem to actually have been brainwashed into believing this garbage, senior military leaders can’t help themselves from now driving away talented recruits and their most qualified servicemembers. Ideologues will never attract sane patriots to join or stay in an all-volunteer force. The rest of the senior leaders who don’t believe in this nonsense appear to lack courage. Their cowardice is largely the result of fear.

Starts at her speech:

 

 

 

 

 

Candidate Selection Based on Worries About ‘Anti-LGBTQ+ Laws’ Reinforces Woke Military Concerns (Townhall, 16 June 23)
Earlier this week, video clips from last week’s Pentagon Pride event resurfaced, in which Space Force Lt. Gen. DeAnna Burt admitted that she is “compelled to consider a different candidate and perhaps less qualified” for squadron command based on the state where the candidate lives.

Burt had been lamenting the rise in “anti-LGBTQ+ laws” being introduced and the supposed effect it could have on force readiness. Introducing those laws, Burt claimed, “demonstrates a trend that could be dangerous for our service members, their families, and the readiness of the force as a whole.”

“I strive to match the right person to the right job,” Burt offered. While she does look at candidates based on “job performance and relevant experience first,” there is a “however” in there. “However, I also look at their personal circumstances, and their family is also an important factor,” she went on to say.

“If a good match for a job does not feel safe being themselves and performing at their highest potential at a given location, or if their family could be denied critical healthcare due to the laws in that state,” is why Burt said she may be “compelled to consider a different candidate and perhaps less qualified.”

This “critical healthcare” that Burt spoke about at the Pride event has to do with irreversible procedures performed on children that involve not just puberty blockers and hormone therapies, as well as the health problems that come with that, but genital mutilation and sterilization.

That this wokeness and targeting of children is affecting the military is particularly concerning. If there’s any concern about “readiness,” it’s to do with the idea that a candidate would be selected based on anything other than his or her job qualifications, demonstrating an overall a lack of proper priorities.  . . . .  (read more on Town Hall)

Space Force general decries ‘anti-LGBTQ+’ laws at Pentagon Pride event, claims they affect hiring decisions (Fox News, 15 Jun 23)
A high-ranking officer in the U.S. Space Force used her speech at a Pentagon pride event last week to rail against what she called “anti-LGBTQ+ laws” introduced in state legislatures across the country.

Lt. Gen. DeAnna Burt, deputy chief of space operations, also claimed that such laws affect her hiring and promotion decisions, sometimes leading her to choose a “less qualified” candidate because of a preferred candidate’s “personal circumstances.”

“Transformational cultural change requires leadership from the top, and we do not have time to wait,” Burt told those attending the event. “Since January of this year, more than 400 anti-LGBTQ+ laws have been introduced at the state level. That number is rising and demonstrates a trend that could be dangerous for service members, their families, and the readiness of the force as a whole.” . . . . (read more)

Anti-constitutional military leadership is becoming more brazen (American Thinker, 17 Jun 23)

 

taxpayers

Air Force uses taxpayer money for personnel to travel to pride events in DC

by Military

A memo (below) sent out from the Department of Air Force Office of Diversity and Inclusion encouraged personnel to attend various pride events at the Pentagon in Washington, DC.

They reminded them that according to government regulations, they can travel for free to DC, paid for by their unit (which is funded by American citizens tax dollars):

“In accordance with the Joint Travel Regulation (JTR) Section 030201 “Conference Attendance and Participation”, Air and Space Force Commanders are authorized to utilize unit funds for their Air and Space personnel to travel to, and participate in, this year’s DAF Pride events if approved by their individual supervisory authority.

Service members or civilian employees may attend conferences at the unit expense to maintain and improve professional competency or to improve management of the Department’s functions and activities. Attendance is not mandatory at this event.”

In case personnel had difficulty trying to convince their supervisor to allow them to leave their duties and travel at government expense to the nation’s capitol (great tourist spot), a sample memo request was provided (below).

But how to justify official travel to pride events rather an activity having to do with, say, readiness and warfighting? The memo provides guidance for that too. Go under the mantra of “Diversity and Inclusion”:

“b. Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-7001, Diversity and Inclusion.

It is the Air Force’s mission to “…develop and retain a high-quality, diverse Total Force, ensuring a culture of inclusion in order to leverage the diversity of the nation for strategic advantage in Air Force, joint and coalition operations.”

(Para 1.2) “Airmen, military and civilian, must be deliberately developed to apply diversity and inclusion competencies to the Air Force mission, in order to effectively achieve individual, organizational, and operational excellence.” (Para. 1.5)”

Do everything you can to twist and turn to justify using American taxpayer dollars to send yourself for free to DC.

Also notice that phrase, “Airmen, military and civilian, must be deliberately developed to apply diversity and inclusion competencies…” Sounds like a job for Military Political Commissars. Just like Communist Russia had.

LTC Matthew Lohmeier, who was the first to call attention to this on Twitter, said,

“Even if you’re not into all that Pride stuff, this is your shot at an all-expenses-paid trip to Washington, DC with your friends. Why sit it out?! Be sure to visit with some members of Congress while you’re there to let them know how you got there.”

Yes, let members of Congress know you used government money which came from hard-working Americans to attend a non-warfighting event.

 

Click on graphic to enlarge: