Hegseth defends $1.5 trillion Pentagon budget, Patel faces drinking allegations in Senate hearing
Hegseth called a $1.5 trillion Pentagon request “historic” as Patel was pressed over drinking allegations and government jet use.
Pete Hegseth defended a $1.5 trillion Pentagon budget request while lawmakers pressed him on the Iran war’s cost, strategy and fallout, a test of how much pressure the Trump administration can absorb as military spending, regional risk and leadership credibility collide.
Hegseth told Congress the fiscal 2027 defense budget was “historic” but “fiscally responsible,” even as questions mounted over the war with Iran and the cost of reopening or securing the Strait of Hormuz. The Pentagon’s top budget official said the conflict had already cost nearly $29 billion, about $4 billion more than an estimate given nearly two weeks earlier. Lawmakers warned that disruptions in the strait could ripple beyond the battlefield and trigger a broader economic shock.
The hearing made the budget fight about more than topline spending. Senators were trying to pin down the endgame of the Iran war, the pace of military commitments and whether Pentagon leaders had a clear plan for the next phase. For Hegseth, the issue was not only the size of the request but whether the administration could justify it while the war’s costs kept climbing and strategic uncertainty deepened around one of the world’s most important shipping lanes.
At a separate Senate Appropriations subcommittee hearing on the FBI’s fiscal 2027 budget request, Kash Patel faced a different kind of pressure: questions about whether personal behavior had become a leadership problem. Sen. Chris Van Hollen, the panel’s top Democrat, cited allegations that Patel had been so drunk and hungover that staff had to force entry into his home. Patel denied the claims and said he had “never been intoxicated on the job.”
The exchange quickly turned combative. Patel agreed to take a drinking test if Van Hollen would also take one, and he accused the senator of drinking on the taxpayer’s dime while referencing Van Hollen’s April 2025 trip to El Salvador. The hearing also revived scrutiny of Patel’s use of government aircraft. Senate Democrats asked the Government Accountability Office in May 2025 to review whether he had reimbursed the government for personal flights, including trips tied to his girlfriend in Nashville, as well as travel to Las Vegas and hockey-related events.
The dispute reached beyond one official’s reputation. It raised the same accountability question now shadowing the administration across national security agencies: when do accusations about conduct become evidence of management failure, and when do they start to undermine confidence in the people running the government’s most sensitive institutions? In Patel’s case, the answer is now tied not just to personal credibility, but to whether lawmakers believe FBI leadership can withstand sustained scrutiny.
Know something we missed? Have a correction or additional information?
Submit a Tip
