Loading...
Loading...
Browse all stories on DeepNewz
VisitProPublica to publish article on West Point-Hegseth controversy by June 30, 2025?
Yes • 50%
No • 50%
ProPublica's official website or other reputable news outlets reporting the publication
Senators Seek Investigation After West Point Denies Hegseth's Acceptance Twice Despite Proof
Dec 11, 2024, 05:37 PM
Pete Hegseth, President Donald Trump's nominee for Secretary of Defense, has been at the center of a controversy involving the United States Military Academy at West Point and investigative journalism outlet ProPublica. ProPublica was investigating claims that Hegseth had stated he was accepted to West Point but did not attend. When ProPublica reached out to West Point's public affairs office for verification, the academy's officials reportedly denied, twice on the record, that Hegseth had applied to or been accepted by the institution. However, upon contacting Hegseth's spokesperson, ProPublica was provided with copies of his acceptance letters from 1999 and 2003, which Hegseth had kept for over 25 years. As a result, ProPublica did not publish a story questioning Hegseth's statements. The situation has raised concerns among several commentators and politicians, including Senators Bill Hagerty and Tom Cotton, who are calling for explanations and investigations into West Point's actions, citing potential violations of the Privacy Act. Critics suggest that the misinformation from West Point may have been a deliberate attempt to undermine Hegseth's nomination. They also criticize ProPublica for not reporting on West Point's apparent error or deliberate misrepresentation. The incident highlights the importance of accurate communication from military institutions and raises questions about internal processes at West Point.
View original story
Yes • 50%
No • 50%
Yes • 50%
No • 50%
Yes • 50%
No • 50%
Yes • 50%
No • 50%
New York Times • 25%
Washington Post • 25%
CNN • 25%
Fox News • 25%
Hegseth's claim verified • 25%
Hegseth's claim disproven • 25%
No conclusive evidence • 25%
Other resolution • 25%
Yes • 50%
No • 50%
Yes • 50%
No • 50%
No significant report published • 25%
Report published supporting allegations • 25%
Report published refuting allegations • 25%
Report published with inconclusive findings • 25%
Investigation inconclusive • 25%
Major violation found • 25%
Minor violation found • 25%
No violation found • 25%
Other outcome • 25%
No action taken • 25%
Reprimand issued • 25%
Policy changes recommended • 25%