Connect with us


Americans Need An ‘Honest Examination of the Pentagon’s Budget’



A few weeks ago, I proposed certain areas of agreement that the “America First” movement might find with progressives. Now, one example is an issue that’s been avoided in Washington by both parties, an honest examination of the Pentagon’s budget.

Now, we know that the Pentagon is extremely hostile to Trump and his “America First” supporters, and it is likely to become more so under Joe Biden.


Furthermore, we know that our military is scattered all around the world, while China’s forces and investment are concentrated in Asia.

So it’s time to ask, should we be spending any money on defense that isn’t directly related to the threat from the CCP? Or, if we’re spending a fortune to defend ourselves from the CCP, shouldn’t our economic policy do everything possible to avoid helping them become richer?

Top Democrat concerned by Biden’s potential Pentagon pick over support for foreign wars

Here now, someone who could potentially be a part of that new coalition, Congressman Ro Khanna, from California, Democrat. Congressman, I know you share the concern that foreign entanglements have allowed China to get ahead of us. So how could restructuring the Pentagon maybe start to address this?

Rep. Ro Khanna: Well, Laura, I appreciate your raising this. The first thing we should look at is the overseas contingency fund. Mick Mulvaney has said it’s a slush fund. It allows the Pentagon to fund overseas bases, to fund foreign interventions without any accountability. And I guess my question is, wouldn’t it be smarter to put that money in high-speed Internet to make sure we’re winning in the technologies of the future and not let China win in those technologies? So I think those are areas that we could form a bipartisan consensus.

Laura Ingraham: There seems to be a decent-sized contingent in the Democrat Party, obviously, Alexandria Costa Cortez, as has just zoomed to celebrity status among young people and others in the United States and globally and other members of the so-called squad, and they are antiwar Democrats. Correct?

Rep. Ro Khanna: Yes, no, let me be clear, I mean, I was for the strikes in Afghanistan, if terrorists hit our country, we need to do that. But, I supported President Trump and getting the troops out of Afghanistan. I’ve supported President Trump saying we don’t need the troop presence in Germany. There is a consensus that we are spread out too far and that this is not in our national security.

Laura Ingraham: And what do you think about the potential Department of Defense pic that has been floated in for a Biden administration? I mean, a lot of these folks don’t look like they’re going to be anxious to pull more troops out of Afghanistan. Certainly, the generals don’t seem to want to do that.


Rep. Ro Khanna: Well, I’ve expressed concern about Michèle Flournoy. Let’s see what she says, but she was for an escalation in Afghanistan. She was for Iraq. She was for Syria. These policies have cost us trillions of dollars. China hasn’t been in a war since 1979. We’ve been in 40 wars. If you view China as our biggest strategic competitor in the twenty-first century, then these policies aren’t what’s going to allow America to win and compete. So this is, Matt Gates shares this view. There are people on the Armed Services Committee who share this view. This is really not partisan. It’s about making sure America leads the twenty-first century.

Laura Ingraham: Congressman Khanna, I would love to have you back because I actually think there are a lot of issues where Republicans can work with progressives, conservatives can work with progressives. And this is just one of them, I think one of the more obvious issues given where this debate already seems to be going. If Biden indeed is inaugurated.

This is a transcript from “The Ingraham Angle” on December 1, 2020. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.