Already a subscriber? Make sure to log into your account before viewing this content. You can access your account by hitting the “login” button on the top right corner. Still unable to see the content after signing in? Make sure your card on file is up-to-date.

President Donald Trump’s appointee to be the number two at the Pentagon is facing scrutiny from both sides of the aisle after refusing to confirm whether Russia invaded Ukraine.

Some shit you should know before you read: While the US is involved in high-level talks with Russia on ending the war in Ukraine, Trump administration officials, including the president himself, have steered clear of directly accusing Russia of starting the war. President Trump has also notably refused to label Vladimir Putin as a dictator, suggesting that such rhetoric would not help advance the sensitive peace negotiations. This is part of a broader diplomatic approach aimed at maintaining open communication channels with Russia, as US officials seek to broker a resolution without alienating Russian leadership.  

What’s going on now: While testifying on Capitol Hill, Stephen Feinberg faced intense questioning from Senate Democrats over his refusal to acknowledge Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. In a heated exchange with Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), Feinberg repeatedly declined to provide a direct answer, stating, “I don’t feel that I should publicly comment in the middle of a tense negotiation when I’m not privy to the facts.” When pressed further, he explained, “I’m not privy to the details of what’s going on in negotiation between Russia and Ukraine… so I’d be afraid to speak out of turn and undermine that.”

His reluctance drew sharp criticism from Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.), who argued, “This was a Russian invasion of Ukraine, and at the highest levels of our government right now, we have folks who won’t speak the truth.”

Feinberg also defended the Trump administration’s significant cuts to the Pentagon, including the planned layoffs of thousands of civilian employees. He portrayed the reductions as part of a realignment aimed at enhancing efficiency. He added that the cuts would likely come from voluntary retirements and departures rather than direct layoffs or terminations, framing the move as necessary for streamlining operations and modernizing military priorities.