Letter to Secretary Hegseth on defense-trading allegations
Reporting cited here
- reported
Five senators wrote that, if the reported purchase attempt was accurate, it could violate Hegseth's ethics agreement; they cited 10 U.S.C. § 988 restrictions on covered Defense officials' holdings in top contractors and Office of Government Ethics guidance that a single-industry sector fund can create criminal-conflict exposure under 18 U.S.C. § 208.
Pages 1–2, conditional ethics analysis, cited statutes, and ethics-agreement termsHegseth's broker was reported to have sought a defense-sector ETF purchase before the Iran war · Pentagon denied the report March 30; senators requested records April 1
- alleged
ABC News relayed Financial Times reporting that Pete Hegseth's Morgan Stanley broker contacted BlackRock in February 2026 about a multimillion-dollar investment in its Defense Industrials Active ETF; the reported transaction did not proceed because the fund was not yet available to Morgan Stanley clients, and ABC said it had not independently confirmed the report.
Page 1, reported February broker inquiry and fund nameHegseth's broker was reported to have sought a defense-sector ETF purchase before the Iran war · Pentagon denied the report March 30; senators requested records April 1
- documented
On April 1, 2026, Senators Elizabeth Warren, Richard Blumenthal, Tammy Duckworth, Jeff Merkley, and Gary Peters asked Hegseth for records identifying any defense-sector trades, his prior approvals, broker instructions, and any information shared about pending military action.
Pages 3–4, questions 1–14 and April 15 response requestHegseth's broker was reported to have sought a defense-sector ETF purchase before the Iran war · Pentagon denied the report March 30; senators requested records April 1