‘I Just Want a Serious National Security Debate’

Rep. Mike Gallagher talks to The Dispatch about tonight’s debate, China policy, and more.

By
69
Rep. Mike Gallagher leaves the U.S. Capitol after the last votes of the week on Thursday, September 14, 2023. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call/Getty Images)

Do you have opinions about tonight’s Republican presidential primary debate? So does Rep. Mike Gallagher, the Wisconsin Republican who chairs the House’s select committee on competition with the Chinese Communist Party. He spoke with The Dispatch  Tuesday about what he’s hoping to see—a serious national security debate—and his belief that Donald Trump shouldn’t be the GOP nominee. The conversation below has been lightly edited for length and clarity.

Haley Byrd Wilt: Hi, Congressman. Is Donald Trump going to be the nominee?

Gallagher: I’m not prepared to concede that point.

Why not?

You're out of free articles
Create an account to unlock 1 more articles
By signing up with your email, you agree to The Dispatch’s privacy policy and terms and conditions
Already have an account? Sign In
69
By
Comments (69)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Rune485

    You should have asked him how he gets from “serious national security” to “it’s just a territorial dispute DeSantis”, because I am fing *dying to know.

    Collapse
  2. Avatar photo
    Ben Connelly

    “But we just didn’t implement the defense portion of that strategy. We had another failed pivot to the Pacific. The 355-ship Navy did not emerge.”

    Bingo. Keep hammering that one.

    Look I’d prefer Gallagher went full Liz Cheney on Trump for J6 but I think his strategy is probably the only one that will work to actually defeat Trump and retake the party. If all the moderates leave only the Trumpists are left and Trump will win every primary. If dirty politicking by Gallagher results in a Republican Congress and Trump not the nominee, it will have been worth it.

    Collapse
  3. Randall Briggs

    Alexander Solzhenitsyn wrote, “You can resolve to live your life with integrity. Let your credo be this: Let the lie come into the world, let it even triumph. But not through me.”

    By contrast, Mike Gallagher is a disgusting wretch who knows the truth but accedes to the spreading of the lie. Because he knows the truth yet allows it to be trashed, he is worse than the true-believer fascists who constitute Trump's base of support. He castigated Trump, but twice he voted not to impeach him. He spoke in support of Liz Cheney, but voted to remove her from her leadership position.

    Collapse
  4. Jim.H

    Good interview…..and as you can see, when it comes down to Biden or Trump, the commonsense Republican chooses Trump.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Pbanuski

      I hope this comment is sarcastic... Otherwise... Woof...

      Collapse
    2. Jackson Condrey

      "commonsense" is not the adjective I'd use to describe a Republican who chooses Trump, but OK.

      Collapse
  5. James OMalley

    I always find myself wishing you push the guest more when they say Trump is unfit but yet they will "vote for the nominee". I don't understand that at all. Don't vote for Biden if you are hard core Republican but at least vote for a write in not Trump if nominated.

    Collapse
  6. Avatar photo
    Steve Gordon

    We need more Mike Gallaghers in the GOP. He's clear eyed about our biggest threats and realistic about solutions. Thanks to The Dispatch for getting his position published on a regular basis.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Pbanuski

      He's a coward who is myopic about the threats facing this nation and has no credible solutions. The Dispatch would do a better service to their readers by pointing out his rank hypocrisy when it comes to Trump.

      Collapse
  7. Avatar photo
    Iwasacrookedlawyer

    Gallagher is senatorial material. His name was widely discussed as a possible opponent for Tammy Baldwin but he declined to make the run. The unstated reality is that Republicans are unlikely to be competitive in Wisconsin in ‘24. This is due to the damage that has been done, and will continue to be done, by Trump at the top of the ticket and Trumpists in the Wisconsin legislature. Even with a likely Trump defeat next year, the damaging ripple effect of Trumpism will be felt for at least another decade.

    Collapse
  8. Avatar photo
    David Chen

    In December 2015 I visited my cousin in China and asked him who he wanted to win the 2016 election. To my surprise he said Trump. His reasoning was that any POTUS who is incompetent would give China room to grow, and he saw Agent Orange as the undisputed King of Chaos.

    Jokes on him, he worked in import/exports.

    Collapse
  9. Avatar photo
    George.Skinner

    It's an interesting tell when people refer to accomplishments or policies by the Trump administration: these successes are typically things that managed to succeed because they avoided Trump's attention one way or another, managing to find traction without presidential support or being sabotaged by Trump's terrible instincts and ideas. Mike Gallagher has some good things to say about the national security side of the Trump administration, but nothing good to say about Trump's actual approach to national security. I think more attention needs to be drawn to the fact that the good, competent people responsible for the Trump administration's successes almost certainly wouldn't be part of Trump 2.0. Instead, you're going to get more people championing the flawed Trump approach.

    Collapse
  10. Indisguise

    Once my Chinese friend approached me about a job. His friend was a manager in a company in the valley. Turns out the Chinese govt wanted a team of people to work in China and learn from tech engineers directly. The ickiest part was our boss would be two timing his company. This encapsulates why I don't see trade with Chinese companies comparable to free trade with companies in Korea or Mexico or Germany or Philippines or Japan. Based on my work experience. We just can't be naive. As much as we want to be fair to individuals

    Collapse
    1. Deleted Comment

      This comment has been deleted

Load More