
(Screenshot via X/@SecDef)
House Republicans blocked an immediate vote on Republican Kentucky Rep. Thomas Massie’s resolution Tuesday to impeach Secretary of War Pete Hegseth in a procedural vote.
Massie introduced the articles of impeachment Monday, which included eight charges accusing Hegseth of “operating in contravention of three specific provisions of the War Powers Resolution of 1973.” House leadership’s procedural vote referred Massie’s resolution to the House Judiciary Committee, where Republicans are currently in the majority.
Unless the Judiciary Committee passes the resolution, Massie’s impeachment effort would remain stalled throughout the remainder of the 119th Congress. House Democrats could revive impeachment efforts when they are in the majority in January.
Massie said he would request a separate vote on each article if leadership blocked the vote.
“I’ve heard from several members they agree with some of the Articles of Impeachment but not all of them,” Massie said on X. “If the motion to kill my resolution by referring it to committee fails, and we proceed to the Articles themselves, I’ll request a vote on each of the Articles separately.
House and Senate Democrats supported the impeachment effort, meaning they could successfully move forward with impeaching Hegseth when they reclaim the majority in the next Congress. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries said he was a “hard yes” on impeaching Hegseth.
Massie accused Hegseth of extrajudicial killings, stating he oversaw the killings of at least 221 individuals in international waters, and of suppressing free speech by allegedly intimidating Democratic Arizona Sen. Mark Kelly for calling on service members to “refuse illegal orders.” He alleged Hegseth waged an unlawful war in Yemen.
The resolution alleged that Hegseth “executed unlawful orders” through the U.S. involvement in the Iran war. Massie argued that Hegseth “directed and caused” U.S. Armed Forces to be involved in hostilities against the Islamic Republic of Iran without Congress’ approval or declaration of war against the regime.
Massie alleged Hegseth continued to direct the U.S. Armed Forces to engage in hostilities against Iran after the House and Senate passed a concurrent war powers resolution, which directed the president to remove the Armed Forces from “unauthorized hostilities.” The resolution was concurrent, meaning President Donald Trump’s administration had no legal obligation to comply with the directive since concurrent resolutions have no force of law.
The resolution alleged Hegseth would “remain a threat to the Constitution” if he remained in office.
Hegseth dismissed the impeachment articles, calling the effort a “political spectacle” during a Tuesday press conference.
“What one disgruntled and defeated congressman is attempting is not oversight, and it’s not accountability. It’s a political spectacle, a personal manifesto driven by ego and resentment,” Hegseth said.
Massie initially introduced the articles on Sept. 15, although the House left early for the October recess before a floor vote could be held.
At least six Republican senators appeared open to a trial, including Republican Louisiana Sen. Bill Cassidy, who lost his primary to a Trump-endorsed challenger. Republican Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina said he would vote to oust Hegseth from his position if given the chance.
Republican Sens. John Curtis of Utah, John Boozman of Arkansas and Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia said Tuesday they would examine the evidence of wrongdoing.
Massie lost his primary to Republican Kentucky Rep.-elect Ed Gallrein, who received Trump’s endorsement. Trump wanted Massie ousted from Congress due to his criticisms of his actions in Iran and his push to release the files surrounding Jeffrey Epstein.
All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact [email protected].