Massachusetts Democrat Jake Auchincloss says impeaching Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth should be a top priority if his party reclaims Congress, calling the Pentagon chief "unqualified and incompetent" from his first day on the job.
Auchincloss made the declaration during an August 11 appearance on MSNOW's "On the Line," where host Alicia Menendez pressed him on whether Democrats would move beyond rhetoric if they win a majority in the upcoming midterm elections. His answer left no room for ambiguity. He wants an inquiry, investigations, and, if the findings warrant it, a formal impeachment proceeding against the defense secretary.
The congressman has repeatedly called on Hegseth to resign, according to Menendez's framing of the question. But the broadcast marked an escalation: Auchincloss moved from demanding a resignation to publicly endorsing the use of Congress's impeachment power against a sitting cabinet official.
Auchincloss tied his impeachment case to what he described as a failing U.S. military engagement in the Middle East. He offered no specific operation or country name, but his language was sweeping. As Breitbart News reported, the congressman accused the president of launching the conflict without consulting allies, Congress, or his own cabinet.
"There was no plan for this war. This president launched this war without consulting allies, without consulting Congress, without consulting his own cabinet."
That claim stands unverified by any document or additional source in the public record cited during the broadcast. Auchincloss offered no classified briefing details, no inspector general findings, and no corroborating testimony, just his own characterization.
He then broadened his indictment of Hegseth's leadership, arguing that dysfunction at the top of the military chain of command threatens the discipline that holds the armed forces together. Hegseth's tenure at the Pentagon has drawn scrutiny from both parties. Earlier this year, retiring Republican Sen. Thom Tillis publicly criticized the defense secretary's missteps, illustrating that frustration with Hegseth's leadership has not been limited to Democrats.
Auchincloss told Menendez:
"When the very top of the chain of command is corrupt, is incompetent, cannot articulate a mission, cannot execute a mission, it starts to corrode the very basis of that good order and discipline. This is what makes me so worried about the continuation of this quagmire in the Middle East, is that, however bad it is right now, it could get so much worse if Congress does not take away the reins from this president."
Words like "corrupt" and "incompetent" carry weight, especially when a sitting congressman uses them to describe a Senate-confirmed cabinet secretary on national television. But Auchincloss did not cite a single specific act of corruption. He did not name a contract, a payment, a conflict of interest, or a legal violation. The accusation floated free of any documented misconduct.
Menendez asked the question directly: "Will impeachment be a priority?" Auchincloss did not hedge.
"Yes, it should be, absolutely. We need an inquiry. We need oversight and investigations. And if the facts yield an impeachment recommendation, we need to pursue that vigorously. This man was unqualified and incompetent to the post on day one, and he has underperformed those abysmal expectations."
That framing raises an obvious problem for Auchincloss. Hegseth was confirmed by the United States Senate. Democrats had every opportunity to make the case against his qualifications during the confirmation process. If he was truly "unqualified on day one," that is also an indictment of the senators, including any Democrats, who did not mount a successful opposition.
Impeaching a cabinet secretary is exceedingly rare in American history. The Constitution grants Congress the power to impeach any "civil officer of the United States," but the mechanism has almost never been used against executive branch officials below the president. Auchincloss is proposing an extraordinary remedy without, so far, presenting an extraordinary case.
Hegseth's time at the Pentagon has been marked by friction. Reports earlier this year indicated that President Trump confronted Hegseth over munitions shortfalls during tensions with Iran, a sign that even within the administration, the defense secretary's management drew tough questions.
What Auchincloss did not say on the broadcast matters as much as what he did say. He named no co-sponsors for an impeachment effort. He identified no committee that would lead the inquiry. He did not describe what "the facts" would need to show before he would recommend articles of impeachment. And he did not explain how a Democratic majority, which does not yet exist, would handle the political cost of impeaching a defense secretary during an active military engagement overseas.
He also did not specify which conflict in the Middle East he was referencing. No operation name. No country. No casualty figures. No timeline for when the engagement began or how long it has lasted. For a congressman building a case serious enough to justify impeachment, the public argument remains remarkably thin on detail.
Meanwhile, Hegseth has continued to pursue policy priorities at the Pentagon. He has vowed to take the fight over transgender troop policies to the Supreme Court after a federal appeals panel blocked the administration's expulsion order, a move that kept him in the headlines on culture-war terrain where he has long been most comfortable.
And his public profile has not been entirely defined by controversy. Earlier this year, a Gold Star widow's Memorial Day request drew Hegseth to Arlington National Cemetery, a moment that underscored the personal connection many military families still feel toward the defense secretary.
Every word of Auchincloss's impeachment pledge is conditional. It depends on Democrats winning the midterms, an outcome that is far from certain. Until then, his statements amount to campaign positioning: a promise to a progressive base hungry for confrontation with the Trump administration, delivered on a friendly cable broadcast.
That does not make the threat irrelevant. If Democrats do retake the House, Auchincloss has now put himself on record. He will face pressure to follow through. And the spectacle of impeachment proceedings against a defense secretary, during a military operation the congressman himself describes as a worsening situation, would consume Washington at exactly the moment the country could least afford it.
Hegseth's role within the administration has already shifted in recent months. Reporting has indicated that Hegseth stepped back from the Iran spotlight as President Trump pivoted toward diplomacy, suggesting the defense secretary's influence may have already been recalibrated from within.
Auchincloss wants to remove Hegseth through the most dramatic tool Congress possesses. But so far, the case he has built in public rests on adjectives, "corrupt," "incompetent," "unqualified", not on evidence. If Democrats want to be taken seriously on oversight, they will need more than a cable-news interview and a list of grievances. Accountability requires facts. What Auchincloss offered was a press release with a pulse.
