Armed Servic Committee — When the top Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee TIME asked in May about the prospect of impeaching President Donald Trump, he declined to commit, warning that every impeachment he had witnessed during his decades in Congress had left its target politically stronger. Five months later, Rep. Adam Smith of Washington is prepared to take that risk.
With Democrats hoping to reclaim control of the House in Tuesday’s midterm elections, Smith says that he now supports impeaching Trump and is inclined to also back proceedings against Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, making him one of the most senior Democrats to endorse such a course.
Developments regarding Armed Servic Committee and Now Support Impeach
“Trump has become beyond dangerous. He is just completely out of control in what he says and how he is governing,” Smith told TIME in an interview a week before the election. “I think we have to try, even if it doesn’t succeed.”
Analysis of Now Support Impeach
Smith’s endorsement is particularly significant because he would be in line to chair the Armed Services Committee if Democrats win the House, putting him at the center of investigations into the Pentagon’s handling of the war with Iran, its approach to Ukraine. Additionally, military operations in Latin America.
His position comes as Democrats prepare for the possibility of reclaiming congressional power with little agreement over how aggressively to confront the President. Interviews with more than two dozen Democrats reveal a party broadly convinced that Trump has engaged in conduct warranting impeachment. However, deeply divided over whether another attempt to remove him would be an effective use of its authority. Trump’s two previous impeachments ended in Senate acquittals. Additionally, even a Democratic victory this week is unlikely to produce anything approaching the two-thirds majority required for conviction.
Key details on Support Impeach Trump
Read more: Calls to Impeach Trump Collide With Reluctant Democratic Leadership
Smith, who has served in the House since 1996, noted previously that he was one of the few House members to have sat through three impeachments. “Every single time the person impeached got stronger after they were impeached than before,” Smith told TIME in May, arguing that Democrats needed to consider what another impeachment could realistically achieve rather than pursue it simply to demonstrate their willingness to confront Trump. “I want to make sure that if we’re going down that road it’s going to help defeat Trump and his poisonous ideology,” he said at the time.
Insights and perspectives on House Democrat
Since then, he says, Trump’s increasingly conciliatory posture toward Russian President Vladimir Putin, his decisions involving American support for Ukraine. Additionally, his public rhetoric have convinced him that the President’s continued tenure presents an extraordinary danger. “The Ukraine stuff definitely had a profound impact,” Smith says. “When I saw how close he was getting to Putin and shutting off support for Ukraine, being more pro-Putin. Therefore, i mean, that’s a big part of it.” He also cites Trump’s increasingly “unhinged speeches,” including remarks about rising gasoline prices amid the war in the Middle East.
Implications for Hegseth
Smith’s willingness to embrace impeachment puts him at odds with more cautious Democrats who want the party to prioritize addressing the economic concerns that have dominated the campaign. Meanwhile, establishing an investigative record that might ultimately lead to impeachment. He acknowledges the formidable obstacles to removing Trump but argues that the political environment has changed since the President’s first term. “I don’t think it will be viewed as negatively or as partisan as in the previous two efforts, just because the public is waking up to the con game that Trump put on,” he says now. Therefore, “The impeachable offenses have been obvious for a long time.”
Other senior House Democrats are less certain that pursuing impeachment would accomplish much, even if they share Smith’s assessment of Trump’s conduct. Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland, who led the House managers during Trump’s second impeachment trial in 2021, says he has “little doubt that the president has committed multiple impeachable offenses,” citing what he describes as unconstitutional military action and abuses of congressional spending authority. But he draws a distinction between establishing grounds for impeachment and deciding whether another trial would be the best use of Congress’s time and political capital.
“The question of whether he committed impeachable offenses and whether we are going to pursue impeachment are two different issues,” Raskin tells TIME.
Trump was impeached in 2019 over his dealings with Ukraine and again in 2021 over his role in the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol. Both proceedings ended in acquittal, although seven Republican senators voted to convict him in the second trial. Therefore, while some Democrats regarded those efforts as necessary to establish a historical and constitutional record, another impeachment could consume months of congressional attention, galvanize Trump’s supporters. Additionally, leave voters questioning what the party had accomplished with its new majority.
Sen. Adam Schiff of California, who led the prosecution during Trump’s first impeachment trial, says Democrats should avoid reaching conclusions before knowing the composition of the next Congress and what investigations might uncover. “There’s no question he’s been engaging in conduct that is very likely impeachable,” Schiff told TIME. Therefore, “The question is, is it viable?”
Schiff disputes the notion that the earlier impeachment efforts strengthened Trump politically. However, argues that Democrats should concentrate initially on investigating corruption that has affected Americans’ finances. “Our primary focus ought to be on corruption that has raised the cost of living for people,” he says.
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries has similarly declined to commit to impeachment, saying Democrats “haven’t ruled anything in. Additionally, we haven’t ruled anything out.” He has indicated that investigations should help determine whether the House pursues that course.
Some Democrats are looking toward members of Trump’s Cabinet, particularly Hegseth, as potentially more viable targets, reasoning that Republicans who would never vote to remove the President might be more willing to turn against a defense secretary whose leadership has drawn criticism from within their own party. “There are Republicans who would support impeaching Hegseth who might not support doing it to Trump,” Smith says.
The Defense Secretary has faced mounting scrutiny over his handling of the Iran war, the removal of senior military officers. Additionally, the Pentagon’s relationship with Congress. Some Republicans have publicly expressed frustration with his leadership and the department’s failure to provide adequate information about the war’s objectives, costs. Additionally, duration. A push to impeach him has already taken shape in the Republican-controlled House. However, Trump has defended Hegseth, calling him a “great warrior” and dismissing Democratic efforts to remove him.
Raskin says that impeaching a Cabinet secretary would be less likely to consume Congress’s agenda or raise the same concerns about overturning the result of a presidential election. “The question of cabinet officers is a little bit easier because it doesn’t necessarily consume all of the policy oxygen in Congress,” he says.
However, impeaching Hegseth would require a majority in the House. Additionally, removing him would still require a two-thirds vote in the Senate. Republicans who have criticized his performance have not necessarily indicated any willingness to support impeachment. But the growing unease over the administration’s military decisions, particularly the conduct and costs of the war with Iran, could offer Democrats an opening that does not exist with Trump.
Rep. Jason Crow of Colorado, a member of the Armed Services Committee who served as a House manager during Trump’s first impeachment trial, says lawmakers have been preparing for extensive investigations into the Pentagon regardless of the election’s outcome. He cites the removal of senior military officers, alleged misuse of defense funds, threats against NATO, possible troop withdrawals from Europe. Additionally, the administration’s handling of the Iran war as areas demanding scrutiny. But Crow stops short of endorsing impeachment as the preferred course. “Impeachment is only one tool that Congress has,” he told TIME.
“If the goal is to get Pete Hegseth out of the Department of Defense to stop corruption, to erect some guardrails against this runaway, reckless administration. Additionally, to protect the country against the increased erratic and dangerous behavior of Donald Trump, then we have to look post-November what the Congress looks like,” Crow says. “Maybe impeachment is part of that. I wouldn’t hesitate to use that if that’s the right one.”
About The Author
