Sen. Thom Tillis, one of the most vocal Republican critics of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, now supports the impeachment resolution filed by a fellow GOP lawmaker, a rare intraparty rebuke of a sitting Cabinet member.
Tillis, the outgoing North Carolina Republican who is not seeking reelection in November, told reporters Thursday that he wants Hegseth removed from the Pentagon by whatever means gets the job done. He endorsed the eight articles of impeachment that Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky introduced earlier in the week, while making clear he would prefer President Trump simply replace his defense secretary outright.
"He needs to go, whether it's impeachment or the most expedient route, just the president to replace him, would be great," Tillis told reporters.
The remarks mark an escalation from a senator who voted to confirm Hegseth but has spent months publicly souring on the Pentagon chief's leadership. Tillis is now the most prominent Senate Republican to align himself with Massie's impeachment effort, a move that puts two elected Republicans from different chambers on record calling for a Trump Cabinet member's ouster through Congress's most severe constitutional tool.
Massie filed the articles of impeachment on Tuesday. The resolution accuses Hegseth of mishandling the war in Iran and violating his oath to support and defend the Constitution. The specific allegations within each of the eight articles have not been detailed publicly beyond those broad charges.
When asked whether other Senate Republicans should line up behind Massie's effort, Tillis deferred to the House but left no doubt about where he stands.
"I'll let the House do what the House is going to do. I think I'm pretty well staked out on my assessment of Mr. Hegseth."
That assessment has been building for months. Earlier this year, Tillis told Politico that getting Trump to fire Hegseth was on "a Christmas wish list." He also said he believed Hegseth had misled the president about the dynamics of the war in Iran, a charge that tracks with the central thrust of Massie's impeachment filing.
Then, earlier this month, Tillis took his criticism to the social platform X with a blunt public statement aimed squarely at Trump's judgment on the matter.
"I have never witnessed more inept management of the brave men and women who serve our country."
In the same period, Tillis urged the president directly: "I urge the President to find a new leader at the Pentagon who will retain and empower our military talent rather than diminish it."
The immediate backdrop for Tillis's renewed push is the departure of former Army Secretary Dan Driscoll, who resigned at the end of August. Driscoll had clashed with Hegseth over the firing of senior Army leadership and other changes at the department. His exit removed one of the few internal checks on the defense secretary's management decisions and gave critics like Tillis fresh ammunition.
Tillis has framed the broader problem as Hegseth pushing out experienced military officials, the kind of institutional knowledge a wartime Pentagon cannot afford to lose. That argument carries weight with national-security conservatives who backed Hegseth's confirmation expecting a reformer, not a house-cleaner who drives out seasoned leaders without clear replacements.
The situation is unusual by any measure. Republican members of Congress rarely move against a sitting president's Cabinet pick, and impeachment of a defense secretary is virtually unheard of in modern American politics. House Democrats have also laid groundwork for their own impeachment push, which means Hegseth now faces pressure from both flanks, though for different reasons and with different political motivations.
One factor that cannot be ignored: Tillis is not running again. He has no primary to worry about, no Trump endorsement to court, and no political cost for breaking ranks. That freedom explains the bluntness. It does not explain why other Republican senators who share his concerns, and there are almost certainly some, have stayed quiet.
Whether Massie's impeachment articles gain traction in the House remains an open question. So does the White House's response. Neither Hegseth nor the administration has publicly addressed Tillis's latest remarks or Massie's resolution, at least not in the available reporting. That silence may be strategic, or it may reflect a calculation that the effort lacks the votes to go anywhere.
But the underlying complaint, that Hegseth has mismanaged the Pentagon, alienated experienced military leaders, and possibly misled the commander-in-chief about an active conflict, is not going away. If anything, Driscoll's resignation made it harder to dismiss. A Cabinet secretary who loses his Army secretary over internal disagreements about senior-level firings has a management problem that no amount of political loyalty can paper over.
Tillis's criticism also raises a pointed question about accountability within conservative governance. Republicans rightly demand competence and results from federal agencies. Veterans and national-security voices have added their own objections. When a defense secretary's own party members describe his leadership as the most inept they have ever seen, the standard should apply equally, regardless of who nominated him.
Hegseth's management of the Pentagon has also drawn scrutiny for specific policy decisions. Directives like mandatory testosterone screening for troops have become flashpoints, adding to the sense among critics that the defense secretary's priorities do not match the gravity of the moment.
The men and women in uniform deserve a Pentagon run with steady hands and sound judgment. If the evidence says that standard is not being met, the fix is not partisan, it is common sense.
