战争部长皮特·赫格塞思周二反对弹劾行动，指责议员试图将对总统唐纳德·特朗普军事政策的分歧转化为可弹劾的罪行。
War Secretary Pete Hegseth pushed back against an impeachment effort Tuesday, accusing lawmakers of trying to turn disagreements over President Donald Trump's military policies into impeachable offenses.
国会正准备对八项条款进行投票，这些条款指控五角大楼负责人违反联邦法律并滥用职权。
Congress is preparing to vote on eight articles alleging the Pentagon chief violated federal law and abused his authority.
“一位不满的议员想要因政策分歧而将其撕毁。事实就是如此：政策分歧，而非重罪、轻罪、叛国、贿赂，也非创始人撰写弹劾条款时所意图的那种罪行，”赫格塞思周二上午在五角大楼新闻发布会上表示。
"One disgruntled congressman wants to shred it over policy disagreements. That's what it is: policy disagreements, not high crimes, not misdemeanors, not treason, not bribery, not the kinds of offenses the founders intended when they wrote the impeachment clause," Hegseth said at a Pentagon press conference Tuesday morning.
“政策分歧的正确补救方式是立法、辩论和下一次总统选举，”他补充道。
"The proper remedy for a policy disagreement, it's legislation, it's debate, it's the next presidential election," he added.
但周一由肯塔基州共和党众议员托马斯·马西提出的弹劾决议，超出了对政府军事战略的反对。该决议指控赫格塞思违反国会战争权力、授权非法军事行动，并因一名在任参议员行使其宪法权利而对其进行报复。
But the impeachment resolution introduced Monday by Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., goes beyond objections to the administration's military strategy. It alleges that Hegseth violated congressional war powers, authorized unlawful military operations and retaliated against a sitting senator for exercising his constitutional rights.
这场冲突将弹劾的界限置于围绕特朗普国家安全议程日益激烈的斗争中心，检验议员们是否能为罢免赫格塞思提出宪法论据，还是仅仅利用弹劾来挑战他们反对的军事和政策决策。
The clash puts the limits of impeachment at the center of a growing fight over Trump's national security agenda, testing whether lawmakers can make a constitutional case for removing Hegseth or are just using impeachment to challenge military and policy decisions they oppose.
马西的八项条款集中于特朗普政府几项最具争议的国家安全决策，其中三项指控赫格塞思在对伊朗战争中违反《战争权力法案》。
Massie's eight articles center on several of the Trump administration's most controversial national security decisions, with three accusing Hegseth of violating the War Powers Resolution during the war against Iran.
这位即将卸任的肯塔基州共和党人指控，赫格塞思在未经国会授权的情况下发动敌对行动，在国会指示终止军事行动后仍继续军事行动，并无视要求撤出美军的法定期限。
The outgoing Kentucky Republican alleges that Hegseth initiated hostilities without congressional authorization, continued military operations after Congress directed their termination and disregarded statutory deadlines requiring the withdrawal of U.S. forces.
其他文章指控赫格塞斯未能遵守旨在尽量减少平民伤亡的法律，包括与一场针对伊朗学校的打击有关，并在加勒比海对涉嫌贩毒者进行非法海上打击。
Other articles accuse Hegseth of failing to comply with laws intended to minimize civilian casualties, including in connection with a strike on an Iranian school, and conducting unlawful maritime strikes against suspected drug traffickers in the Caribbean.
该决议还指控赫格塞斯报复亚利桑那州民主党参议员马克·凯利，因为凯利曾发布视频敦促服役人员拒绝非法命令，并非法指挥在也门的军事行动以及抓捕前委内瑞拉领导人尼古拉斯·马杜罗。
7 REPUBLICANS REBEL AGAINST TRUMP, VOTE WITH DEMS TO REIN IN IRAN WAR POWERS The resolution also alleges that Hegseth retaliated against Sen. Mark Kelly, D-Ariz., over a video urging service members to refuse unlawful orders, and unlawfully directed military operations in Yemen and the capture of former Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro.
马西拒绝了弹劾行动仅仅是对赫格塞斯工作表现或政府军事政策的公投这一说法。
Massie has rejected the suggestion that the impeachment effort is simply a referendum on Hegseth's job performance or the administration's military policies.
“问题是他是否犯下了可被弹劾的行为，”马西周一在X上写道。“答案是肯定的，有八次。”宪法法学专家乔纳森·图雷基本同意弹劾行动基础不稳，主张马西提出的八项弹劾条款中有六项应直接驳回。
"The question is whether he committed impeachable acts," Massie wrote on X Monday. "And the answer is yes, eight times." Constitutional law scholar Jonathan Turley largely agreed that the impeachment effort was on shaky ground, arguing that six of Massie's eight articles should be dismissed outright.
“在我看来，八项条款中有六项根本站不住脚，包括涉及伊朗的条款，”图雷周二在X上写道。
"In my view, six of the eight articles should be nonstarters, including the Iranian articles," Turley wrote on X Tuesday.
图雷承认，国会有合法的宪法利益来主张其战争权力，但认为马西试图利用弹劾来解决关于总统权力的长期争议。他指出，两党总统，包括比尔·克林顿、巴拉克·奥巴马和乔·拜登，都曾声称拥有无需国会批准即可发动军事行动的广泛权力。
Turley acknowledged that Congress has a legitimate constitutional interest in asserting its war powers, but argued that Massie was attempting to use impeachment to settle a longstanding dispute over presidential authority. Presidents of both parties, including Bill Clinton, Barack Obama and Joe Biden, have claimed broad authority to launch military operations without congressional approval, he noted.
“马西不会通过弹劾来‘诉讼’此事，”图雷写道，并认为特朗普正在行使其前任长期声称拥有的权力。
"Massie is not going to 'litigate' the matter through impeachments," Turley wrote, arguing that Trump was exercising authority long claimed by his predecessors.
然而，副总统JD·万斯周二认为，立法者们正在利用弹劾来替代行使其立法权力。
Vice President JD Vance, however, argued Tuesday that lawmakers were using impeachment as a substitute for exercising their legislative powers.
“皮特·赫格塞斯是否犯有可被弹劾的罪行？这个问题很荒谬，答案是：显然不是，”万斯在“国会有太多工具来表达政策分歧。他们不使用这些工具，反而要试图弹劾皮特·赫格塞斯，”他继续说道。
"Has Pete Hegseth committed impeachable crimes? The question is absurd and the answer is: obviously not," Vance wrote on "Congress has so many tools for registering its policy disagreements. Rather than use them, they're going to try to impeach Pete Hegseth," he continued.
万斯暗示，这场努力与其说是由与伊朗的战争驱动，不如说是由对赫格塞斯在五角大楼推行的更广泛变革的反对驱动，包括将美军从欧洲和乌克兰调走，以及重组军方高层领导层。
Vance suggested the effort was driven less by the war with Iran than by opposition to Hegseth's broader changes at the Pentagon, including shifting U.S. forces away from Europe and Ukraine and reorganizing the military's senior leadership.
“这不是关于伊朗，而是关于皮特挑战了五角大楼的官僚体制，”万斯写道。
"This isn't about Iran, this is about the fact that Pete took on the bureaucracy at the Pentagon," Vance wrote.
图利驳回了关于马杜罗被捕的弹劾条款，并引用了涉及美国抓捕前巴拿马领导人曼努埃尔·诺列加的法院先例。
Turley dismissed the article of impeachment concerning Maduro's capture, pointing to court precedent involving the U.S. seizure of former Panamanian leader Manuel Noriega.
但图利将那些关于行政权力的争议与他认为更严重的两项指控区分开来：针对涉嫌毒贩的海上打击，以及赫格塞斯对参议员马克·凯利的对待。
But Turley drew a distinction between those disputes over executive authority and two allegations he considered more serious: the maritime strikes against suspected drug traffickers and Hegseth's treatment of Sen. Mark Kelly.
“如果属实，‘双击’指控将构成战争罪，”图利写道，并指出特朗普和赫格塞斯都否认下达过此类命令。
"The 'double tap' allegation would be a war crime, if true," Turley wrote, noting that Trump and Hegseth have denied issuing such orders.
图利认为，因一段敦促部队拒绝执行非法命令的视频而惩罚凯利，也引发了关于在任参议员言论自由权利以及潜在不当指挥影响的严重问题。
The effort to punish Kelly over a video urging troops to refuse unlawful orders also raised serious questions about a sitting senator's free speech rights and potential undue command influence, Turley argued.
不过，他并未得出任何一项指控符合宪法规定的弹劾门槛的结论，称还需要更多证据。
Still, he stopped short of concluding that either allegation met the constitutional threshold for impeachment, saying more evidence was needed.
“我会寻找这两篇文章背后的证据，”他写道，并将两者都描述为可能存在问题，但难以界定为“重大罪行和轻罪”。宪法授权因叛国、贿赂或其他重大罪行和轻罪而弹劾，这一标准不要求证明存在刑事犯罪。国会历史上一直将对官方权力的严重滥用视为可能的弹劾理由，尽管其确切界限仍存在争议。
"I will be looking for the underlying evidence on those two articles," he wrote, describing both as potentially problematic but difficult to establish as "high crimes and misdemeanors." The Constitution authorizes impeachment for treason, bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanors, a standard that does not require proof of a criminal offense. Congress has historically treated serious abuses of official power as potential grounds for impeachment, though the precise boundaries remain contested.
这一区别使得“指控仅涉及军事政策，因此可以简单驳回”的论点变得复杂。议员们可以不同意国防部长的决定，但这种分歧本身并不构成可被弹劾的不当行为；然而，指控称一名官员明知故犯地违法或滥用其职权，则涉及另一个宪法问题。
That distinction complicates the argument that the allegations can be dismissed simply because they involve military policy. Lawmakers can disagree with a defense secretary's decisions without those disagreements constituting impeachable misconduct, but allegations that an official knowingly violated the law or abused the powers of his office present a different constitutional question.
与此同时，赫格塞斯一直坚称，决议中引用的行动合法，且由总统指挥。
Hegseth, meanwhile, has maintained that the operations cited in the resolution were lawful and directed by the president.
“我支持每一项这些行动。我很自豪能够执行它们，如果明天再来一次，我也会这么做，”赫格塞斯周二表示。
"I stand behind every one of these operations. I was proud to execute them, and I would do it again tomorrow," Hegseth said Tuesday.
新闻发布会后，特朗普总统也为他的国防部长站台，称赞他的表现，并抨击麦西，麦西今年早些时候输掉了共和党初选。
President Trump also rallied behind his defense secretary following the press conference, praising his performance and attacking Massie, who lost his Republican primary earlier this year.
“不到两年时间里，赫格塞斯部长与特朗普总统并肩工作，致力于恢复美国在世界舞台上的实力，打造数代以来最强大的军队，并在五角大楼灌输战士精神。特朗普总统和赫格塞斯部长采取了大胆且必要的行动，以剥夺伊朗政权研发核武器的能力，将纳克托恐怖分子尼古拉斯·马杜罗绳之以法，并保卫家园免受危险恐怖分子和贩毒集团的侵害——挽救了美国人的生命，”白宫发言人奥利维亚·威尔斯对福克斯新闻数字版表示。
"In just under two years, Secretary Hegseth has worked side-by-side with President Trump to restore American power on the world stage, build the strongest military in generations, and instill a warrior ethos at the Pentagon. President Trump and Secretary Hegseth have taken bold, necessary action to deny the Iranian regime the ability to develop a nuclear weapon, bring narco-terrorist Nicolás Maduro to American justice, and defend our homeland from dangerous terrorists and cartels – saving American lives," White House spokesperson Olivia Wales told Fox News Digital.
“这场闹剧只证明了我们一直都知道的事情：托马斯·马西和民主党人更感兴趣的是玩政治游戏，而不是致力于改善美国人民的生活，”韦尔斯补充道。
"This spectacle only proves what we’ve known all along: Thomas Massie and the Democrats are far more interested in playing political games than working to improve the lives of the American people," Wales added.
特朗普内阁官员集体支持赫格塞斯，柯林斯、伯格姆、罗林斯、穆林和特纳在社交媒体上发布支持信息。鲁比奥和布兰奇也公开为赫格塞斯辩护。
Trump Cabinet officials rallied behind Hegseth, with Collins, Burgum, Rollins, Mullin and Turner posting messages of support on social media. Rubio and Blanche also defended Hegseth publicly.
鲁比奥表示，他“相当有效地”执行了特朗普的命令，布兰奇则否认自己做过任何违法或错误的事情。
Rubio said he carried out Trump’s orders "quite effectively" and Blanche rejected claims that he had done anything illegal or wrong.
预计众议院将于周二晚投票，决定是否推进马西的弹劾决议。弹劾需要众议院简单多数通过，但罢免赫格塞斯职务需要参议院三分之二多数定罪。
The House is expected to vote Tuesday evening on whether to advance Massie's impeachment resolution. Impeachment would require a simple majority in the House, but removing Hegseth from office would require conviction by a two-thirds majority in the Senate.
此次投票将检验立法者是否认为这些指控构成弹劾理由，还是应通过国会的立法和监督权力更好地解决的争议。
The vote will test whether lawmakers view the allegations as grounds for impeachment or a dispute better addressed through Congress's legislative and oversight powers.