A New Hampshire congressional candidate is drawing attention online after a debate clip showed her struggling to name a specific impeachment charge against President Donald Trump. In footage from WMUR’s Granite State Debates, Democrat Paige Beauchemin was asked what high crimes or misdemeanors she believes Trump has committed this term. She said it was “really hard to narrow it down.” Online users reacted after the exchange, with many arguing that policy disagreements are not an impeachable offense.
The video shows a segment of WMUR’s Granite State Debates, with two candidates at podiums. Moderator Steve Bottari of WMUR News 9 turns to Beauchemin, identified on screen as a Democratic candidate for Congress in New Hampshire’s 2nd District, and notes that she has pledged to “file articles of impeachment against President Trump on day one” if she gets to Washington. He then asks her to explain, for viewers, what she sees as the high crimes or misdemeanors the president has committed this term.
In the exchange, Beauchemin does not name a specific article of impeachment. She says it is “really hard to narrow it down,” adds that she “didn’t bring my running list,” and continues, “I’ll just say that pretty much everything Trump is doing, there’s something wrong with it.” The clip does not include the rest of the debate or what happened immediately before the question.
How Viewers Are Responding to the Debate Exchange
Some users focused on the gap between an impeachment vow and the answer on stage, with one writing, “So you’re part of a group who has VOWED to impeach the president of the United States on day 1… and can’t name ONE THING he did that’s impeachable.”
Another summarized the exchange as, “Democrats: IMPEACH TRUMP!!! Also Democrats: Why? idk just vibes.”
Others argued that disagreement with the president is not a constitutional charge. “A difference in policy platforms is not an impeachable offense,” one commenter wrote. Another said, “Not liking something does not make it impeachable.”
A further reply described the answer as a “blanket” response: “I don’t know, but it’s everything.”
For voters, however, the exchange raises a fairly straightforward question: if a candidate is promising to impeach a president, shouldn’t they be able to explain exactly what they believe he should be impeached for? Judging by the reaction online, plenty of viewers felt that answer should have come much more easily.
