Search results for "impeachment"

Trump's latest rambling pitch just invited another impeachment

The Trumpapalooza midterm convention in Dallas was an embarrassing flop. Republicans running in competitive races wisely steered clear of the event, staged to spin the disastrous results of Trump 2.0 into ‘The Great American Comeback.’

Speaker after speaker praised Trump so lavishly the convention looked like one of his made-for-tv cabinet meetings. The core audience watching the event, both at home and in the arena wearing sequined Trump merch, appeared to be MAGA loyalists, not the moderates or undecided voters Republicans needed to reach.

Democrats considered holding a competing convention but didn’t, preferring to let Trump bask in the spotlight under the theory that more is less—the more voters see of Trump, the less they trust him.

It was the right decision.

“Bread and circus bribes”

Trump was the keynote speaker both nights, where he spun high fuel and energy costs, an intractable war of choice, and serial divorce papers served on us by our allies as accomplishments. Such is the power of spin when truth no longer holds currency.

It will shock readers to learn that Trump made the convention all about Trump, even though he is not running for office. What he is running for is his continued escape from accountability. If Democrats retake the House and Senate, the words ‘impeach,’ ‘corruption,’ and ‘Emoluments Clause’ will dominate headlines as they reacquaint federal governance with the rule of law.

Trump spoke for nearly two hours in a widely panned, rambling speech, using the spotlight to make false and familiar claims building up to the crescendo where said, “If the Republicans win the House of Representatives and the United States Senate, … I will issue a dividend to every adult citizen in the United States of America for $5,000.” He said the payments would be “very much like a successful company will do a cash distribution to its shareholders, or like last year when I gave our great members of the military $1,776.”

Both comparisons are laughably false. Corporations don’t give bonus distributions when earnings are down and the company is $40 trillion in debt, and he didn’t “give” service members $1,776 because Congress had already funded a $2.9 billion military housing allowance in July 2025 from which those funds were taken. A fan of renaming things, Trump simply renamed it a “Warrior Dividend,” and claimed it was his gift.

Trump still doesn’t understand how appropriations work

While most analysts assailed Trump’s $5k promise as an election-year sweetener at best and an illegal bribe at worst, the devastating takeaway was that Trump, after nearly six years on the job, still doesn’t understand how federal legislation works. Trump didn’t say he’d work with the Republican majority to authorize the payout, or help pass the law to drive it. A perennial mob boss, he said he would issue the checks, but only if he likes what he sees in the midterms.

After repeated promises to issue checks that never materialize, Trump still hasn’t learned that massive direct-payment plans require either fast-track legislation or formal congressional approval. Even though Republicans now control the House, the Senate, and the Supreme Court, Trump has been claiming checks that never were for two years:

Trump’s convention speech demonstrated his continuing economic illiteracy

According to the Census Bureau, there are about 245 million U.S. citizens over 18. If Trump gave $5,000 to every adult U.S. citizen, it would cost well over $1.2 trillion, exploding the already astronomical federal deficit. To put this in perspective, the entire 2025 annual U.S. budget was $7 trillion; Trump would add another 20% to the national debt to keep his unchecked power. Just as he doesn’t understand who pays tariffs, he either doesn’t understand the basic relationship between national debt, the bond market, and interest rates, or he simply doesn’t care.

Trump also demonstrated ignorance about how a free market works, telling his fawning audience that, “The only caveat I have is that the dividend that we’re making must be spent in the United States of America...” This is more fantastical—or delusional—thinking. In a capitalist economy, currency cannot be stopped from moving freely; there is no way to track how or where cash is spent unless he intends to mark denominations ‘legal tender, but only inside the U.S.’

Given his un-American attempt to choose who gets to vote by controlling the mail, and his apparent belief that he can simply print money, wait for Trump to mint $5K Trump coins restricted to purchasing Trump.com products. Small wonder he is desperate for Republicans to win.

During his convention speech, Trump urged voters to “pretend that he is on the ballot.” Democrats should blast that line across billboards nationwide.

Sabrina Haake is a political analyst and 25+ year federal trial attorney specializing in 1st and 14th A defense. She writes the free Substack, The Haake Take.

From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web

Trump biographer calls it: 'Impeach' this man 'quickly'

On Monday, following news that President Donald Trump is considering a nuclear attack against Iran, one of his biographers urged Republicans to “impeach and remove” him “quickly.” Seth Abramson, author of three bestselling books on Trump, took to social media to warn that the president is a danger to the entire world.

“This just dropped,” said Abramson over an article on Trump’s interest in using nuclear weapons to end his spiraling war. “I wish we lived in a world in which Republicans — yes Republicans — were capable of actually coming around and understanding they need to impeach and remove this man quickly to save the planet. I mean all of us. Their families, my family, their friends, my friends.”

Abramson continued, "It seems increasingly likely that one day Americans are going to awaken to a mushroom cloud in the Middle East and the beginnings of a World War without a single politician in D.C. having taken a single meaningful step to remove an unambiguously psychopathic president from power."

He isn’t the only person who has spent a great deal of time considering Trump to warn of the danger of the president’s nuclear designs. According to Miles Taylor, who served as Deputy Chief of Staff in the Department of Homeland Security during Trump’s first term, he “watched Donald Trump talk about nuclear weapons like they were presidential toys,” and “he may be closer to playing with them than you think.” Taylor asserts that when Trump butted heads with North Korea in 2017, Defense Secretary James Mattis began preparing DHS officials for nuclear war, and “for the first time in the Department of Homeland Security’s history, we ran exercises for a potential real-life nuclear strike on American soil, because frankly, we couldn’t rule out that our own president might take us into such an apocalyptic situation.”

Taylor asserted that Trump has maintained “nuclear fantasies” for a long time. For example, when Trump was a candidate in 2016, "MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough said a foreign policy adviser had come away from a briefing with Trump rattled, because Trump asked, three separate times, some version of the question: ‘If we have nuclear weapons, why can’t we use them?’ Candidate Trump also told The New York Times he wasn’t sure it ‘would be a bad thing for us’ if Japan built its own nuclear deterrent against North Korea, and he told CNN’s Anderson Cooper that Saudi Arabia should have nukes, too, ‘absolutely.’” And “since then, Trump has toyed with nuclear weapons more openly and more recklessly than any American president ever entrusted with the stewardship of the bomb.”

Then on Monday, another figure from Trump’s orbit, former Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, posted that the president and his advisors “are discussing using nuclear weapons on Iran in strategy meetings… It’s real. I’m not speculating, I know. And it’s pure evil.”

From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web

Trump just did something 'impeachable': ex-WH ethics attorney

President Donald Trump’s use of taxpayer funds to pay for campaign ads may be outright “impeachable.” This is according to former White House ethics attorney Richard Painter, who took to social media on Sunday to warn that a recent string of advertisements amounted to government-sponsored “propagandha.”

This was in reference to several advertisements aired across multiple networks promoting Trump in the run-up to the midterms. The ads – which focus on Trump’s claims that he’s fighting “communism” and “the deep state,” with one declaring he will “expel the warmongers from our government” even as his war on Iran drags into its seventh month – are tagged with disclaimers that read “Paid for by the U.S. Government.” Under the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, public officials cannot use taxpayer dollars for campaigning purposes, and according to Painter – who served under President George W. Bush – these ads are in direct violation of the law.

“This could be an impeachable offense,” posted Painter on Sunday. “@POTUS has no right to use taxpayer money for campaign ads. Congress has expressly prohibited government sponsored political propaganda, which is dangerous for democracy.”

He wasn’t the only one to question the ad campaign’s legality. According to Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA), the use of taxpayer money to fund ads promoting the president was “probably” illegal. As he elaborated, “I don’t think any public official, including President Trump … or John Kennedy, should spend public money … on private ads for themselves.”

The White House has attempted to dismiss such criticism by claiming the clips are not campaign ads because Trump is not on the ballot in November, but the president himself has previously instructed voters to “pretend” he is. According to the Hill, “The Trump administration also highlighted past examples of the federal government airing public service announcements, such as when the George W. Bush and Obama administrations aired spots explaining new Medicare legislation and open enrollment in the Affordable Care Act marketplace, respectively.”

“When prior Administrations utilized the airwaves, it was called ‘public education,’” the White House release reads. “When this Administration promotes pride in our country, many of those same voices call it ‘propaganda.’”

But rather than explaining the finer points of new policy initiatives, Trump’s new ads feature his typical rally rants, like, “We will cast out the communists, Marxists, and fascists. We will throw off the sick political class that hates our country. We will rout the fake news media, and we will liberate America from these villains once and for all.” According to the Washington Post, over $300,000 was spent on the ads, and it is unknown which government agency footed the bill.

From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web

Trump's desperate to avoid impeachments — as his latest move shows

President Donald Trump is terrified of being impeached, according to a recent report — and that helps explain the recent meeting between his son-in-law Jared Kushner and Democratic House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries.

“But Kushner’s meeting with Democrats signals that Trump is afraid of losing, [political strategist David] Rothkopf argued,” reported The Daily Beast's Vic Verbalaitis on Monday. Rothkopf added that “of course, Trump has been going around... saying if the Democrats get elected, they will impeach me. And I think part of what he’s trying to do here is, he says to Jared, ‘Go reach out to them.’”

He added that Trump “really doesn’t want to be impeached again. There are a lot of Democrats who are like, what’s the point? But I think Trump sees the point. He knows how devastating that would be to his administration, to his reputation.”

Rothkopf continued, “And there’s no assurances that the next impeachment turns out the way the last did, where the Senate defends him. Because everybody saw what happened then, you know.”

He summed up his views by saying, “I think Trump’s terrified. I think, you know, just as he sends Jared to deal with the Iranians and Jared to deal with the Russians, when he’s got some big issue, he sends Jared.”

In addition, Rothkopf argued that Kushner’s meeting with Jeffries shows an insensitivity toward his own party, as Jeffries has refused to meet with progressive Democrats like Michigan Senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed and New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani.

“So he looks like a guy who’s on the attack against members of his own party, but willing to compromise with the fascist in the White House,” Rothkopf observed.

Steve Schmidt, a former adviser to Republican President George W. Bush, had a similar observation on Monday.

“In the meeting, apparently, Jared Kushner made the point that it would be a good idea to open up a relationship between Hakeem Jeffries, who may soon be the Speaker of the House, and Susie Wiles, the White House Chief of Staff — because, according to The New York Times, which keyed us in on Jared's thinking, the most stable and reasonable people in the White House and in Congress are Susie Wiles and Hakeem Jeffries,” Schmidt said on his podcast.

Schmidt continued, “Here's the thing: Susie Wiles is a staffer, an employee of Donald Trump's. Hakeem Jeffries would be a constitutional officer. His peer is not the White House Chief of Staff — it's the President of the United States.”

He concluded, “Finally, what the Democratic Party must be for in this election — though the means of achieving it may well run through the keyhole of ‘Donald Trump has made everything more expensive’ — is the restoration of the American Constitution. Jared Kushner is under congressional investigation, and the incoming chair of the Judiciary Committee has made clear that Jared Kushner's financial entanglements, stretching from one end of the earth to the other while he functions as shadow Secretary of State, raking in billions from Arab potentates, are going to be scrutinized.”

From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web

Top conservative magazine calls it: Trump should be impeached

On Wednesday, the National Review – the preeminent conservative magazine since 1955 — called it: President Donald Trump has done the “impeachable.”

“There is no plausible defense of Trump's TruthSocial scheme,” declared National Review Senior Editor Charles Cooke. “It is flagrantly corrupt. It is impeachable. Congress should intervene. (It won't, I know.)” He posted this assertion over his latest article, entitled “Truth Social’s Early-Access Scheme Is Indefensible.”

As he explains, over the weekend, the Trump Media & Technology Group announced the creation of a “real-time feed on the Truth Social website that will give paying institutions early access to certain high-profile posts for between $60,000 and $100,000 per month.” Cooke doesn’t hold back with his assessment of the scheme, writing, “There is no credible defense of this. The only reason that anyone would want priority access to Truth Social is to gain priority access to President Trump’s pronouncements on that platform. And the only reason that anyone would want priority access to President Trump’s pronouncements on that platform is to act on them for pecuniary gain.”

As Cooke elaborates, “Trump often uses Truth Social as the primary forum for his announcements — announcements that include changes to personnel, the imposition or rescission of tariffs, key foreign policy decisions, and more. These announcements are extremely useful to financial institutions, and, in the age of high-speed trading, the faster those financial institutions can obtain them, the more money those financial institutions can make. Facilitating this access is not a byproduct of Truth Social’s API offering; it is its core — perhaps its sole — purpose. Simply put: President Trump is charging Americans a fee — a fee that, in part, goes into his family’s pockets — for the privilege of receiving news about his official actions earlier than those who do not pay.”

According to Cooke, it is “obvious how unequivocally corrupt this setup is. Technically speaking, the beneficiaries will not gain the information they seek directly from Trump himself, but indirectly, via an API (Application Programming Interface) whose output will be processed by a bunch of semi-autonomous servers and acted upon according to a set of predetermined parameters. But the results will be the same as if Trump had personally picked up the phone.”

He continues, “Good traders do not react to the news on the fly; they have plans of action, which are to be implemented if a war starts or ends, if taxes are raised or cut, if the Federal Reserve’s next chairman is expected to be hawkish, dovish, or somewhere in between, and so on. If, instead of using Truth Social as the middleman, President Trump announced that, for a hefty annual charge, he would call a select group of brokers at the stock exchange to inform them of his important decisions, and thereby give them a head start in executing their plans, we would call that what it is: corruption. Why not here?”

Here Cooke concludes in rare agreement with Democratic lawmakers, writing, “Senators Warren and Schiff have described Trump’s plan as ‘an outrageous abuse of the President’s office for his personal benefit that undermines everyday investors and the integrity of our markets, while enriching Wall Street and other wealthy insiders.’ They are correct… It is certainly a grave offense against honesty, transparency, and good government. If it has any self-respect, Congress will respond to the president’s brazen provocation by passing a law that renders his model flatly illegal. And, if that fails to persuade him, it will impeach and remove him from office, the better to drain the swamp.”

From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web

Democrats plan to strangle Trump without a single impeachment vote

In the face of endless corruption allegations and the Trump family’s monetization of the White House, U.S. House Democrats are preparing for a possible return to power with a broad, new investigative strategy, reports the State.

“From sketchy Pentagon contracts lining the pockets of the president's sons, Trump's crypto billions, and the shady backroom deals for Trump donors, we will ensure we combat corruption when Democrats take back the House in November," Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.) vowed in a statement.

Polls suggest Democrats will be stampeding the House in November, and the State reports they plan to target companies and financial firms surrounding Trump instead of trying to immediately impeach Trump, according to four people familiar with the discussions.

“Senior Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives and committee aides have discussed using hearings, subpoenas and document requests to obtain records from entities tied to Trump's political and business orbit, the sources said,” reports the State. “It is a bet that investigating private companies and outside financial players will prove more fruitful than directly confronting a White House they expect to resist oversight, they said.”

"We're not going into this to impeach," said a senior Democratic aide, describing the thinking among party leaders and committee staff. "No one wants a failed vote on day one. The focus is on building a body of evidence through investigations that can hold Trump accountable."

The State reports this new approach reflects both Democratic caution and a lesson many in the party say they learned during Trump's first term: that impeachment proceedings can consume Congress while allowing Trump to cast himself as the victim of a partisan campaign. It is especially fruitless if the Republican Party remains willing, as a monolith, to either look the other way or wholeheartedly embrace Trump’s corruption.

Instead, Democrats involved in the planning envision using House investigative powers after November's midterm elections to scrutinize the administration's decision-making and examine whether Trump used his power to benefit himself, allies or donors.

Democrats expect the White House to ignore or fight information requests targeting the executive branch, which makes companies, contractors and financial firms working with the administration an important second route for obtaining information, according to sources.

“Three sources said Apple, Alphabet, Palantir, Blackstone, BlackRock and companies owned by Elon Musk, such as Tesla, have surfaced in discussions because of their contracts, regulatory exposure or administration dealings. The sources said no final target list has been established and no formal investigations have begun,” reports The State.

However, Democrats have already begun laying the groundwork for investigations, say at least two sources, with party leaders already sending letters to companies, contractors and other organizations connected to potential investigations. These preliminary requests seek records, and they could herald a wave of subpoenas if Democrats win the House.

From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web

Conservative newspaper panics over 'real possibility' Trump will be impeached

With the midterms looming, there is a “real possibility” that President Donald Trump will be impeached. This is according to the conservative newspaper the Washington Examiner, which on Monday warned its Republican readers that the GOP’s congressional majority is seriously imperiled, and that Trump and his party could be “in for a couple of trying years.”

As the Examiner explains, “The odds are Republicans will lose control of the House in the coming midterm elections, for five reasons: 1) their current majority is so narrow that losing a literal handful of seats would cost them control; 2) they will be hurt by President Donald Trump’s low job approval rating, especially on his handling of the economy; 3) the so-called ‘generic ballot’ poll shows voters would prefer a Democrat to represent them in the House; 4) the war in Iran/the Middle East will be a continuing source of uncertainty and tension for the GOP; and 5) precedent strongly suggests the party that controls the White House will lose a substantial number of House seats.”

Should the Democrats flip it, warns the Examiner, “there’s a real possibility that a new Democratic majority in the House would impeach Trump for a third time. And there’s no doubt in the world that Democrats would kill the president’s legislative agenda.” In the case of the latter, however, the Examiner does admit that the danger to Trump’s legislative goals is limited, because “beyond the SAVE America Act, which will not pass this year, Trump doesn’t really have a legislative agenda to kill.”

Impeachment in the House also wouldn’t mean much for Trump, who has been impeached twice already, unless Democrats also flip the Senate, which would be required for actual removal from office. But while their road to a Senate majority is narrower than with the House, the Examiner says that there “appears to be more of a chance” than a few months ago.

“Republicans hold 53 seats in the Senate, which means Democrats would have to win four currently Republican-held seats to win control,” explains the Examiner. “This time last year, that seemed a remote possibility. But now there are six Republican seats that Democrats have a non-zero chance of winning. And there are just two Democratic seats in significant jeopardy.” And as the Examiner notes, Democrats are likely to flip one of those six, while the other five “could go either way.”

While the paper notes that there are still three months over the course of which a lot can happen, it concludes on a pessimistic note, warning conservatives, “There is no reason for Republicans to feel confident that, after losing the House, they will still have the Senate. They could lose both. And then, President Trump and his party will be in for a couple of trying years.”

From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web

Trump may have just exposed himself to 'grounds for impeachment'

On Friday, President Donald Trump posted a Truth Social message that some commentators say may have just handed Democrats the “grounds for impeachment” they’ve been looking for should they take back a Congressional majority in the midterms.

As Michael Tomasky of the New Republic explains, “It all has to do with the slush fund … the result of a settlement in a mind-bending legal proceeding in which Trump sued himself: That is, the president of the United States sued the Internal Revenue Service, seeking $10 billion.” In May, acting Attorney General Todd Blanche — who happened to be Trump’s former personal lawyer — settled the suit by creating a $1.776 billion “anti-weaponization” fund for the benefit of Trump loyalists, including J6 insurrectionists, while granting Trump, his family members and his companies immunity from prosecution for any tax-related crimes.

But outcry from both the public and Congress forced the administration to backpedal, and Blanche assured lawmakers that the fund would be canceled. He said he would put that in writing but failed to do so, and as a result, Republican Senators John Cornyn (R-TX) and Thom Tillis (R-NC) are refusing to vote for his confirmation as attorney general.

At this point, Trump said that he would withdraw Blanche’s nomination for confirmation until Cornyn and Tillis — both of whom are lame duck Senators — leave office in January. As Tomasky explains, “What Trump is saying here is obvious. The slush fund and probably especially the immunity are far more important to him than Blanche is.”

“This matter has now jumped to the top of my list of grounds for impeachment,” Tomasky declared. Trump installed his personal lawyer to preside over a lawsuit in which the president is on both sides, resulting in a nearly $2 billion slush fund and immunity from tax crimes, then he admitted openly that the fund and immunity are more important to him than confirming his attorney general. The holdout Republican Senators have been very clear: if Blanche would commit to ending the fund and immunity in writing, he would be swiftly confirmed. But Trump won’t allow that.

Other commentators have noted the blatant corruption. According to former US attorney Barb McQuade, “Trump would rather pull Blanche’s nomination for AG than allow him to commit in writing that Trump’s IRS deal is off. The immunity Blanche granted to Trump from IRS audits is a windfall that some experts estimate is worth $100 million in taxpayer funds for Trump.”

Based on Trump’s inadvertent admission, “it’s hard to say how many articles of impeachment the Democratic House might come up with,” writes Tomasky, noting that the “biggest challenge will be deciding which high crimes and misdemeanors not to pursue. There’ve been dozens, hundreds, and they just can’t plausibly bring an indictment of 100-plus counts. They’re going to have to keep it to some number that the public can digest and buy into. But the slush fund and immunity grant sure look like count number one to me.”

From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web

Missouri Republicans threaten to impeach entire state Supreme Court

Republicans in the Missouri legislature are now threatening to impeach all of the state Supreme Court Justices if they hold Secretary of State Denny Hoskins in contempt of court.

Ahead of the state Supreme Court's hearing on Thursday over Hoskins' order to defy its ruling against changes to the electoral maps, a group of GOP lawmakers published a letter threatening the justices, Fox2NOW reported.

On Wednesday night, 14 members of the Missouri General Assembly signed a letter arguing that Hoskins shouldn't be held in contempt for violating his order because doing so would violate the separation of powers. If the justices do hold Hoskins in contempt, the GOP officials said they'd impeach the judges.

The letter claims, "the facts are not in dispute" over the court's Sept. 3 ruling.

The Republicans issuing the threat told Chief Justice W. Brent Powell, “Should Secretary of Hoskins be held in contempt, we will petition the Speaker of the House and legislative leadership to begin impeachment proceedings against the responsible members of this Court for willful neglect of duty, incompetency and misconduct under Article VII, Sections 1 and 2 of the Missouri Constitution."

The U.S. Supreme Court already stepped in earlier this week to say it would not approve a temporary restraining order that would allow the GOP's maps to be used. Shortly before the Hoskins’ contempt hearing, the U.S. Supreme Court issued another ruling in which the justices rejected the Republican-backed maps intended to eliminate the Democratic district.

Democrats in the state responded to the GOP threat by saying that the letter was judicial tampering, a Class D felony, and that they fully intend to take those Republicans to court.

“Missourians forcefully responded to Republicans’ attempted power grabs last month by rejecting Amendments 4 and 5. They will react even worse to the GOP openly intimidating the Supreme Court as it considers whether the state’s highest election official abused his authority in defiance of the law," the Democrats said in a statement.

“This is how Democracies collapse,” said House Minority Leader Ashley Aune, a Democrat from Kansas City. “Corrupt officials defy the courts; the courts act to hold them responsible; corrupt officials eliminate the courts.”

The chief justice issued an ominous threat that Hoskins not leave town until they decided whether he'd be held in contempt of court.

Kansas City Star editorial board member Toriano Porter wrote on Wednesday that the state has fully fallen into a "constitutional crisis."

From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web

Impeachment coup: Mark Kelly says Hegseth just walked into a trap

Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., introduced a resolution Tuesday to impeach Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, accusing him of defying Congress and illegally continuing the U.S. war in Iran, among other crimes. However, one target of Hegseth’s alleged abuses unleashed a devastating “I told you so” on the defense secretary.

In addition to the defying Congress over the Iran War, Massie’s eight-article resolution also targets Hegseth over U.S. military operations in Venezuela and Yemen, and accuses him of illegally directing the operation to capture Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro without congressional authorization. It also accuses him of carrying out extrajudicial killings.

“Secretary Hegseth abused the powers entrusted to him as secretary of defense by subordinating the constitutional limits on the use of military force and the laws governing the conduct of hostilities to his own policy objectives,” said Massie, adding that Hegseth has shown “profound disregard” for the impact of U.S. military operations on civilians.

In his resolution, Massie also pointed out that Hegseth “weaponized the Department of Defense to retaliate against and intimidate Senator Mark Kelly” after Kelly appeared in a video addressed to members of the military reminding them that “our laws are clear. You can refuse illegal orders.”

At the time, the video pertained to an “unlawful strike campaign against vessels suspected of narcotics trafficking in international waters,” said Massie, but Kelly said Hegseth would have done well to heed the video warning himself.

“I think the real ironic thing about Pete Hegseth’s potential impeachment from being secretary of defense is six of those eight articles are about Pete following illegal orders from the president,” said Kelly, speaking with an Atlantic host at the September Atlantic Festival” in New York. “If he’d just listened to us, he would not have found himself as now … [as] the first cabinet member where a member of his own party has tried to impeach him and throw him out of office.”

“So, [Hegseth] goes down in history as that guy,” chided Kelly. “But if he had listened to the six of us he would not have found himself in this situation.”

Kelly said he had “never met Tom Massie” prior to his resolution this week.

“We’ve never spoken before until a couple of days ago after this happened. I thought it was appropriate to give him call because of his … resolution of impeachment, but it’s eight articles in there. One of them is about what Pete Hegseth is trying to do to me, my name, and he goes through my case and why he believes this is an impeachable offense.”

From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web

NYT columnist exposes 3 Trump officials most 'vulnerable' to impeachment

Democrats reportedly remain uncertain about pursuing another impeachment of President Donald Trump after the midterms, but according to one New York Times columnist, his administration officials deserve it just as much as their boss, and at least three of them are particularly "vulnerable."

With Democrats projected to sweep into a new House majority — and potentially one in the Senate as well — in the coming midterms, talks of impeaching Trump once again remain a heated topic. Despite the fact that there are ample grounds on which to prosecute the case, many in the party remain hesitant about impeaching Trump again, given that it remains highly unlikely that he could be removed from office, and given how his first two impeachments were leveraged to help him rile up his biggest supporters.

Jamelle Bouie, a liberal political commentator and columnist for The New York Times, has been outspoken in his support for a third impeachment of Trump, and in his most recent "Takes" video on YouTube, made the case that, if Democrats remain hesitant about targeting the president, they should consider going after his top officials, who are just as worthy of being prosecuted as their boss.

"No, there may not be an impeachment of Trump, but you can impeach [Defense Secretary Pete] Hegseth," Bouie argued. "You can impeach [Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy] Jr who is currently, basically, facilitating a measles outbreak that's already killed several people. You can impeach Russell Vought, the head of the Office of Management and Budget, one of the real supervillains of this administration, who is engaged in a lawless attack on the Congress's spending power. You can impeach Stephen Miller, the architect of the administration's extremely draconian and fascist immigration policies. You can remove Sean Duffy, the idiot Secretary of Transportation. I mean, really, you can use this to go after the entire administration."

Bouie argued further that there might actually be enough Republican support in the Senate for impeachment proceedings to remove these Trump officials from office, given their admitted disdain for their policies and their hesitance to blame Trump for any of it directly. He conceded, however, that launching investigations against so many administration officials might lose GOP support, so focusing in on the most "vulnerable" officials might be necessary.

"Maybe you just focus it on a few people," Bouie explained. "Hegseth and Miller, in particular, I think are the best targets; Hegseth, Miller and RFK are the best targets. I'm not sure if Republicans will go for Vought; if they don't, so be it. I would like him gone, but I get that. I think Hegseth, Miller and RFK are the three vulnerable ones who a lot of Republicans are unhappy with because of their conduct, their behavior, their record, and impeaching them would be the beginning of an accountability process and force the president to have to defend them."

From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web
@2026 - AlterNet Media Inc. All Rights Reserved. - "Poynter" fonts provided by fontsempire.com.