SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
impeachment
Impeachment Calls Grow as Dems Say Up to $20 Million in Taxpayer Funds Were Used for 'Illegal' Pro-Trump Ads
"We should not have to remind you that using government funding to create or air political ads like the ones that have been running over the last few days is illegal and a shockingly corrupt misuse of taxpayer dollars."
Sep 29, 2026
As critics condemn President Donald Trump's trio of taxpayer-funded advertisements as illegal propaganda and "an impeachable offense," The Wall Street Journal and leading congressional Democrats revealed Tuesday that the administration appears to have used US Department of Homeland Security funding to pay for the ads.
Citing unnamed sources, the Journal reported that "Trump personally pushed for the ads and has been involved in their creation," and that the money came from US Customs and Border Protection, an agency of DHS. Top Democrats in the Senate and House of Representatives said the administration apparently used CBP funding allocated in Republicans' One Big Beautiful Bill Act last year.
Senate Appropriations Committee Vice Chair Patty Murray (D-Wash.) and Homeland Security Subcommittee Ranking Member Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Tuesday sent a letter to DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin about the "outrageous scheme" of using "Americans' hard-earned tax dollars to bankroll the obscene political ads celebrating President Trump."
The pair noted that on September 19, the Office of Management and Budget approved a release of money to CBP, including "$20 million in new funding under the line item 'Commemorative Events,' which we suspect may well be the funding tapped to run this government propaganda."
"We should not have to remind you that using government funding to create or air political ads like the ones that have been running over the last few days is illegal and a shockingly corrupt misuse of taxpayer dollars," they told Mullin, a former senator who voted for the GOP's 2025 budget package.
Specifically, as the watchdog Public Citizen detailed in a Tuesday complaint to the Federal Communications Commission, the Federal Trade Commission, and broadcasters, the three campaign ads "appear to violate the federal law against using taxpayer funds to finance propaganda (5 USC §3107) and related provisions of the appropriations laws as well as the Hatch Act (5 USC §7324)."
Margaret Dylus-Yukins, senior legal counsel for ethics at the nonpartisan Campaign Legal Center, highlighted on Monday that the unlawful ads come on top of the war chest that Trump has raised—mostly from rich people and corporations—since the last election for the super political action committee (PAC) MAGA Inc.
"At a minimum, this is an appalling abuse of taxpayer dollars, particularly when hundreds of millions of private dollars are already flowing into US elections—and Trump has personally helped raise enormous sums from wealthy special interests for a super PAC devoted to advancing his political agenda," Dylus-Yukins said.
Axios on Tuesday corroborated the Journal's reporting that "Trump is personally selecting which government-funded ads his administration is airing ahead of the midterms," and one unnamed official claimed that "this is just the beginning."
With the midterm elections that will determine control of Congress just five weeks away, the administration has claimed the ads are "public service announcements." Murray and Murphy called that defense "as absurd as it is offensive," and pointed out that "the White House has failed to answer our most basic questions about where these funds coming from and who is responsible."
"The American people deserve answers about how this president is literally stealing their tax dollars to air campaign ads celebrating himself—while doing nothing to help them afford healthcare or housing. These ads need to immediately come off the air, taxpayers need to be paid back for this theft, and everyone responsible needs to be held accountable for this corrupt and illegal propaganda," the senators argued, demanding answers to a list of questions within 48 hours.
House Appropriations Committee Ranking Member Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) and House Appropriations Homeland Security Subcommittee Ranking Member Henry Cuellar (D-Texas) also spoke out Tuesday, saying that "after gutting $1 trillion from Medicaid, stripping healthcare coverage from millions of Americans, giving the very richest Americans and large corporations massive tax breaks, adding more than $4 trillion to the deficit, and more than quadrupling funding for mass deportations, it turns out the Trump administration used Republicans' One Big Beautiful Bill to pay for President Trump’s political ads."
"When Democrats reclaim control of Congress next year, the House Appropriations Committee will work to uncover and reverse misuses of taxpayer money like this and hold those who abused their power accountable," that pair pledged.
With Trump's approval rating dropping—largely due to poor economic conditions exacerbated by his illegal Iran War—Republicans are increasingly at risk of losing their current majorities in one or both chambers. In the House, that would likely mean not only DeLauro chairing the Appropriations Committee, but also Reps. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.), Jim Himes (D-Conn.) Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) respectively leading the Oversight, Intelligence, and Judiciary committees.
"For two years, Trump and his family have run the presidency like a family business, getting richer by the billions while Republicans in Congress held the door open," Congressional Integrity Project senior adviser Jeremy Funk said in a Tuesday statement.
Pointing to "Gulf money" for Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, "Pentagon contracts" for Donald Trump Jr., the first family's lucrative cryptocurrency schemes, and "now taxpayer-funded ads starring Trump himself," Funk charged that "every one of these rackets depended on a Republican Congress that refused to ask a single question."
"That era ends in January," he declared. "Jim Himes, Robert Garcia, and Jamie Raskin, and every other Democratic committee chair, has the receipts, and soon they'll have the gavels and subpoena power. Trump's cronies are already lawyering up. They should be. Accountability is coming for all of them."
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), who could become speaker if Democrats reclaim the chamber, made clear in an interview with The Associated Press published on Saturday that "we are going to hold the crooks accountable," and "we haven’t ruled anything out," including impeachment.
While some elected Democrats and political commentators have argued that impeaching Trump a historic third time wouldn't be a good use of the party's time—particularly as the Senate acquitted him in both of the previous cases—Jeffries' comments came just days after Congressman Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.), who is retiring after this term, introduced over two dozen more articles of impeachment against the president.
Meanwhile, Richard Painter, a University of Minnesota law professor who served as the White House ethics lawyer under former President George W. Bush, told The New York Times on Sunday that the use of federal funds for the ads could be "an impeachable offense."
"This is very dangerous," Painter said. "We do not allow government-sponsored propaganda in the United States."
This article has been updated with reporting from Axios.
Keep ReadingShow Less
If Democrats Win Control of Congress in the Midterms, Will They Impeach Trump a Third Time?
"It's about setting a standard, and the Democrats can impeach, to uphold constitutional values, and at the same time, have a first-hundred-day agenda that deals with the cost of living," said Rep. Ro Khanna.
Sep 27, 2026
With the US midterm elections less than six weeks away and Republicans' congressional majorities at risk, both GOP leaders and Democrats are discussing the possibility that a Democratic-controlled Congress could impeach President Donald Trump a historic third time.
"They say they’re not going to, but we know they will—they'll do a third impeachment of President Trump," House Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) said of Democrats during a Sunday radio interview. "But that's just part of it. They're going to investigate the first family, they're going to investigate Cabinet secretaries."
In fact, Democratic leaders are not denying another potential impeachment effort targeting someone who has been condemned by a range of critics as "the most openly corrupt president in American history."
During an interview with The Associated Press published on Saturday, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), who could become speaker if Democrats reclaim the lower chamber, signaled that impeachment is on the table—and not just for Trump.
"We haven't ruled anything out... and we haven't ruled anything in," he said. "If folks have been stealing from the American people, shortchanging the American people, or screwing over the American people... we are going to hold the crooks accountable."
Jeffries and other Democrats "are preparing a vast oversight agenda" that is "as robust as it is daunting, spanning several House committees," the AP reported. "With majority power comes bigger budgets and staff, and the ability to investigate, subpoena, and potentially course-correct what the Democrats say are widespread corruption and abuses of power."
Annual financial disclosures released this summer show that Trump pocketed at least $2.2 billion—over half of it from his family’s cryptocurrency grift—during his first year back in office, and his stock trades since then have continued to generate alarm.
Trump's deployment of federal immigration agents to various US communities to abuse the rights of US citizens and immigrants alike as well as his illegal war on Iran—with its the resulting affordability crisis—have also fueled calls for impeachment.
Responding to suggestions from some that another impeachment wouldn't be a good use of Democrats' time, Congressman Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), a potential 2028 presidential candidate, said during a Sunday appearance on NBC News' "Meet the Press" that "it's not about Donald Trump," who will be a lame duck and "increasingly irrelevant."
"The point is to stand up for the Constitution," Khanna explained. "Impeachment says that you can't get into an illegal war in Iran without constitutional approval. Impeachment says that you can't just start firing federal employees... in defiance of what Congress says. Impeachment says you can't do deals with foreign governments to allegedly enrich your own family."
"It's about setting a standard, and the Democrats can impeach, to uphold constitutional values, and at the same time, have a first-hundred-day agenda that deals with the cost of living," he added, pointing to issues such as free childcare, raising the minimum wage, and taxing billionaires. "We can do both."
Democrats have unveiled various articles of impeachment against Trump since his return to the White House last year. On Thursday, Congressman Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.), who is retiring after this term, introduced 26 more, including for alleged abuses of power, violations of his oath of office, and corrupt use of the pardon authority.
"Trump is clearly the most impeachable president our country has ever endured," said Cohen, a member of the House Judiciary Committee. "His continued presence in office is a danger to our democracy. That the sycophantic Republican majority in Congress is derelict in its duty does not mean that I must abandon my responsibilities."
Cohen stressed that "I took an independent oath to support and defend the Constitution. That commitment compels me to introduce this resolution today. When historians write about this period, and our constituents ask who stood up to President Trump's lawlessness, this resolution is the answer."
The House initially impeached Trump for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress in December 2019. After his supporters stormed the US Capitol on January 6, 2021, he became the first president to be impeached twice. However, the Senate acquitted him in both cases.
Keep ReadingShow Less
What Do We Do About Trump? Remove Him!
No Kings is an historical descriptive designed to engage our intellect, but it asks nothing. It demands nothing. It, like media editorials, sounds an alarm but an alarm is endless without a call. What’s missing is a bold call for removal.
Sep 26, 2026
We’re nearly two years into President Donald Trump’s second term in office—his first where his fascist dreams took flight—and I’m not the only one to notice. Millions of people in groups as large as city blocks, and as tiny as a corner in a village without a traffic light, have gathered to protest under the banner, No Kings.
Its success was in bringing together disparate groups of people. At some I had the impression that out of thousands of people, no two had a similar political orientation. That’s the good part. It’s also a weakness.
At the same time, and now with increasing regularity, respected media (from The New York Times down to those that take their lead from it) editorialize in stark terms against the administration. Editorials read like a list of grievances, not unlike the Declaration of Independence. But unlike the Declaration, they lack a political message.
Fascism is not a throwaway word. Trump told people he was returning the nation to its “rightful place,” and pretty soon hastily organized federal police ganged up on people and shot them in the streets.
No Kings is an historical descriptive designed to engage our intellect, but it asks nothing. It demands nothing. It, like media editorials, sounds an alarm but an alarm is endless without a call. What’s missing is a bold call for removal. Remove him!
By what mechanism? Do I mean by impeachment? No, I do not. Do I mean by the 25th Amendment? No, I do not. Do I mean by the Democratic Party? No, I do not.
It is not up to those that call for removal to state or provide a mechanism. The call signifies itself. If the causes are alarming enough—and I suggest we are presently living under a fascist regime—there is nothing left to be done but what was once done.
The Declaration of Independence keenly notes that people “are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.” Before enumerating the greatness of the causes for separation, the Declaration expresses a sentiment that Washington’s gatekeepers would have us forget: that it is the right and the duty of the people to throw off such government as is reducing them to despotism.
The gulf must be acknowledged between what the leaders of a country in 1776 declared and did, and what, not the leaders, but the followers of a country in 2026 are prepared and able to do. The situations cannot be compared, but they can be instructive.
The Declaration is a radical document. It did not wait for the government of the mother country to have a change of heart, as we wait for the midterm elections. Suffering what we must.
What is our cause for alarm? And should it mark the time for a call for removal? Even if it only articulates what we want?
Fascism is not a throwaway word. Trump told people he was returning the nation to its “rightful place,” and pretty soon hastily organized federal police ganged up on people and shot them in the streets. They’re coming for people. They may not have come yet for you and me.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Love It': Trump Reflects on Why the Democrats Won't Put Up a Fight
'They do nothing. That’s normalizing me before the American people. How wonderful.”
Sep 19, 2026
“I was in the Oval Office when I got a call with the results of the September 15th House Impeachment vote. Unbelievable. Of course, my Repubs all voted against this persecution, but 47 of the Dems, including their leaders—Hakeem Jeffries, Nancy Pelosi, and Richard Neal from Democratic Massachusetts—voted PRESENT! That is really a vote against Impeachment and makes them ON MY SIDE! My aide read their lame excuse, saying that ‘serious work’ had to be done, including ‘comprehensive investigations, reviews of thousands of documents … Congressional hearings, sustained public organizing … to build a broad national consensus.’ That’s why they voted PRESENT!”
“But they were really AWOL. The polls show well over a majority of people want me FIRED. The Dems are really cowards. All they had to do was to use my scores of Executive Orders, which they claim were illegal and unconstitutional. Plus, repeat my widely reported statements that I can do whatever I want as President and what they have condemned as my outlaw actions here and abroad. I’m the only evidence they need.”
“Look at crazy Nancy. She impeached me twice, once on the Hunter Biden fabrication and once on the January 6 peaceful demonstration. Now she refuses to vote for Impeachment for the far wilder and more destructive things she has accused me of doing daily. Go figure.”
“Am I just lucky, or are they afraid of my going after them by name? Fear is a coward’s fuel, someone once told me.”
“Thankfully captive to their corporate consultants—look all I’ve done for their corporate clients—cut taxes, cut regulation, subsidized them—the Dems are helpless. They’ve let me normalize me in every way. They look at how I MAGA every day, call them traitors and lunatics and fanatics, demand the execution of six senators, and they say, ‘There he goes again.’ Then they do nothing. That’s normalizing me before the American people. How wonderful.”
“They are sooo out of it. They have no slogans, unless you are stupid enough to think ‘Build Back Better’ does anything other than bring us more of Sleepy Joe. They have no nicknames to counter my torrent of nicknames, even though my name lends itself to many.”
“Examples: I said, ‘Drain the Swamp.’ They could have said, unfairly, ‘Close the Trump Dump.’ I expected them to call me ‘Dictator Donald,’ ‘Trump the Chump,’ ‘Tyrant Trump,’ ‘The Trump Pump’ (because of gas prices), ‘The Trump Sump’ (their nutty charges of de-regulated air pollution) or ‘Dangerous Donald.’ Or, taking off from my naming things after me, have you heard words like Hurricane Trump, Tornado Trump, or Trump’s Dark Ages? We’ve laid off firefighters. But no giant wildfire has yet been given my name.”
“What really stuns me is how they have normalized what they call my greed. I had to disclose my finances for 2025 when I made $2.2 billion working out of my Trump House position. Again, a few words of rage, but no Dems broke it down to $1.1 million an hour, over a 40-hour week, as I proudly keep the federal minimum wage at $7.25 per hour for our business friends. ‘Billions’ go in one ear and out the other. But $1.1 million an hour hits home! They blew it again.”
“To my praise of our brave, lethal soldiers, the Dems could have regularly called me a serial draft dodger during the Vietnam War. Silence. They do once in a while call me a ‘convicted felon,’ but it’s a throwaway line. Then they vote in Congress for an even bigger unaudited Pentagon budget.”
“In an anger fit, I threaten to bomb like hell our ally Oman; they call me ‘frustrated’ over the war with Iran. How kind of them.”
“I pardoned over 600 violent convicted criminals over January 6. Over a hundred of them have already committed serious crimes since their release from jail. The Dems just say I’m abusing my pardon powers. Don’t they remember what damage the first Bush’s campaign did to Dukakis in 1988, blaming him for the crime Willie Horton committed after his early release from jail?”
“Am I just lucky, or are they afraid of my going after them by name? Fear is a coward’s fuel, someone once told me.”
“I campaigned on making the US dollar stronger than ever. Now it is weaker than in many years against other currencies. From the Democrats—silence.”
“I call them socialists and communists. They don’t call me fascist—just authoritarian. How feeble can you get? Such people are often called ‘useful idiots’”
“I call global warming and possible AI extinction ‘hoaxes,’ along with labeling wind power and solar energy ‘scams.’ ‘There he goes again,’ is the shoulder-shrugging reaction. Love it.”
“Were I a churchgoer, I would thank Almighty GOD for blessing me. With such enemies, who needs friends?”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Nader Rips 'Feeble, Weak, Cowardly' Democrats for Eschewing Trump Impeachment
"The Democrats and electorally frightened Republicans pushed Richard Nixon out in 1974 for far, far lesser transgressions than those committed by Trump in a week."
Sep 17, 2026
As Democrats campaign for the November midterm elections after helping kill the latest congressional effort to impeach President Donald Trump, progressive consumer advocate and four-time presidential candidate Ralph Nader this week renewed attacks on the party's leadership for abandoning their constitutional responsibility to hold the president accountable.
In a September 14 essay published by Current Affairs, Nader argued that Democratic leaders have effectively given up on impeachment even as Trump's second administration faces continuing allegations of executive overreach and misconduct.
"The chronic prevaricator and delusionist Donald J. Trump knows that the worse his outlaw actions become, the less likely the Democrats in Congress are to impeach him," the Public Citizen co-founder wrote. "The massive number of blatant, impeachable acts by the lawless, corrupt, violent, systemically racist, unstable, dangerous tyrant increases by the day."
"The American public knows it," Nader continued. "The majority of Americans favor impeaching Trump. Among Democrats, it’s 84% in favor, as well as a majority of independents. Polling even shows that most Americans think Trump is a 'dangerous dictator whose power should be limited before he destroys American democracy.'"
Yet, "when asked about impeachment, House minority leader Hakeem Jeffries [D-NY] replied: 'We haven’t ruled anything in and we haven’t ruled anything out,'" he noted. "What? Every day, the mega-arsonist is burning down our republic and its Constitution, with tens of millions of Americans suffering and endangered. Yet Jeffries has been noncommittal about whether Democrats would pursue impeachment even if they had a congressional majority."
In a column republished by Common Dreams earlier this month, Nader wrote, “What must Tyrant Trump be thinking about his opponents’ feeble, weak, cowardly responses to his daily torrent of serious, impeachable offenses?”
“Even his egomaniacal narcissism cannot fully explain his amazing good luck," he opined.
Earlier this week, the House of Representatives voted 232-147 to table an impeachment resolution introduced by Rep. Al Green (D-Texas), effectively ending the measure's consideration. Eighteen Democrats joined Republicans in voting to table it, while 46 Democrats—including House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries—voted “present.”
Green's resolution accused Trump of high crimes and misdemeanors arising from the administration's deadly anti-immigrant crackdown, including alleged violations of civil liberties and due process. Green said before the vote that the Constitution contains no provision requiring Congress to wait before confronting impeachable conduct.
Democratic leaders have attempted to justify their decision not to support Green's resolution by arguing that impeachment requires a substantial investigative record, hearings, witness testimony, and document review. Jeffries, along with Democratic leaders Katherine Clark of Massachusetts—the House minority whip—and Pete Aguilar of California, the House Democratic Caucus chair, said they would vote “present” because “none of that serious work has been done," as they jointly explained.
Nader rejects that reasoning. In Current Affairs, he argued that saying Democrats “don’t have the votes” misses the purpose of a sustained impeachment campaign, which he described as a way of building public pressure and organizing voters.
“Impeachment is a mobilizer for get-out-the-vote efforts," he wrote, as well as "for educating and energizing the people back home."
Trump has already been impeached twice by the House, although the Senate failed to convict him either time. No other president has been impeached multiple times. Nader has pointed out that Trump's high crimes and misdemeanors are more grave than those for which then-President Nixon resigned from office in 1974 rather than face impeachment, and that Democrats' fear of the consequences for impeaching Trump again is no excuse for their cowardice.
"The Democrats and electorally frightened Republicans pushed Richard Nixon out in 1974 for far, far lesser transgressions than those committed by Trump in a week," he wrote.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Did Johnson Just Adjourn Congress for 7 Weeks to Avoid Massie's Impeachment Articles Against Hegseth?
"These people are such incredible cowards," said Rep. Pramila Jayapal. "They know that what Pete Hegseth has done, his role in driving us into the war, is absolutely wrong."
Sep 16, 2026
US House Speaker Mike Johnson said Wednesday that with seven weeks to go until Election Day, it was time for lawmakers to "go home to their districts and make the case to the American people"—a day earlier than scheduled.
But with the US public overwhelmingly disapproving of President Donald Trump's war in Iran and demanding accountability for his bombing of boats in the Caribbean Sea, Republicans may be headed home hoping their constituents don't ask questions about those issues, particularly as Johnson (R-La.) faced accusations of ending the House session early in order to avoid a vote pertaining to them.
Johnson announced the early adjournment a day after Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) filed articles of impeachment against Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, arguing in the resolution that Hegseth violated the War Powers Resolution of 1973 by initiating strikes against Iran without authorization from Congress and continuing to attack the country past the 60-day mark set by the law.
He also accused Hegseth of “ignoring laws that minimize civilian casualties," citing an attack that killed more than 150 children and teachers at a school in Minab, Iran, and of conducting an illegal campaign of extrajudicial killings by overseeing dozens of boat bombings in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific Ocean that have killed at least 230 people since last September.
Massie's resolution was privileged, meaning it had to be taken up by the House within two legislative days.
With House members now on their way back to their districts to campaign ahead of the midterm elections, lawmakers will be unable to pursue the impeachment effort until at least November. They are not set to return to Capitol Hill until after Americans vote on November 3.
"These people are such incredible cowards," said Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) of her Republican colleagues. "They know that what Pete Hegseth has done, his role in driving us into the war, is absolutely wrong."
Republicans just CANCELLED votes for tomorrow, the last legislative day before the midterms.
Why? Because they’re afraid we’ll impeach Pete Hegseth. What a bunch of cowards. pic.twitter.com/vTTfNNtpmP
— Rep. Pramila Jayapal (@RepJayapal) September 16, 2026
Johnson derided Massie's resolution as "ridiculous" and "a publicity stunt by someone who wants attention."
“It’s a publicity stunt by someone who wants attention," he said. "It will immediately be tabled, of course, but we probably won’t do that today. We’ll probably do it when we come back. But it’s a stunt. Secretary Hegseth has done an extraordinary job at the Department of War. We’re in the middle of international conflicts right now, and we should not be playing games with national security."
A motion to table a resolution immediately kills the measure without debate.
"We're calling off Congress," said Massie on the House floor Wednesday, "and we're in the majority... I would implore all of us to take it up with the leadership. Why are we going to be denied a debate on whether there should be an impeachment or not?"
Massie: We’re in the majority. Why are we whining about The Save Act? We won the elections. Why are we saying the elections were stolen if we won them all? pic.twitter.com/sab4GGViw3
— Acyn (@Acyn) September 16, 2026
Public polling suggests most Americans likely do not think Hegseth and other top officials are doing an "extraordinary job" regarding the war in Iran, as Johnson claimed.
A survey in late July showed that nearly two-thirds of Americans felt the war was not worth fighting, and an Associated Press poll in June found the same percentage of respondents disapproved of Trump's handling of issues concerning Iran. The war has sent oil and gas prices skyrocketing, and a majority of voters told Reuters/Ipsos in April that they blamed the Trump administration.
Massie noted that Johnson's maneuver would make it harder for supporters of a discharge petition to force a vote on the Epstein Files Transparency Act to gather the 218 signatures they need.
"I thought we’re supposed to be running a government here. Speaker Mike Johnson just sent the House home. Why? Because Rep. Thomas Massie filed articles of impeachment against Pete Hegseth," said Rep. Mike Levin (D-Calif.). "Speaker Johnson, the WEAKEST speaker of all time, was so scared that we had the votes to impeach Hegseth and hold him accountable that he’s sending us all home to make sure it doesn’t happen."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Massie Files Impeachment Articles Against Hegseth for Illegal Iran War, Boat Murders
"By directing the Department of Defense in a manner that foreseeably dismantled the safeguards necessary to distinguish civilian objects from military objectives, Secretary Hegseth thereby effected the murder of civilians."
Sep 15, 2026
Rep. Thomas Massie on Tuesday filed articles of impeachment against US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth for his roles in waging an illegal war against Iran and conducting a spree of boat bombings that many human rights groups and international law experts consider acts of murder.
Massie (R-Ky.), who earlier this year lost a Republican primary election to a challenger endorsed by President Donald Trump, accused Hegseth of a wide variety of misconduct across a set of eight impeachment articles.
The most prominent allegedly impeachable conduct highlighted by Massie involves the Iran War, which was launched in February without any congressional authorization.
Massie argued that, in carrying out the war, Hegseth violated the War Powers Resolution of 1973, which specified that the president cannot send the US military into combat operations absent "a declaration of war, specific statutory authorization, or a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces."
Congress, Massie noted, did not declare war against Iran, nor enact "any specific statutory authorization" for the use of force against the country. Additionally, Massie wrote, "no national emergency had been created by an attack by the Islamic Republic of Iran upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces."
Massie said that Hegseth "nevertheless knowingly executed and implemented the order to commence such hostilities," which he described as an abuse of his powers.
The GOP lawmaker argued in a separate impeachment article that Hegseth further violated the law by ignoring a war powers resolution passed earlier this year by both chambers of the US Congress that compelled him to end hostilities with Iran.
In a fourth impeachment article, Hegseth is accused of "ignoring laws that minimize civilian casualties" by tearing up rules of engagement that the defense secretary has openly derided as "stupid."
It was this recklessness, Massie alleged, that led to the deadly US attack on the Shajareh Tayyebeh Elementary School in the city of Minab, Iran, which killed more than 150 schoolchildren and dozen teachers.
"By directing the Department of Defense in a manner that foreseeably dismantled the safeguards necessary to distinguish civilian objects from military objectives," Massie wrote, "Secretary Hegseth thereby effected the murder of civilians and abused the trust of the men and women under his command by requiring them to conduct military operations within a targeting and legal-review system that he had deliberately degraded."
The fifth article of impeachment accuses Hegseth of conducting an unlawful campaign of extrajudicial killings by bombing alleged drug-trafficking vessels in international waters.
Massie said that this campaign sentenced people to death merely on the suspicion of criminal conduct, "without judicial process, without congressional authorization, and without establishing a lawful basis for treating such persons or vessels as military targets."
The result of this, Massie continued, is that Hegseth has anointed himself "the roles of judge, jury, and executioner and asserted a unilateral power to determine who may live and who may die."
"Such a power is foreign to the rule of law," Massie continued, "repugnant to the legal traditions and fundamental values of the United States and the Western world, and contrary to United States law and customary international law."
At least 225 people so far have been killed because of the boat bombing spree.
Other articles of impeachment accuse Hegseth of attempting to suppress free speech by threatening to court marshal Sen. Mark Kelly (R-Ariz.) after he reminded US military personnel that they should not carry out illegal orders; of illegally kidnapping a foreign leader by having the military abduct Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro; and of launching unauthorized combat operations in Yemen.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump's DHS Is Preparing To Engage In Voter Suppression and Intimidation
The Trump administration is desperate. They will do anything—regardless of how illegal or unconstitutional—to subvert the will of people and remain in power. Yet, with the stakes so high, we cannot allow ourselves to be intimidated.
Sep 06, 2026
On September 1, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin told reporters that Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents could be deployed to polling sites across the country. He remarked, “The only reason why we would be at polling places is if there is a threat to that polling place or we’re serving a warrant on someone that we have been actively tracking down.” Later that day, DHS doubled down on this point. In a statement, the department said that, while ICE is not “planning operations targeting polling locations,” the agency conducts “intelligence-driven targeted enforcement, and if an active public safety threat endangered a polling location, they may be arrested as a result of that targeted enforcement action.”
Missing from those statements, however, is that this “intelligence-driven” enforcement would be based on DHS’ explicit and baseless efforts to amplify President Donald Trump’s election fraud lies. In July, Mullin said, “We will scrub all election records, looking for illegal aliens and those who are ineligible to vote, including those that somehow voted, yet they were deceased.” At the time, he also threatened to withhold federal election-related aid to states that failed to comply with the Trump administration’s probe.
That same month, DHS issued a statement alleging that over 250,000 noncitizens are illegally registered to vote in California, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Nevada. According to DHS employees and officials familiar with the situation, those numbers were wildly inflated. For instance, while DHS claimed that there were close to 16,000 noncitizens on Nevada’s voter list, it only managed to provide state officials with information on 185 voters. DHS failed to disclose what data they used to match those voters to noncitizens.
This is unsurprising. As the Brennan Center for Justice reports, empirical studies, state investigations, and work by journalists have consistently found that cases of noncitizens voting are exceptionally rare. Moreover, claims made by Republicans and their media allies to the contrary have been repeatedly shown to be false.
These extreme measures also point to just how afraid Trump is ahead of the midterms.
The reality is that Mullin’s DHS is actively trying to fabricate a pretext for ICE to be present at polling sites, regardless of how illegal it would be. 18 U.S.C § 592 directly prohibits any deployment of military personnel or “armed” federal agents “at any place where a general or special election is held.”
To that end, Mullin is exploiting every resource available to him. On September 1, Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) reportedly launched “a coordinated criminal voter fraud surge initiative to pursue investigative leads, conduct field interviews, and support timely prosecutorial review,” according to a federal guidance reviewed by CNN. HSI offices in Washington, Wisconsin, Missouri, Georgia, California, Pennsylvania, Nevada, New York, and Connecticut are expected to take investigative action from early September through mid October. While HSI ordinarily focuses on crimes like human trafficking, drug smuggling, and child exploitation, it has been repeatedly tasked with investigating voter fraud in Trump’s second term. In February, the White House directed the agency to determine if any naturalized citizens voted or registered to vote prior to becoming citizens. HSI has also been directed to coordinate with US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) to issue removal proceedings for noncitizens suspected of or linked to voter fraud.
ICE is also currently seeking vendors to handle “and secure delivery of publicly available voter registration files and voter history files to support Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) fraud detection and data segmentation activities.” To be clear, as J.B. Branch, the director of Federal AI Governance and Technology Policy for Public Citizen’s Congress Watch division, notes, “Publicly available does not mean ‘fair game’ for unlimited government surveillance.” He continues, “There is an enormous difference between a voter record sitting in a state database and the federal government aggregating millions of those records, cross-referencing them against other government and commercial databases, and using algorithms to generate investigative leads about individual Americans.”
That contract would be worth between $2-5 million according to an acquisition forecast document published by DHS on August 31.
This latest data grab is one of several coordinated efforts by ICE and the Trump administration to undermine voter eligibility. A procurement record from July indicated that ICE planned to pay Thomson Reuters, a major data broker firm, $125 million for access to its CLEAR database, which includes “peoples’ names, addresses, Social Security numbers, ethnicity, social media posts, and geolocation information,” to help the agency investigate voter fraud.
On September 3, the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC), along with individual voters, filed a motion asking a federal judge to block the Trump administration’s plan to compile state-by-state lists of people it deemed eligible to vote—“State Citizenship Lists”—and publish them online. The basis for this project is an executive order Trump signed on March 31. While a lower court blocked several key provisions from going into effect in 33 states and Washington, DC, the Supreme Court stayed the injunction in August, thus paving the way for the plan to be implemented nationwide. This, despite the fact that the Constitution clearly dictates that only states and Congress—not the president—have the power to control US elections.
All of these escalating efforts so close to the midterms point to one undeniable truth: DHS is readying itself, on behalf of the Trump administration, to engage in nationwide voter suppression and intimidation this November.
These extreme measures also point to just how afraid Trump is ahead of the midterms. On August 21, he told supporters that if Republicans lose, he will be impeached. Several Republicans, including House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-LA), have recently echoed this "warning."
And they are right to be afraid. Democrats are favored to take back control of the House and possibly win control of the Senate. If this happens, Congress should immediately impeach Trump and put him, as well as everyone who enabled his corrupt administration, on trial for their many crimes.
The Trump administration is desperate. They will do anything—regardless of how illegal or unconstitutional—to subvert the will of people and remain in power. Yet, with the stakes so high, we cannot allow ourselves to be intimidated. This country cannot afford two more years of unchecked Trumpism. While there is still time, we must continue to advocate for progressive candidates as well as calling out and challenging every effort by Republicans to steal our elections.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Tyrant Trump Is Lucky in the Cowardice of His Enemies
Democratic leadership's refusal to pursue impeachment signals to Trump that he has two-plus unchallenged years to ravage the lives and livelihoods of millions of people here and abroad.
Sep 05, 2026
What must Tyrant Trump be thinking about his opponents’ feeble, weak, cowardly responses to his daily torrent of serious, impeachable offenses? Even his egomaniacal narcissism cannot fully explain his amazing good luck.
Start with the House’s two impeachments of Donald Trump, while Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) was Speaker, in 2019 and 2021. The first was over Trump’s trying to bribe or extort Ukraine into going after Hunter Biden—an investor and Board member of a Ukrainian business. Pelosi knew there was no chance of getting the required two-thirds vote required for Senate conviction, but went for the House vote anyway. At the same time, Pelosi declined to pursue numerous other "slam dunk" kitchen table impeachable offenses we and others presented to her. (See Congressional Record, December 18, 2019).
In 2021, after the January 6 Trump-incited violent insurrection involving attack on the Capitol and Trump’s effort to overturn the 2020 election, Pelosi did the same thing: impeached Trump in the House. Unfortunately, the Senate fell short of the two-thirds vote required to convict and remove him from office because most Senate Republicans cowardly failed to hold Trump accountable for these treacherous actions.
Come the Second Trump term, after criminal indictments, a felony conviction, and civil litigation brought by women accusing him of sexual misconduct, on Day One, January 20, 2025, Trump began issuing illegal executive orders. Many of them were impeachable offenses as he boastfully implemented them, with the aid of Elon Musk’s criminal enterprise—DOGE.
Trump continues to commit “high crimes and misdemeanors,” brazenly, taunting the so-called leaders of the Democrats by saying, “This is just the beginning."
Trump probably anticipated a much more vigorous impeachment drive by the Democrats, even though they were in the minority in the House. His luck continued. The Democratic Party’s so-called leadership decided against this excellent galvanizing get-out-the-vote initiative for their voters, 90% of whom wanted Impeachment yesterday. Rep. Hakeem Jeffries’ (D-Calif.) staffers told inquirers that they didn’t know how it would play out.
Jeffries himself told a reporter that “he didn’t want to get ahead of that discussion.” What? Ahead of 90% of his party’s voters!!?
Trump, who called for the execution of six Congressional Democrats for reminding soldiers of their obligation not to obey an illegal order that is contrary to the Constitution or the laws of the United States (as in described in the Army Manual for Courts-Martial [MCM] along with international law) must be privately dumbfounded. The more violently extreme and erratic he gets, the less interested the Democratic Party is in an Impeachment Drive. (See “Statement from Medical Professionals” in the April 30, 2026 Congressional Record.)
Rep. Al Green (D-Texas) introduced H. Res. 537 on June 24, 2025. It was treated as a privileged impeachment resolution and Rep. Al Green took to the floor for debate and a prompt vote to educate the public about the necessity of ordering Trump, “You’re Fired.” Jeffries and his cohorts opposed it! Trump must have been stunned.
After all, people and their children are feeling, seeing, and hurting in the tens of millions from Trump’s wrecking, endangering, and weakening America. (See my column last week, “Open Letter to Representative Hakeem Jeffries.”)
Under the Jeffries and Schumer anti-impeachment bans, thus agreeing with Trump, the news media has little activity to cover in Washington, DC. Also, it’s not keeping up with the civic activity around the country demanding Impeachment. (See nader.org/impeachment.)
More puzzling is the refusal of editorial writers to urge impeachment. They regularly make the Impeachment case against Trump but decline to tell their readers the obvious conclusion: that the House should begin an impeachment inquiry and approve articles of impeachment. Congress also has an important role under Section 4 of the 25th Amendment. Congress, by statute, may appoint itself—in lieu of the principal officers of the Executive Branch—to determine whether the president is disabled and should be temporarily removed until the disability lapses.
Despite the many detailed editorials in The New York Times, such as one showing how Trump is harming the health of the American people and another “Autocracy Index” titled “Trump’s Election Meddling Erodes Our Democracy,” the editorial writers limped off their pages without answering the alarmed readers’ question, “What do you want done about this?”
The Times Sunday columnist Jamelle Bouie relentlessly documents Trump’s impeachable crimes, but not once has he moved to recommend this Republic-saving mechanism given to us by our Founding Fathers. Same for other Times columnists, Michelle Goldberg and EJ Dionne.
The Times’ reluctance to employ the “I” word is typical of the mass media. What about the independent progressive media? The Nation, In These Times, Progressive Magazine, and The Washington Monthly have all mentioned impeachment, but few have made a sustained, prominent editorial demand for an impeachment drive. Also, they do not report on the rising citizen activities behind Impeachment around the country.
Meanwhile, Trump continues to commit “high crimes and misdemeanors,” brazenly, taunting the so-called leaders of the Democrats by saying, “This is just the beginning.” He provides the Democrats with daily evidence that should prompt SHADOW CONGRESSIONAL HEARINGS organized by Democratic members of Congress and designed to build a public factual record. Such hearings could attract substantial media attention, particularly if they focused on specific alleged abuses and featured affected witnesses, legal experts, and former public officials. Nonetheless, Jeffries and Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) block any shadow hearings by dissenting House members.
What explains this historic cowardice? Is it fear of Trump retaliating? Is it smugness over Trump’s low polls, and a belief they can win in November by lying low, raising AIPAC and corporate campaign money, mumbling about affordability, and avoiding heavily poll-favored Pledges or Contracts for the American people showing specifically what they stand for? (See, Compact for American Workers and Robert Reich’s 10-Point Plan To Make America Affordable.) Or is it just trying to avoid Trump accusing the Democrats of having done similar things when they controlled the White House, such as starting or backing unconstitutional wars?
Whatever explains their inhibitions, the result is to signal to Trump that he has two-plus unchallenged years to ravage the lives and livelihoods of millions of people here and abroad, oppose preparedness for climate and pandemic catastrophes, to suppress renewable energy and favor omnicidal fossil-fuel combustion, invade our cities with his stormtroopers, and treat children with unsurpassed cruelty. It also leaves unanswered serious questions about his personal financial enrichment while in office—estimated to be $1.1 million per working hour. All this invites the demand that they resign. The people need fresh, stand-up leaders to take over the Democratic leadership and its party committees. (See RootsAction: “Tell Democrats in Congress to Insist That Schumer and Jeffries Step Aside”.)
The Democrats and electorally frightened Republicans pushed Richard Nixon out in 1974 for far, far lesser transgressions than those committed by Trump in a week.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Impeach Pete Hegseth. Do It Today.
Hegseth is the most incompetent person in the Trump regime — with the exception of Trump himself — and a clear and present danger to the security of the United States and the world.
Sep 03, 2026
The latest casualty of Pete Hegseth’s disastrous tenure as Secretary of “War” is Dan Driscoll, who resigned Monday as Secretary of the Army after repeatedly clashing with the Heg.
Driscoll isn’t a liberal in lion’s clothing. He’s an old friend of JD Vance from Yale Law days. He resigned because of his concerns that Hegseth is damaging the Army’s efforts to modernize and adapt to the 21st century battlefield environment — where drone warfare is becoming increasingly important — by firing or pushing out leaders spearheading those efforts.
A defense official in Europe told CNN that even though Hegseth talks about technology reform, he’s focusing instead on “muscles, dudes in dresses, testosterone.”
Hegseth’s tenure has been disastrous from the moment he walked into the Pentagon. Even if Trump were capable of hearing sound advice, Hegseth hasn’t come close to giving it to him. Instead, he’s been pursuing grievances about DEI, promoting testosterone, and denigrating or firing women and Black officers.
The Army now has no Senate-confirmed secretary or chief of staff (George’s replacement, General Christopher LaNeve, so far doesn’t have the votes to be confirmed).
The Iran war, meanwhile, is requiring the ongoing deployment of 19 warships, air-defense units, fighter squadrons and paratroopers across the region — straining service members and their families and creating a maintenance backlog that could take years to unwind, according to The Wall Street Journal.
The Washington Post reports that multiple senior military leaders — those still left, that is — have warned Hegseth that the United States cannot indefinitely extend military operations against Iran. Even the chief of naval operations, Admiral Daryl Caudle (who campaigned for the job by signaling agreement with Hegseth’s culture-war obsessions), told Hegseth that the Navy cannot “sustain its current level of support for the Iran conflict because there is no anticipated end date.”
Hegseth’s response? He castigated the media for revealing classified information.
I’ve known many other defense secretaries, starting with Cap Weinberger, who served as defense secretary under Reagan. I can say without fear of contradiction that Pete Hegseth is the stupidest and least qualified of them all.
Hegseth’s incompetence and determination to suck up to Trump helped launch the war against Iran in the first place.
Among the regime’s senior officials, Hegseth was the only one who supported Trump’s fantasies of a quick victory. Marco Rubio was against the war as was JD Vance; even then–Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard told Trump that a war with Iran was not winnable.
Since then, Hegseth has lied his way through more than six months of Pentagon and Iran war mayhem.
At a press briefing in March, Hegseth complained about a CNN report that the Trump administration had underestimated Iran’s ability to disrupt global oil traffic by closing the Strait of Hormuz. “Patently ridiculous,” Hegseth told reporters, adding — even as the strait’s blockage was proving to be Iran’s most powerful leverage in the war — we “don’t need to worry about it.” It was a false and insulting claim to an American public that deserved to know what the Trump regime was planning to do about soaring prices at the gas pump, directly due to that blockage.
He also denied that the U.S. bombed the school where some 175 children were killed — a claim belied by mounting evidence that the U.S. did bomb the school. Hegseth’s further insistence that the U.S. “never targets civilians” was refuted by the U.S. military’s killing of over 200 people on small boats in the Caribbean without evidence they were “narcoterrorists” rather than civilians.
Hegseth then lied about the severity of Iranian attacks on U.S. bases in the Persian Gulf that disrupted logistical support for American forces, leading to the deprivations suffered by the crew of the aircraft carrier the USS Abraham Lincoln.
Hegseth evidently believes that his job is to cheerlead and defend Trump with absurd claims like “We didn’t start this war, but under President Trump we’re finishing it” and “America is winning decisively, devastatingly, and without mercy” and “we will show no quarter for our enemies.” (“No quarter” means kill everyone and take no prisoners, which is a war crime.)
In the days leading up to the U.S. attack on Iran, Hegseth spent his time criticizing “wokeness” at American universities and forcing Scouting America to abandon programs aimed at promoting diversity.
Last year, he didn’t just mistakenly share the military’s plans with the editor of The Atlantic; we now know he shared them with a second Signal group, including his wife, brother, and personal lawyer.
John Ullyot, who resigned as Pentagon spokesman, said Hegseth had brought “total chaos” to the Pentagon and that the Pentagon “is in disarray under Hegseth’s leadership.”
Hegseth dismisses war crimes, pooh-poohs the rules of engagement, and projects unequivocal belligerence at a time when the United States is rapidly losing whatever moral standing it once had in the world.
Pete Hegseth is the most incompetent person in the Trump regime — with the exception of Trump himself — and a clear and present danger to the security of the United States and the world. If Trump won’t fire him, Democrats should impeach him when (hopefully) they take over the House next January, and two-thirds of the Senate should convict him.
Keep ReadingShow Less
See More
Most Popular
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy