House torpedoes Rep. Al Green's effort to impeach Trump over Iran strikes
The House on Tuesday overwhelmingly torpedoed an effort by Rep. Al Green (D-Texas) to impeach President Trump over the U.S. strikes on Iran, underscoring how little appetite Democrats have to try and oust the president despite their frustration with the weekend attack.
The chamber voted 344-79 to table Green's resolution, which charges Trump with abuse of power. One hundred-twenty eight Democrats — including the caucus's top three leaders — voted with Republicans to table the measure, while 79 Democrats voted against the effort, pushing for the chamber to hold a vote on the resolution.
Green for months has sought to trigger a vote on impeaching Trump, slamming his handling of both foreign and domestic policy issues.
The congressman on Tuesday reupped that effort, filing and forcing a vote on a resolution accusing Trump of failing to seek authorization from Congress before striking three sites in Iran over the weekend, which Democrats have taken issue with.
'In his conduct of the office of President of the United States, Donald J. Trump, in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, abused the powers of the presidency when he disregarded the doctrine of separation of powers by usurping Congress's power to declare war and ordered the United States military to bomb another country without the constitutionally mandated congressional authorization or notice to Congress — cognizant of the fact that should another country's military bomb a facility within the United States of America, it would be a de facto declaration of war against the United States of America,' the impeachment resolution reads.
Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and other top Republicans have backed up the president, arguing that he had the authority to execute the strike through his Article II powers as commander-in-chief.
'Let me be clear and be as clear as possible: The strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities were clearly within President Trump's Article II powers as Commander in Chief,' Johnson, who previously practiced Constitutional law, said on Tuesday. 'It shouldn't even be in dispute.'
Despite that defense, however, Democrats — and some Republicans — have criticized Trump's strike, with some saying impeachment is warranted. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), who voted against tabling the resolution on Tuesday, said the strikes were grounds for impeachment over the weekend.
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), one of the most vocal advocates against U.S. involvement in Iran, meanwhile, wrote in a statement that the strikes were 'not Constitutional.' He is teaming up with Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) on a war powers resolution to prevent more U.S. intervention in Iran.
Top national security Democrats in the House have also introduced their own measure.
Following Tuesday's vote, the White House touted Trump's efforts in the Middle East.
'President Trump was able to quickly accomplish what no other President has been able to achieve – thanks to his 'peace through strength' leadership, Iran's nuclear program has been obliterated and a ceasefire has been agreed to. Eliminating the prospect of nuclear war is a non-partisan and unifying accomplishment that everyone should celebrate as a historic moment for United States, the Middle East, and the entire world,' White House assistant press secretary Taylor Rogers said in a statement to The Hill.
Updated at 3:48 p.m.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNN
13 minutes ago
- CNN
Takeaways from New York City's mayoral primary: Mamdani triggers a political earthquake – and Republicans rejoice too
Zohran Mamdani delivered a political earthquake Tuesday in New York City's Democratic mayoral primary, riding progressive demands for change in a city facing an affordability crisis to the brink of a stunning victory. Democratic voters rejected a scandal-plagued icon of the party's past, former Gov. Andrew Cuomo. Instead, they backed a 33-year-old democratic socialist who energized young voters and progressives with a campaign that could come to represent the first draft of a new playbook. 'I will fight for a city that works for you, that is affordable for you, that is safe for you,' Mamdani said in his celebratory speech just after midnight. 'We can be free and we can be fed. We can demand what we deserve,' he said. Mamdani's viral, go-anywhere, talk-to-anyone style of campaigning could send shockwaves through the Democratic Party nationally as its leaders and incumbents face calls from frustrated voters for authenticity and aggressiveness. Republicans, meanwhile, moved immediately to elevate Mamdani, seeing an opportunity to campaign against ideas they see as unpopular with swing voters nationally. The formal outcome won't be known until at least July 1, when New York City releases the initial ranked-choice results. But Mamdani held a clear lead Tuesday night, and Cuomo told supporters he had called Mamdani and conceded the primary. 'Tonight is his night. He deserved it. He won,' Cuomo said. Mamdani's upstart campaign had a lot to overcome — Cuomo's universal name recognition, massive financial backing, endorsements from party leaders and unions — and he acted like it. Some of his Democratic rivals portrayed his positions as pie-in-the-sky and impossible to pay for. Mamdani, though, sold his ideas as making life in the city easier to afford, building his campaign around an issue that ranks among the biggest reasons Democrats lost in the 2024 election. He sat for interviews with people that disagreed with him. He engaged in cross-endorsements with rivals, encouraging supporters to rank them highly as well on their ranked-choice ballots. He campaigned aggressively, including walking the length of Manhattan on Friday. 'New Yorkers deserve a Mayor they can see, hear, even yell at. The city is in the streets,' Mamdani said on X. Dan Pfeiffer, a former top aide to President Barack Obama, said on X that Democrats 'have a lot to learn' from Mamdani. 'What's happening in NYC is a blaringly loud message to those in the Dem establishment who still cling to old politics, recite focus-grouped talking points, and are too afraid to say what needs to be said,' he said. Republicans were also thrilled with Mamdani's performance. The House GOP's campaign arm, the National Republican Congressional Committee, issued a press release declaring Mamdani 'the new face' of the Democratic Party. 'Every vulnerable House Democrat will own him, and every Democrat running in a primary will fear him,' NRCC spokesman Mike Marinella said. Mamdani faced attacks from pro-Cuomo forces in the primary over what his opponents described as antisemitic comments, flagging Mamdani's sharp criticism of Israel and his defense of the phrase 'globalize the intifada.' He also ran on progressive positions — including freezing rents, offering free public transit, launching city-run grocery stores and more — that Republicans are certain to use to portray Democrats as extreme, much like they have with previous progressive proposals like the 'Green New Deal.' Those attacks are unlikely to help the GOP in the mayoral race in New York City, where registered Democrats outnumber Republicans almost by about a six-to-one margin. But New York is home to a number of competitive House seats where the GOP could seek to put Democratic nominees on the defensive over Mamdani's positions. It's too soon to sort through everything Mamdani's performance means for the Democratic Party. But it did offer a glimpse at where the party is on some key issues and who within it holds sway with voters. Mamdani, who would become the city's first Muslim mayor if he wins in November, was a vocal critic of Israel's war in Gaza and didn't back down despite being criticized as antisemitic, a charge he repeatedly denied. He defended his views in an interview with CBS' Stephen Colbert in which he also acknowledged the fears Jewish people have faced since Hamas' October 7, 2023, terrorist attack in Israel. 'There's no room for violence in this city, in this country, in this world. And what I have found also, for many New Yorkers, is an ability to navigate disagreement,' he told Colbert. He also demonstrated the influence of progressive New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who endorsed Mamdani. Other New York Democratic leaders, including Gov. Kathy Hochul and its two senators, Kirsten Gillibrand and Chuck Schumer, remained publicly neutral. The results similarly laid bare the ineffectiveness of Cuomo's effort — one backed by establishment Democratic forces that blanketed television airwaves but couldn't match the organic groundswell of a state assemblyman who started the race with little public profile. 'Billionaires and lobbyists poured millions against you and our public finance system,' Ocasio-Cortez said of Mamdani on X. 'And you won.' Cuomo had wanted a second act. The 67-year-old scion of one of New York's most prominent political families was forced out of the governor's office in 2021 amid a cloud of scandal — faced with allegations of sexual harassment that he denied and a report that his administration had covered up nursing home deaths during the coronavirus pandemic. The governor and the state's two senators stayed on the sidelines. But Cuomo's campaign was backed by many prominent New York Democrats and groups, including unions and elected officials who had criticized him four years ago but — seeing his lead in the polls — issued devil-we-know statements this year endorsing him. Though ranked-choice ballots need to be counted next week, Cuomo acknowledged the reality he faced on stage Tuesday, telling supporters he had called and congratulated Mamdani. 'Tonight was Assemblyman Mamdani's night, and he put together a great campaign. And he touched young people, and inspired them, and moved them, and got them to come out and vote. And he really ran a highly impactful campaign. I called him, I congratulated him. I applaud him sincerely for his effort, and let's give him a round of applause and thank him for his campaign,' Cuomo said. His former political rivals, meanwhile, gloated over Cuomo's apparent failure. 'Zohran ran a positive campaign talking about affordability. Cuomo ran a very negative, fear-based campaign. That just made a huge difference,' former Mayor Bill de Blasio said on CNN. In overwhelmingly Democratic New York City, a victorious Mamdani would ordinarily become the clear front-runner in November's general election. But he instead faces a competitive race with much different contours. First-term Mayor Eric Adams, who was elected as a Democrat four years ago, is seeking reelection as an independent. Adams' break from the party came as he faced backlash after President Donald Trump's Justice Department dropped its corruption charges against Adams, and Adams has cooperated with federal authorities to enforce Trump's mass deportation efforts. 'What NYC deserves is a mayor who's proud to run on his record – not one who ran from his record, or one who has no record,' Adams posted on X Tuesday night. 'We deserve a mayor who will keep driving down crime, support our police, fight antisemitism, and stand up for working-class New Yorkers.' Republican Curtis Silwa was unopposed in the primary and will be the GOP nominee. And neither Cuomo nor Mamdani had ruled out the possibility of running in November on another party's ballot line if they lost the Democratic contest — Cuomo as the nominee of the newly created Fight and Deliver Party, or Mamdani as the nominee of the Working Families Party.
Hamilton Spectator
22 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
A whirlwind 48 hours: How Trump's Israel-Iran ceasefire agreement came together
WASHINGTON (AP) — In a 48-hour whirlwind, President Donald Trump veered from elated to indignant to triumphant as his fragile Israel-Iran ceasefire agreement came together, teetered toward collapse and ultimately coalesced. Trump, as he worked to seal the deal, publicly harangued the Israelis and Iranians with a level of pique that's notable even for a commander in chief who isn't shy about letting the world know what he thinks. The effort was helped along as his aides and Qatari allies sensed an opening after what they saw as a half-hearted, face-saving measure by Tehran on Monday to retaliate against the U.S. for strikes against three key nuclear sites. And it didn't hurt that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu , after 12 days of bombing, could tell the Israeli public that Iran's nuclear program had been diminished. 'This is a War that could have gone on for years, and destroyed the entire Middle East, but it didn't, and never will!' Trump declared in a social media post announcing the ceasefire. Netanyahu is less than enthusiastic about Trump's message The agreement began taking shape early Sunday morning, soon after the U.S. military carried out blistering strikes on Iranian nuclear sites that U.S. defense officials said have set back Tehran's nuclear program. Trump directed his team to get Netanyahu on the phone. The president told Netanyahu not to expect further U.S. offensive military action, according to a senior White House official who was not authorized to comment publicly about the sensitive diplomatic talks. The U.S. president made the case that it was time to stop the war and return to diplomatic negotiations with Iran. Trump also noted that the U.S. had removed any imminent threat posed by Iran, according to the official. For his part, Netanyahu listened to Trump's argument as Israel was nearing its own objectives with Iran, the official said. Netanyahu did not enthusiastically agree, but understood Trump's stance that the U.S. had no desire for additional military involvement. Around the same time, Trump special envoy Steve Witkoff spoke directly with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, telling him to come back to the bargaining table because Iran had seen what the U.S. military could do and that it was capable of doing much more, the official said. Witkoff stressed that the U.S. wanted peace — and Iran should, too. Trump ebullient about Israel-Iran deal prospects Less than 48 hours later, Trump took to his social media platform to announce that a 'Complete and Total CEASEFIRE' had been achieved. The ceasefire was based solely on the end of military hostilities, rather than on additional conditions about Iran's nuclear program or its economic interests. Trump was acting on the belief that Iran's ability to develop nuclear weapons had been crippled. But as Trump spoke with confidence about the coming ceasefire, the Israelis and Iranians were notably quiet — neither side publicly commented on what Trump described as a deal that would be phased in over the coming hours. Araghchi spoke out first, acknowledging the wheels were in motion for a deal, but stopping short of saying Iran had signed off. 'As of now, there is NO 'agreement' on any ceasefire or cessation of military operations,' Araghchi posted on X. 'However, provided that the Israeli regime stops its illegal aggression against the Iranian people no later than 4 am Tehran time, we have no intention to continue our response afterwards.' Commitment from Iran and Israel to Trump's ceasefire remained murky Not long before Trump's announcement, Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei took to social media to declare that Iran wouldn't surrender. It was unclear what role Khamenei, the ultimate authority in the Islamic Republic's theocracy, had in the deal. And Netanyahu was silent. He would wait more than eight hours after Trump's announcement to confirm that Israel had accepted the ceasefire and that it had achieved its war goals against Iran. Qatar's prime minister, Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani, said ceasefire efforts gained steam after Iran's retaliatory attack on a major U.S. base in the emirate on Monday evening. The Iranians fired 14 missiles at the base — with U.S. and Qatari defense systems knocking down 13. One of the missiles, according to Trump, was ''set free' because it was headed in a nonthreatening direction.' Trump also claimed the Iranians gave the U.S. and Qatar a heads up, allowing the troops to take shelter and the Qataris to clear their typically busy airspace. Qatar plays a key role in the ceasefire talks Iran's restrained direct response to the U.S. bombardment suggested to Trump administration officials that Iran — battered by Israel's 12-day assault — and its degraded proxy groups, including Lebanon-based Hezbollah and Yemen-based Houthis, didn't have the wherewithal to expand the fight. Qatar's emir, Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani, had a 'long call' with Trump soon after the Iranian attack on the Al-Ubeid military installation, according to the Qatari prime minister. 'There was an opportunity during this communication to announce a full ceasefire on all fronts, and U.S. authorities asked Qatar to contact Iranian authorities to know how prepared they are for a ceasefire,' the prime minister said. Trump saw the moment as a clear opening The president soon got back in touch with Netanyahu to secure his commitment to end the hostilities, officials said. The prime minister agreed to the ceasefire, as long as there were no further attacks by Iran, the officials said. From there, things moved quickly. Vice President JD Vance was making an appearance on Fox News' 'Special Report' on Monday evening when Trump took to social media to announce the ceasefire deal had been reached and would go into effect over the coming day. The vice president appeared surprised when host Bret Baier told him that Trump had announced a deal had been reached. 'We were actually working on that just as I left the White House to come over here,' Vance said. 'So that's good news that the president was able to get that across the finish line.' But after Trump's announcement, the attacks kept coming. Iran launched a series of strikes on Israel after 4 a.m. local time Tuesday in Tehran, the time that Iran's foreign minister had said Iran would cease its attacks if Israel ended their airstrikes. And the Israeli prime minister's office confirmed that Israel launched a major assault hours ahead of the ceasefire's start, hitting central Tehran. 'We attacked forcefully in the heart of Tehran, hitting regime targets and killing hundreds of Basij and Iranian security forces,' the statement read. Iranian media confirmed nine casualties in the northern Gilan province. 'Four residential buildings were completely destroyed and several neighboring houses were damaged in the blasts.' Fars News Agency reported. A frustrated Trump lashes out Trump, who was scheduled to depart the White House early Tuesday to fly to the Netherlands for the NATO summit, was livid. His frustration was palpable as he spoke to reporters on the White House South Lawn. 'I'm not happy with them. I'm not happy with Iran, either, but I'm really unhappy with Israel going out this morning,' Trump said. 'We basically have two countries that have been fighting so long and so hard that they don't know what the f—- they're doing.' Minutes later, he took to his Truth Social platform to send a warning to Israel. 'ISRAEL. DO NOT DROP THOSE BOMBS. IF YOU DO IT IS A MAJOR VIOLATION,' Trump posted. 'BRING YOUR PILOTS HOME, NOW!' Trump climbed aboard Air Force One and was soon on the phone with Netanyahu. He did not mince words with the Israeli leader, according to one of the White House officials. Trump was 'exceptionally firm and direct' with Netanyahu 'about what needed to happen to sustain the ceasefire.' Netanyahu got the message. His office confirmed that the Israeli leader held off tougher action after the appeal from Trump and 'refrained from additional attacks.' After the call, Trump once again took to social media to declare the ceasefire was 'in effect. ' 'ISRAEL is not going to attack Iran,' Trump declared. 'All planes will turn around and head home, while doing a friendly 'Plane Wave' to Iran, Nobody will be hurt, the Ceasefire is in effect!' The president went on to spend a considerable chunk of his flight celebrating what his administration is calling a signal achievement. 'It was my great honor to Destroy All Nuclear facilities & capability, and then, STOP THE WAR!' On Tuesday evening, Trump's envoy Witkoff said the president is now looking to land 'a comprehensive peace agreement that goes beyond even the ceasefire.' 'We're already talking to each other, not just directly, but also through interlocutors,' Witkoff said in an appearance on Fox News' 'The Ingraham Angle.' 'I think that the conversations are promising.' ___ AP writers Darlene Superville in Washington, Josef Federman in Jerusalem and Fatma Khaled in Cairo contributed reporting. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
Time Magazine
26 minutes ago
- Time Magazine
J.D. Vance Defines the ‘Trump Doctrine'
First, the U.S. denied involvement in Israel's strikes against Iran. Then President Donald Trump took credit for them. Trump insisted he wasn't working toward a ceasefire and would take two weeks to consider attacking Iran. Then he bombed Iran's nuclear facilities two days later and, two days after that, announced a ceasefire. His top officials said they were not seeking 'regime change,' then he said: why not? before declaring yesterday that regime change causes 'chaos' and he doesn't want that. Some supporters say he's a master of misdirection. Critics liken it to 'schizophrenia.' J.D. Vance calls it the Trump Doctrine. 'We are seeing a foreign policy doctrine develop that will change the country (and the world) for the better,' the Vice President posted on X on Tuesday, before giving a more detailed elucidation of a foreign-policy approach Trump himself has often distilled into the three-word phrase 'peace through strength.' 'What I call the Trump doctrine is quite simple,' Vance elaborated at the Ohio Republican Dinner on Tuesday night. 'No. 1, you articulate a clear American interest, and that's—in this case—that Iran can't have a nuclear weapon. No. 2, you try to aggressively diplomatically solve that problem. And No. 3, when you can't solve it diplomatically, you use overwhelming military power to solve it, and then you get the hell out of there before it ever becomes a protracted conflict.' Former President James Monroe is credited with starting the trend of presidential doctrines, the core principles underlying a President's foreign policy. The Monroe Doctrine, according to the Office of the Historian at the State Department, focused on three main pillars: 'separate spheres of influence for the Americas and Europe, non-colonization, and non-intervention.' Since then, numerous Presidents have outlined their own doctrines, though rarely as explicitly as Vance has done for Trump. Observers struggled to interpret Joe Biden's doctrine. Following Trump's first-term 'America First' withdrawal from global forums, some suggested Biden hinted at his own doctrine in a line from a Washington Post op-ed before his first foreign trip to Europe in 2021: 'realizing America's renewed commitment to our allies and partners, and demonstrating the capacity of democracies to both meet the challenges and deter the threats of this new age.' In a Foreign Affairs article titled 'What Was the Biden Doctrine?' published in August, former Carnegie Endowment for International Peace president Jessica T. Matthews wrote that 'four years is too little time to establish a foreign policy doctrine' but that Biden's approach seemed 'to eschew wars to remake other countries and to restore diplomacy as the central tool of foreign policy…proving that the United States can be deeply engaged in the world without military action or the taint of hegemony.' For Barack Obama, many distilled his foreign-policy outlook to 'don't do stupid sh-t,' a guiding principle that some critics called overly simplistic and naive and supporters described as appropriately cautious given a history of costly, hubristic U.S. interventions abroad. 'The Obama Doctrine is a form of realism unafraid to deploy American power but mindful that its use must be tempered by practical limits and a dose of self-awareness,' wrote Post columnist E.J. Dionne Jr. in 2009. TIME described George W. Bush's doctrine in 2007 as putting 'a primary emphasis on the projection of American military power.' Syndicated conservative columnist Charles Krauthammer first tried to define the Bush Doctrine in June 2001, before 9/11, as a 'new unilateralism' that 'seeks to enhance American power and unashamedly deploy it on behalf of self-defined global ends.' After 9/11, observers often pointed to a National Security Strategy document released by the White House in 2002 that emphasized combatting terrorism as central to U.S. foreign policy. 'We will defend the peace by fighting terrorists and tyrants,' it said. 'We cannot defend America and our friends by hoping for the best. … America will hold to account nations that are compromised by terror, including those who harbor terrorists—because the allies of terror are the enemies of civilization.' Bill Clinton's doctrine is often pinned to a line from a speech he delivered in San Francisco in 1999, when he said: 'The United States has the opportunity and, I would argue, the solemn responsibility to shape a more peaceful, prosperous, democratic world in the 21st century. … We cannot, indeed, we should not, do everything or be everywhere. But where our values and our interests are at stake, and where we can make a difference, we must be prepared to do so.' While Vice President Vance has helpfully spelled out the Trump Doctrine, some observers had already seen it starting to become clear. Foreign Policy columnist Matthew Kroenig outlined in April a similar three-pillar worldview that underlies the President's seemingly erratic and unpredictable foreign-policy approach: 1) America First; 2) stop America from being ripped off—from trade to immigration to NATO; and 3) escalate to deescalate. 'As Trump writes in The Art of the Deal, his preferred negotiating strategy revolves around making threats and extreme demands to throw one's negotiating partner off balance and ultimately bring them crawling to the table for a deal,' Kroenig wrote of the third pillar in what turned out to be a remarkably prescient analysis of Trump's handling of the Israel-Iran war. Whether the Trump Doctrine, which is certainly disruptive to some, is ultimately successful in changing the U.S. and the world for the better, however, is a question that remains to be answered.
