Posts Tagged ‘trump’

When War Crimes Become Normal: The Price of Impunity

September 30, 2026

A child in a hospital bed in Iran after being injured in a bombing.

In this picture obtained by AFP from the Iranian news agency Tasnim on September 2, 2026 a child lies on a hospital bed receiving treatment following injuries from an overnight strike in Kuhestak, Sirik County, in Iran’s southern Hormozgan province on September 2, 2026.

(Photo by Morteza Akhondi/Tasnim News/AFP via Getty Images)

If we truly believe that all human life has equal value, then we must demand that those who order and carry out attacks on civilians face the same scrutiny and consequences, whoever they are.

Barzin Jafartash Amiri

Sep 29, 2026, Common Dreams

On Tuesday, September 1, 2026, the United States military struck a home in the town of Kuhestak, in Sirik County, southern Iran, where a wedding was underway, killing four people and wounding more than 50. The youngest victim was 4-year-old Amir Ali Karimi. Asked about the strike, US Vice President JD Vance told reporters: “What I can say with 100% confidence is that, unlike the IRGC, the United States never targets civilians in combat. We never will do that. We never have done that.” However, he added, “Sometimes, things happen.”

It’s worth remembering that the campaign the United States and Israel waged against Iran—launched without United Nations Security Council authorization—opened with a strike on the office of Iran’s Supreme Leader that killed him along with his daughter, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, and his 14-month-old granddaughter. Roughly an hour or two later, the US struck the Shajareh Tayyebeh elementary school in Minab with Tomahawk cruise missiles, killing 156 people, including 120 schoolchildren between the ages of six and 13. That same day, an attack on the small town of Lamerd used Precision Strike Missiles (PrSM)—munitions that burst in midair and scatter thousands of tungsten fragments—killing at least 21 people, including four children, among them 2-year-old Avina Barzegar, and wounding 100 more. In the months since, the US and Israel have struck not only military sites but universities, bridges, power plants, police stations, and even desalination plants serving remote islands in southern Iran. Whatever assurances Vance offers, the record is clear that the United States has a long history of striking civilians.

RECOMMENDED…

Joint US-Israeli attacks damage Gandi Hospital in Tehran

Amnesty Says US-Israeli Attacks With Indiscriminate Weapons in Tehran May Have Been War Crimes

Funeral held for children who lost their lives in US-Israeli attack on Iranian Primary School

UN Experts Say US War Crimes Likely in Iran School, Sports Complex Massacres

Of course none of this is new. More than two years have now passed since Israel launched its full-scale assault on Gaza, backed fully by the United States and most Western governments. Over those two years the world has watched strikes on hospitals, schools, and universities, the shooting of civilians, even an assault captured on camera—and despite an International Criminal Court arrest warrant for Israel’s prime minister, no action has been taken either to enforce that warrant or to halt the war. It was hardly surprising that a year-plus of unanswered war crimes in Gaza—what many now call a genocide—normalized the same conduct elsewhere. Israel applied much the same pattern in Lebanon, violating that country’s sovereignty to bomb schools, apartment buildings, universities, and villages. The absence of any serious response to crimes broadcast live to the world sent every power on Earth a clear message: If you are strong enough, you can commit any crime—including the crime of crimes.

Isn’t it time that those responsible for striking a bridge, a wedding, a power plant, a desalination plant, be held to account?

President Donald Trump himself has, through his own public statements, documented attacks that could easily amount to war crimes. In one Truth Social post, he wrote, “A whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again.” In another, he shared footage of the strike that brought down Karaj’s unfinished B1 bridge—a civilian structure, not yet even complete, hit on Sizdah Bedar, the 13th day of Nowruz, when most Iranians are out picnicking in nature and many families were gathered under and around the bridge. The strike was a so-called double tap: A second missile hit after rescue workers arrived to help the wounded, killing two more and injuring several others. In all, 13 people were killed and 95 wounded.

This scale of targeting civilians, met with so little response from the media or the international community, is itself a troubling kind of normalization—one we cannot afford to treat with indifference. Imagine, for a moment, that Iran had bombed the White House on a holiday morning, killing the American president along with members of his family, and then struck an elementary school in Texas, killing more than 120 American students along with their teachers. How would American society, and the West more broadly, have responded? Would the dead children be called a “necessary action” or “mistake”? Or would the entire West have mobilized to respond to such an atrocity?

This same Western indifference to the deaths of people in the Global South—particularly at American hands—is visible in the words of Afghanistan’s former president, Hamid Karzai. Asked recently why he, perhaps alone among Afghan leaders, had wept in public, Karzai spoke of “our national helplessness before powers that had come in the name of helping Afghanistan,” and recalled asking American officials a simple question: If their bombs killed Afghan children, was that terrorism? They told him no—terrorism, he said they told him, is when American interests are put at risk.

This becomes painfully concrete when you consider that the Sirik wedding was only the latest entry in a long, grim record of American strikes on wedding celebrations across Afghanistan, Iraq, and Yemen going back more than two decades—a pattern trackers have documented since at least December 2001.

Isn’t it time that those responsible for striking a bridge, a wedding, a power plant, a desalination plant, be held to account? Don’t the citizens of a country whose president launched a war on another nation without UN authorization, and whose forces have committed numerous documented war crimes in the process, bear some responsibility for holding their own leaders accountable? Would the West have stayed this indifferent if a wedding, or a school, had been hit at home—or would it have moved heaven and Earth to bring the perpetrators to justice? These are the questions that demand an answer. The world cannot continue to condemn violence selectively while treating the deaths of civilians in the Global South as an unfortunate but acceptable consequence of geopolitics.

Every time a war crime is ignored, the threshold for the next one becomes lower. Every time accountability is abandoned, impunity becomes stronger. If we truly believe that all human life has equal value, then we must demand that those who order and carry out attacks on civilians face the same scrutiny and consequences, whoever they are. The first step toward ending war-crime normalization is refusing to look away.

As Trump rejects Iranian cease-fire proposal, Wall Street Journal reports plans to resume bombing after midterms

September 28, 2026

Andre Damon@Andre__Damon. WSWS, 28 Sep, 2026

US President Donald Trump on Saturday publicly rejected an Iranian proposal for a seven-day cease-fire, after the Wall Street Journal reported Friday night that he “has told aides he expects to resume bombing Iran after the November midterms.”

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi presented Iran’s position to reporters Friday outside the UN Security Council in New York. Within seven days of US acceptance, Iran would reopen the Strait of Hormuz and begin nuclear talks, in exchange for the lifting of the US naval blockade, the release of part of Iran’s frozen assets, the waiving of oil sanctions and a cease-fire extending to Lebanon, as the Associated Press and Al Jazeera reported.

Trump told reporters Saturday: “I’m rejecting their deal. They want to make a deal where they open the strait immediately because they are losing so badly.”

The United States “has told Iran and the mediators that Trump has no intention of lifting the maritime embargo,” according to the Journal. Washington, the Journal wrote, “believes economic pressure will eventually force Tehran to sign an agreement with terms that are favorable to Washington and the Arab states along the Persian Gulf.”

Citing US officials, the Journal reported that Trump “has told his staff that he sees a renewed bombing campaign as likely.” The Journal wrote that “the level of strikes Trump is contemplating couldn’t be determined” and that his views “could be affected by the results of the midterms.”

Asked by Fox News on Sunday whether strikes in the coming weeks remained an option, Trump said they were “possible.”

The Journal’s report gives concrete content to Trump’s threat, in his speech to the United Nations General Assembly on Tuesday, to “annihilate the Islamic Republic and do it quickly” and to “drive them into hell with no chance of survival and no hope of future greatness or generations.”

The journalist Seymour Hersh wrote on June 10 he had been told that in “a recent secret meeting in the White House,” Trump “began speculating, albeit vaguely, about a nuclear option that could perhaps bring a quicker end to the war.”

On April 7, Trump wrote on Truth Social: “A whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again.” Asked that day whether Trump would use nuclear weapons, then-White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt did not rule it out. “Only the President knows where things stand and what he will do,” she said.Available from Mehring BooksThe struggle against imperialism and for workers’ power in IranA pamphlet by Keith Jones

Despite unleashing a full-scale aerial bombardment of Iran, the United States has failed to achieve its objectives. Announcing the war on February 28, Trump vowed to “raze their missile industry to the ground” and told Iranians to “take over your government” once the bombing was finished. Nearly seven months later, the government in Tehran remains in power, and Iranian forces have kept firing missiles at US bases.

The United States and Israel assassinated Iran’s supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, on February 28, and in March Iran’s Assembly of Experts named his son, Mojtaba Khamenei, to succeed him. On July 17, Iranian forces killed three US soldiers in a missile attack on the Muwaffaq Salti base in Jordan.

Al Jazeera reported August 28 that US and Israeli forces had attacked Iran at least 3,580 times, according to the Armed Conflict Location and Event Data project, and had killed no fewer than 3,527 people there, according to official figures.

On September 17, the UN Human Rights Council’s fact-finding mission on Iran reported “reasonable grounds to believe” that the United States had carried out the February 28 attack on a primary school in the southern city of Minab, killing 157 people, among them 123 children, and that the attack was a war crime.

What will be the next stage of escalation? Will Trump deploy ground troops or use nuclear weapons?

On June 11, Trump wrote on Truth Social that “we will be taking Kharg Island,” Iran’s chief oil terminal, “and other oil infrastructure points, and assume total control of their Oil and Gas Markets, much like we have with Venezuela….” Trump met his top aides in the White House Situation Room on July 14 to discuss sending ground troops to seize the island, the Journal reported the next day.

More than 50,000 American troops were deployed in the region, the military news site Task & Purpose reported August 30, and units of the 82nd Airborne Division have had their deployment extended to 12 months. On Sunday morning, Trump shared on Truth Social a video in which Fox News host Mark Levin said “there is no reason [Kharg] Island is off the table….”

The cease-fire that began in April collapsed in July. On July 7, after three commercial ships were attacked in the Strait of Hormuz, US forces bombed more than 80 sites in Iran, and the next day Trump pronounced the cease-fire “over.” Since July 14, the US Navy has enforced a blockade of Iran’s entire coastline, which under international law is an act of war.

US forces have attacked Iran repeatedly since, including on September 1, when they killed at least five people at a wedding in Kuhestak on Iran’s southern coast, among them a child, according to Iranian media.

Socialism AI Logo

Socialism AI

by the WSWSSocialismAI.com

Questions about this article? Ask Socialism AI

What is the strategic reason the US ruling class wants to dominate Iran and control the Strait of Hormuz, beyond just Iran’s own oil?How does this war on Iran connect to the broader US confrontation with China and Russia that the article mentions?Can you explain what it means historically when both Democrats and Republicans support the same war, and what this shows about the two-party system?

Ask more questions at SocialismAI.com

Iran is a strategic battlefield in a developing global war against Russia and China. CNN reported Friday, citing unnamed sources, that satellite imagery from Chinese groups helped Iran carry out the July 17 attack in Jordan. According to the Journal, Trump “is reluctant to resume major combat operations” partly because the United States “wants to reserve dwindling munitions for other contingencies.”

French President Emmanuel Macron said Thursday that France would send “soldiers, radar systems and defense systems” to protect Saudi Arabia’s Yanbu oil terminal on the Red Sea, which Yemen’s Iran-allied Houthis have attacked with missiles.

In a CNN poll published September 22, 78 percent of respondents said Trump was not doing enough to end the war, and 76 percent said it had not been worth the cost.

Trump’s approval rating was 34.6 percent on Thursday, according to the FiftyPlusOne average compiled by the analyst G. Elliott Morris, the lowest for any president this close to a midterm election since scientific polling began in the 1930s.

The Democrats’ criticisms of the administration center on its failure to secure US imperialism’s aims in Iran. On ABC’s “This Week” on Sunday, Democratic Senator Mark Kelly of Arizona said Trump had gone to war “without a plan.” He added: “We can’t leave the Strait in the hands of the Iranians. They can’t be allowed to get a nuclear weapon.”

On Thursday, 21 Democratic senators, Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer among them, wrote in a statement on Trump’s Washington summit that day with Chinese President Xi Jinping that the United States “should never have launched the reckless and illegal war against Iran.” In the same statement they complained that “Beijing has exploited the conflict to purchase discounted Iranian oil, while U.S. munitions and strategic stockpiles have been expended at alarming rates.” Schumer told the Senate that day that Trump had acted “sort of as a supplicant” toward Xi and “needs to finally show some backbone.”

On September 16, 58 Democrats helped the House pass a bill that lets Trump impose tariffs as steep as 100 percent on the countries that buy the most Russian oil and gas, chiefly China and India. The bill also extends US sanctions on Iran.

Previously, on September 1, House Democrats voted 176 to 29 for a stopgap bill that keeps the government, the Pentagon included, funded through December 11. In January, 149 House Democrats had voted for the $839 billion military budget that has paid for the war since February 28.

Whatever the result on November 3, the Democratic and Republican parties alike support the war on Iran and the aim of subordinating the country to US domination.

Democrat Files 26 Impeachment Articles Against Trump Over War, ICE, Corruption

September 28, 2026

“Trump is clearly the most impeachable President our country has ever endured,” Rep. Steve Cohen said.

By Sharon Zhang , Truthout Published September 25, 2026

President Donald Trump and First Lady Melania Trump before welcoming China’s President Xi Jinping and his wife Peng Liyuan for tea at the White House, in Washington, DC, on September 25, 2026.

Truthout is a vital news source and a living history of political struggle. If you think our work is valuable, support us with a donation of any size.

A House Democrat has filed articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump, calling him the “most impeachable president” in U.S. history and accusing him of high crimes and misdemeanors ranging from his war on Iran to his schemes to enrich himself and his allies while in office.

House Judiciary Committee member Rep. Steve Cohen, of Tennessee, introduced 26 impeachment articles on Thursday, covering a broad range of actions from the president since his return to office last year.

Two of the articles focus on Trump’s military aggression, in Iran and in his “extrajudicial killings in the international waters of Venezuela.” Numerous articles are focused on the administration’s actions relating to his mass deportation and anti-immigration agenda, including the administration’s defiance of court orders, imprisonment of immigrants in a notorious torture camp in El Salvador, and deployment of the National Guard to U.S. cities.

Other articles focus on Trump’s attempts to punish his political enemies; his attacks on the press; his alleged misappropriations of federal funds; and his various corruption schemes, including his “profiting personally and directly from the presidency.”

“Trump is clearly the most impeachable President our country has ever endured. 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,” said Cohen in a statement on the articles. “When historians write about this period, and our constituents ask who stood up to President Trump’s lawlessness, this resolution is the answer.”

Related Story

Sen. Tammy Baldwin questions Director of the National Institutes of Health Jayanta Bhattacharya during a Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and Related Agencies, in the Dirksen Senate Office Building, on June 10, 2025, in Washington, D.C.

Op-Ed

|

Politics & Elections

Don’t Be Fooled: GOP Scuffle Over NIH Grants Doesn’t Mean Science Has Prevailed

Trump has backed down for now in his new bid to control research grants, but his tune could change after the midterms. By Sasha Abramsky , Truthout

September 24, 2026

Like previous attempts to impeach Trump, the articles are doomed to fail under the Republican-controlled Congress.

The latest attempt, by Rep. Al Green (D-Texas), garnered 147 votes to advance the measure, all from Democrats, in a vote earlier this month.

Eighteen Democrats joined Republicans in voting to table the articles, including some of the most conservative Democrats in the caucus like Representatives Jared Golden (D-Maine) and Marie Gluesenkamp Perez — who have also twice broken with their caucus to help buoy Republican priorities in recent weeks. Another 46 Democrats voted “present,” including House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-New York).

Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Kentucky) also recently introduced articles of impeachment against Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth. The eight articles focused on the U.S.’s military campaigns in Iran, Venezuela, Yemen, and in the Caribbean Sea and Pacific Ocean, while also accusing Hegseth of disregarding civilian safeguards and suppressing the speech of critics. Massie moved to force a House vote on the articles, but was blocked by GOP leaders.

A majority of Americans say that Hegseth should face impeachment, however. Recent polling found that a slim majority, 51 percent, of U.S. voters say that Hegseth should be impeached, The Economist/YouGov found.

25 Years of Truthout: An important fundraising appeal

This September, Truthout is celebrating 25 years of publication. For over two decades, we have been a trusted source for fiercely independent journalism thanks to readers like you.

Looking to the next 25 years, we launched a special fundraising campaign. We still need to raise $16,000.

We are asking for your support at this juncture because we face greater threats than ever before in our organizational history. Trump and his MAGA allies are determined to control the information ecosystem, and movement-based organizations are subject to dangerous censorship and scrutiny.

If you can support Truthout with a one-time or monthly donation, you will make a significant impact on our work and our legacy. Anything you can do makes a difference!

about:blank This article is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), and you are free to share and republish under the terms of the license.

Sharon Zhang

Sharon Zhang is a news writer at Truthout covering international affairs, politics, and labor. She has a master’s degree in environmental studies. She can be found on Twitter and Bluesky.

Iran stands firm on Hormuz plan after US rejection

September 27, 2026

AFP Published September 27, 2026

Add Dawn as a trusted source

Iran stood firm Sunday on its conditions for reopening the Strait of Hormuz, despite United States President Donald Trump’s rejection of the proposal that had created some optimism for breaking the Mideast war stalemate.

The waterway is key to the world’s energy supply and is now central to the conflict between Washington and Tehran, which was triggered nearly seven months ago with deadly strikes on Iran.

Iran’s plan called for a cessation of all hostilities in the Middle East, including in Lebanon, according to Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, and fulfilling conditions in the ceasefire deal that fell apart months ago.

That agreement, which dissolved during fighting over Hormuz, called for the release of frozen Iranian assets, the lifting of sanctions on Iranian oil and an end to the US naval blockade.

“Our conditions are clear, and any move toward reopening the Strait of Hormuz is contingent upon these conditions being fulfilled. We will not back down from them,” Araghchi said on Sunday, state broadcaster IRIB reported.

“We have never closed the door to diplomacy or negotiations, but at the same time, we have never backed down from our rights.”

But Trump said on Saturday that he rejected the truce deal.

“They want to make a deal where they open the Strait immediately because they’re losing so badly,” he told reporters. “They want to make a deal and I think that’s fine. I like making a deal too.”

Araghchi said on Sunday that the Iranians “saw the first reaction from the US president, but so far, nothing has been conveyed to us by the mediators”.

“We are waiting for the mediators to convey the definitive positions to us, and we will make a decision based on them,” the foreign minister added.

‘Tool for pressure’

Washington and Tehran signed a Pakistan-mediated memorandum of understanding (MoU) in June that aimed to end the war, to reopen the strait and to launch talks on Iran’s nuclear programme.

But the deal broke down shortly afterwards when Iran fired on commercial ships in Hormuz that it accused of deviating from its approved route through the waterway.

Iran requires ships to obtain authorisation before passage, citing security and sovereignty reasons.

Ships that refuse to comply are regularly targeted, while the United States sporadically bombs Iranian coastal areas in retaliation.

At the UN, Saudi Arabia’s Foreign Minister Faisal bin Farhan complained that the “international community has been absent” and is failing to live up to the responsibility to keep the Strait of Hormuz and the Bab al-Mandab open.

“The kingdom rejects any party’s use of these vital passages as a tool for pressure, threat, or harm to the interests of states,” he said, stressing the waterways’ importance to global energy security.

His Russian counterpart, Sergei Lavrov, told member states that “Russia, together with other responsible states, stands ready to constructively contribute to stabilising this strategically important region.”

In New York, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian met with UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, according to his office, and said: “Iran has not walked away from the negotiating table but, given past experiences, it no longer trusts the United States.”

Araghchi said at the UN: “Iran has conveyed to the United States, through Qatar, a concrete seven-day plan. If the necessary conditions are met, the strait can be reopened, and normal maritime passage restored within seven days.”

“The choice now rests with the United States. Iran does not accept coercion, threats or intimidation, and Iran will not surrender its sovereign rights under pressure,” he added.

Hossein Mohebi, a spokesman for Iran’s Revolutionary Guards, was quoted by Tasnim news agency as saying: “We will not cease punishing the US until Iran’s seven conditions are met.”

Mohebi had told AFP in an exclusive interview on Tuesday that ending hostilities in Yemen was also among Tehran’s demands.

Trump Threatens Cuba at UN General Assembly, Cuba Responds

September 26, 2026

US President Donald Trump gives his speech at the 81st session of the UN General Assembly, September 22, 2026. Photo: UN.

InternationalLatin America and ALBA-TCPNews

September 23, 2026, By Orinoco Tribune

US President Donald Trump gives his speech at the 81st session of the UN General Assembly, September 22, 2026. Photo: UN.

In his speech at the United Nations General Assembly, the president of the United States, Donald Trump, threatened Cuba, claiming that the country is under the highest level of pressure and that it will eventually fall.

In protest against Trump’s words, the Cuban delegation, led by Foreign Minister Bruno Rodríguez Parrilla, walked out of the room. Prior to the threats from the US president, which he often repeats, the president of Brazil, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, had expressed his condemnation of foreign interference in the region and criticized the measures imposed by the US against Cuba. Lula emphasized that the intensified blockade represents collective punishment against 10 million people.

Trump claimed that Cuba is a failed state, and backed up his claims by referring to the added pressure of the economic and energy blockade policy. “It is failing like never before, and it is going to fall,” the US president said in his usual bellicose tone. He also mentioned that US Secretary of State Marco Rubio is leading ongoing negotiations with the Cuban government, a claim that has been denied by Cuba.

In addition to his warlike tone against Cuba, the US president uttered warnings against Iran. Trump stated that he must decide between quickly annihilating Iran to supposedly prevent it from attacking other countries or allowing an agreement that favors the reconstruction of the country under Washington’s terms, although he toned down the bravado by adding that he expects to reach a pact after the US midterm elections. He also insisted that the Iranian government will never have a nuclear weapon, despite the fact that Iran has a declared policy of not making any nuclear weapons.

Earlier, upon his arrival at the UN headquarters in New York, Trump had an incident with the press, when he reproached a CNN reporter for covering his attendance, citing his ban on CNN.

Trump also boasted about the achievements of the US economy, calling it the envy of the world, although the country is experiencing high inflation, elevated fuel costs, and rising mortgage rates faced by the US population.

Cuba condemns Trump’s attacks
The Cuban government responded to Trump’s attacks by reaffirming its right to sovereignty and condemning the economic and social impact of the intensified US blockade.

The president of Cuba, Miguel Díaz-Canel, decried on social media that the characterization of Cuba as a threat has the objective of justifying the genocidal US economic war against the Cuban population.

Díaz-Canel stated that Trump’s resorting to lies reflects a refusal to accept the self-determination of the Cuban people and reaffirmed that the country will maintain the defense of its sovereignty, working to overcome US imperialist aggression. He added that the blockade is the real threat.

Similarly, Foreign Minister Bruno Rodríguez said that the US government is incapable of recognizing Cuba as an independent and fully sovereign nation.

Rodríguez dismissed Trump’s accusations as falsehoods and slander, insisting that Cuba does not pose a danger to the United States or any other country, while the current economic restrictions and energy blockade do threaten Cuba and the rest of the world.

“The blockade is an act of genocide and collective punishment. We are a country of peace and we deserve peace,” emphasized the foreign minister, adding that the blockade has been systematically denounced by the majority of the international community.

(Telesur) with Orinoco Tribune content

Translation: Orinoco Tribune

OT/SC/CD

Stop Mad King Donald’s Iran War: An Open Letter to Members of the US Congress

September 24, 2026

Stop Mad King Donald’s Iran War: An Open Letter to Members of the US Congress

The war with Iran is Trump’s folly but Congress’s disgrace for not stopping it.

Jeffrey D. Sachs

Sep 23, 2026 Common Dreams

Dear Members of Congress,

In truly deranged remarks to world leaders at the UN, Donald Trump declared that “I have a big decision to make,” whether to negotiate a deal with Iran or instead to “annihilate the Islamic Republic” and drive Iran “into hell with no chance of survival.”

RECOMMENDED…

U.S.-WASHINGTON, D.C.-TRUMP-ATTACK OF IRAN-SUSPENSION

‘We Are in a Constitutional Crisis’: Congress Urged to Sue Trump to End Iran War

Donald Trump speaks

‘Do I Blow the Entire Nation Up?’: Trump Says He’s in ‘Deciding Mode’ on Iran War

He posed it as his personal choice. The fact that the American people are dead set against Trump’s war means nothing. And as for the voters, he added that he gives “absolutely no credence” to the coming midterm elections in deciding on his actions and on Iran’s fate.

The President’s threat to annihilate a member state of the United Nations, delivered from the General Assembly podium, disgraced Trump in front of the world.

Nothing binds this President. He is not bound by law, the Constitution, the UN Charter, or public opinion at home and abroad. When asked at the start of the year whether he has any limits on his power, he said “Yeah, there is one thing. My own morality. My own mind. It’s the only thing that can stop me.”

Trump opened his speech with the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, hailing America’s freedom. The fact is that Trump’s authoritarianism far outdoes that of King George III, against whom the colonies rebelled. Among the founders’ indictments of Mad King George was that “He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.” Yet our own mad king has decided that the survival of a whole civilization is in his hands alone.

Trump is emboldened in his contempt for Congress because the Republican members of Congress have abdicated their constitutional responsibilities, terrified of their own president, and forsaking their constituents for campaign lucre from AIPAC and the military-industrial complex.

The Constitution is unambiguous regarding Congress’s responsibility. Article I, Section 8 assigns Congress, not the President, the sole power to declare war. That is not a choice or an option. The Constitution doesn’t say that Congress can play dead and let the President declare war. The Framers made this choice deliberately, because they were explicitly rejecting the power of a king to take the nation to war.

In Federalist 69, Hamilton assured the public that the President’s war powers would be far less than the British monarch’s. Madison stated the principle plainly in a letter to Jefferson in 1798: “The constitution supposes, what the History of all Govts demonstrates, that the Ex. is the branch of power most interested in war, & most prone to it. It has accordingly with studied care vested the question of war in the Legislature.”

The founders’ careful design has been overturned because of the unconstitutional subservience of the Republican members of Congress to Trump and to the military-industrial-digital complex. And yes, under Democratic presidents, most Democratic members of Congress also looked the other way when those presidents chose to go to war.

The war with Iran is Trump’s folly but Congress’s disgrace for not stopping it. It is a war without a purpose that has created mass suffering in Iran, tens of billions of dollars of direct outlays, and staggering damage to American military bases in eight countries of the Middle East. The closure of the Strait of Hormuz has sent world and American prices soaring for oil, gas, fertilizers, and more. And the world has duly noted that Iran can hold its own against US aggression, albeit at great sacrifice to the people of Iran and the region.

America’s much vaunted AI battlefield has been exposed in the most horrifying way. On the first day of the war, an American missile struck the girls’ elementary school there, killing more than 150 people, most of them girls aged seven to twelve, and the military’s own inquiry reportedly found that overreliance on artificial intelligence contributed to the targeting. Trump blamed “Iran or somebody else,” and seven months later the administration has offered no findings, no apology and no compensation to the families.

The President’s threat to annihilate a member state of the United Nations, delivered from the General Assembly podium, disgraced Trump in front of the world. It also violated Article 2(4) of the UN Charter, which prohibits even the threat of force against another state. Nearly all the world stands aghast.

I write to you because you cannot simply walk away from Trump’s recklessness, shaking your heads silently. You have a job to do, so do it. The craven Republican Party has to find even a minimal level of guts to tell Trump, “No, you do not have the power to destroy Iran. Any war with Iran depends on us, and we don’t support you and our constituents want this war to stop.” A clear majority of Americans oppose this war, and poll after poll shows that the opposition to the war is growing. A few Republicans have found that courage. Last week three more Republicans broke ranks to support ending the war. Their colleagues should follow.

Many of you receive campaign contributions from military contractors and technology companies deeply involved in the war. Many of you take money from AIPAC, which champions the war that Netanyahu did so much to help launch. This has to stop, as it is a dereliction of your constitutional duty and a violation of your oath.

Congress holds the power of the purse. The fiscal year ends on September 30, and every bill that funds the Pentagon is your opportunity to prohibit funds for unauthorized offensive operations against Iran.

The right course for the US is simple. Congress should cut off funding, and the US should stop further attacks and go home. We need no agreement with Iran or anyone else to stop the war that we started. By ending the war you will immediately restore some sanity and safety to the world energy markets, food supplies, and prices faced by Americans and others around the world.

How America has declined from the glorious moment when John F. Kennedy stood at the same podium at the UN on September 20, 1963, after having negotiated the Partial Nuclear Test Ban Treaty with the Soviet Union. He told the assembled leaders that the treaty can be a lever, and Archimedes, in explaining the principles of the lever, was said to have declared to his friends: “Give me a place where I can stand—and I shall move the world.” My fellow inhabitants of this planet: Let us take our stand here in this Assembly of nations. And let us see if we, in our own time, can move the world to a just and lasting peace.

Members of Congress, to save our nation’s honor and our Constitution, you must do your duty to stop this war, and stop Trump’s brazen, destructive, and unconstitutional grab for power.

Respectfully,

Jeffrey D. Sachs

University Professor, Columbia University

An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder


Dear Common Dreams reader,

It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits.

It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do.

Many people said we wouldn’t last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong.

Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.

Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work.

But here’s the urgent message from me today. It’s never been this bad out there. And it’s never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever.

We don’t accept corporate advertising and never will. We don’t have a paywall because we don’t think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you.

When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we.

Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives?

—Craig Brown, Co-founder
about:blank

about:blank

Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.

Jeffrey D. Sachs

Jeffrey D. Sachs is a University Professor and Director of the Center for Sustainable Development at Columbia University, where he directed The Earth Institute from 2002 until 2016. He is also President of the UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network and a commissioner of the UN Broadband Commission for Development. He has been advisor to three United Nations Secretaries-General, and currently serves as an SDG Advocate under Secretary-General Antonio Guterres. Sachs is the author, most recently, of “A New Foreign Policy: Beyond American Exceptionalism” (2020). Other books include: “Building the New American Economy: Smart, Fair, and Sustainable” (2017) and “The Age of Sustainable Development,” (2015) with Ban Ki-moon.

Full Bio >

Join the Conversation

Poll: Majority of US Voters Support Impeaching Hegseth Over Iran War

September 23, 2026

by Dave DeCamp | September 22, 2026 at 1:20 pm ET | Iran

A new poll from The Economist/YouGov found that a majority of registered US voters support impeaching US Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, after Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) of Kentucky introduced a resolution to remove him.

The poll, conducted from September 18 to September 21, found that 51% of registered voters surveyed support impeaching Hegseth for starting the war with Iran without congressional authorization, while 34% oppose it. Support for impeachment rises among likely voters to 54%, and opposition rises to 35%.

“This is why [House Speaker Mike Johnson] adjourned Congress to avoid the vote and why the President isn’t defending [Hegseth],” Massie wrote on X in response to the results.

Hegseth before the Senate Appropriations Committee on July 21, 2026 (Pentagon photo)

Massie introduced the articles of impeachment on September 15, and because it was a privileged resolution, a vote had to happen within two days. But Johnson canceled the House’s voting session for September 17, sending lawmakers home early for a long recess that pushes the impeachment vote until after midterm elections.

Impeachment is much more popular among Democrats, with the YouGov poll showing 77% supporting it compared to just 22% of Republicans. But Massie only needs a few Republican votes to pass the impeachment resolution through the House, and seven House Republicans supported the latest War Powers Resolution calling for an end to the war with Iran, signaling that he may get enough.

While the poll asked only about Hegseth’s role in the Iran war, Massie’s eight articles of impeachment also address how Hegseth has ignored US laws designed to mitigate civilian casualties, his role in extrajudicial executions at sea (strikes on alleged drug-running boats), the attack on Venezuela to abduct President Maduro, the bombing campaign in Yemen last year, and his efforts to chill free speech.

If you liked this article, please support Antiwar.com.
We are 100% reader-supported.

Dave DeCamp is the news editor of Antiwar.com, follow him on Twitter @decampdave.

Join the Discussion!

We welcome thoughtful and respectful comments. Hateful language, illegal content, or attacks against Antiwar.com will be removed.

For more details, please see our Comment Policy.

Trump’s threat to “annihilate” Iran: The criminalization of imperialist foreign policy

September 23, 2026
Andre Damon@Andre__Damon, WSWS, 23 Sep 2026

President Donald Trump speaks to the United Nations General Assembly, Tuesday, Sept. 22, 2026, at the UN headquarters. [AP Photo/Julia Demaree Nikhinson]

US President Donald Trump told the United Nations General Assembly on Tuesday that he is deciding whether to “annihilate the Islamic Republic” of Iran and “drive them into hell with no chance of survival.”

The American president asked: “Do I annihilate the Islamic Republic and do it quickly, never giving them a chance to kill and destroy people and countries again?”

Trump’s murderous language marks a new stage in the criminalization of imperialist foreign policy amid the eruption of global war. It is without precedent in modern politics outside the discourse of Adolf Hitler’s regime, which waged a Vernichtungskrieg, a war of annihilation, against the Soviet Union.

Unlike Trump, however, Hitler did not announce his war of extermination in public. He gave the order in private, to his generals. On March 30, 1941, in a closed meeting with some 200 senior officers, he told them the coming invasion would be a Vernichtungskampf, “a war of extermination,” according to the diary of his army chief of staff, Franz Halder.

The extermination of the population of Iran, which has resisted Trump’s efforts to subjugate the country through war, is in fact being actively discussed at the White House. The journalist Seymour Hersh reported on June 10 that Trump had raised using nuclear weapons against Iran, a country of 93 million people, in a secret meeting with his senior staff.

Trump’s criminal war of aggression against Iran had killed at least 3,468 people and wounded more than 26,500 by June 10, according to Iran’s Health Ministry. Last week, a UN fact-finding mission found “reasonable grounds to believe that the United States committed war crimes,” citing the US missile attack on February 28 on an elementary school in Minab that killed more than 150 people, 120 of them children.

The war against Iran is one component of the US-Israeli onslaught throughout the Middle East, whose highest expression is the genocide in Gaza, which has killed 73,919 Palestinians, according to Gaza’s Health Ministry.

The threat against Iran was one item in a series. Trump boasted that the US military had penetrated “deep into the Venezuelan capital” and “arrested” Maduro, and that the reward was “the largest oil deal in history,” 65 billion barrels. “To the victor belong the spoils,” Trump declared. Cuba “is an absolutely failed state … and it will fall.” Greenland is to pass under the “permanent control” of the United States, with two “very major military bases.”

During Trump’s speech, only the delegations of Iran and Cuba, whose government Trump threatened to overthrow, left the hall in protest. The representatives of the European imperialist powers, for all their constant talk of democracy and human rights, sat there and did nothing. Khalilur Rahman, the Bangladeshi foreign minister who presides over the Assembly, thanked the American president.

The UN Charter was signed in San Francisco on June 26, 1945, seven weeks after the surrender of Nazi Germany, “to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind.”

Its Article 2 binds every member to “refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state.” Trump’s speech was such a threat, made in the building constructed to outlaw it by the leader of a state almost seven months into an illegal war of aggression. Trump’s speech itself is indictable as a violation of international law.

The European counterpoint to Trump was given Tuesday by French President Emmanuel Macron, who spoke of “the return of imperialism, of arrogance, the return of unrestrained force which knows no rules … A world in which some believe that they can undermine the international order so as to push their borders outwards.”

He added, “War crimes have been industrialized. We’ve seen the destruction of civilian infrastructure, human rights violations.”

But while some commentators took his remarks as a veiled critique of Trump, he never named the American president. Rather, his speech was a vocal and explicit denunciation of Russia and a declaration of intent to continue, alongside Trump, to fund and arm Ukraine.

Macron declared that “Russia has been waging a cruel war on civilians. It’s been occupying the territory of a sovereign state. France will continue providing unstinting support” for Ukraine in its war against Russia.

In Macron’s view, the appropriate response to Russia’s “imperialism” and “war crimes” is for the European imperialist powers to intensify their war against Russia. Macron made no effort to square his claims that the war against Russia is a war for democracy with the fact that Trump, his ally in that war, had just threatened to exterminate the population of an entire country.

In 1920 Lenin described the League of Nations, the UN’s predecessor, as “a league of mad dogs who are snatching each other’s bones.” The phrase is perhaps somewhat quaint. The UN General Assembly of 2026 is an active planning center for war.

After meeting Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky the same day, Macron announced a contract to supply Ukraine with radars and air-defense missiles, the Kyiv Independent reported Tuesday. Trump, for his part, also met Zelensky on Tuesday and confirmed that the manufacture of Patriot air-defense missiles in Ukraine was under discussion.

As the Trump-Zelensky meeting opened, a British reporter told Trump that “a lot of people in the UK are very worried about the mood music from the UK and other European leaders about the inevitability of direct conflict between us and Russia,” and asked: “Can you stop that happening?” Trump refused to give a serious answer.

In fact, Trump’s blood-curdling threats against Iran, and the fact that they provoked no serious protest among the leaders of the imperialist powers, demonstrate the extent to which global war, and its corollary, the extermination of entire populations, has been normalized by world capitalism.

The Democrats are not an alternative to this warmongering. Just days earlier, they had given Trump a blank check to escalate the war not only against Russia but against Iran. On September 16, 58 House Democrats voted for the Lindsey O. Graham Sanctioning Russia and Iran Act, which authorizes the president to tax imports from China, India and the other largest purchasers of Russian oil at rates as high as 100 percent and extends for five years the sanctions on Iran’s energy and arms sectors. Thirty-six of the 45 Senate Democrats had voted for it on August 7.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries voted no because, he said, the bill did not go far enough against Russia: “You have to confront the bully, not appease the bully.” A Democratic majority in Congress after November 3 would take the war further and faster.

The day before his speech, Trump met New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani, a member of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), at Gracie Mansion. Mamdani said nothing about the war and told reporters: “We appreciate the president’s commitment to the city.”

Trump began his speech by boasting of “the golden age of America,” declaring, “The entire world is being lifted by the wealth, strength, spirit, and momentum of a newly energized and a very powerful United States of America.”

In fact, Trump presides over a social order and political system that is rotting on its feet—what Trotsky described on the eve of World War II as “the death agony of capitalism.” The same crisis is producing its opposite: the growth of social opposition, mass protests and global class struggle.

The opposition to Trump’s criminal warmongering will come neither from the European imperialist powers nor from the Democrats and their accomplices in the DSA. It will come from the international working class, armed with the program of international socialism.

Majority of Democratic Voters Want to Prosecute Both Biden and Trump Administration Officials Over Gaza

September 23, 2026

Pro-Palestinian protest in Washington DC

Protesters gathered in front of the US State Department demanding an immediate ceasefire in Gaza, an end to the US-backed Israeli military operations, and unrestricted humanitarian aid access on July 22, 2025, in Washington, DC.

(Photo by Yasin Ozturk/Anadolu via Getty Images)

The vast majority of Democratic voters believe Israel has committed a genocide in Gaza and want its supporters in both parties to face consequences.

Stephen Prager, Common Dreams, Sep 22, 2026

The majority of Democratic voters believe Israel has committed genocide in Gaza for the past three years. And they want the American politicians in both parties who supported it to pay.

In a poll released on Monday by the Center for Strategic Politics and commissioned by the magazine Liberal Currents, 683 Democratic voters were asked whether the next Democratic administration should “pursue criminal prosecution of members of the Trump and Biden administrations for actions taken related to Israel’s genocide in Gaza.”

RECOMMENDED…

World Leaders Speak At The 79th Session Of The United Nations General Assembly In New York

‘Drop the Genocide 20’: Activists Launch Campaign to Exclude Officials Behind Biden Gaza Policy From Democratic Politics

HELP Markup

‘Incredible Story of Corruption’: Bombshell Report Puts Susan Collins at Center of Massive Bribery Scheme

More than half, 57%, of the Democrats surveyed answered “yes,” while only 22% answered “no” and another 22% said they “don’t know.”

Self-described “socialists” and “progressives” were most bullish on Gaza-focused prosecutions. But so were 52% of “liberals” and even 48% of Democrats who called themselves “moderate” or “conservative.”

It is one of several questions in the poll about a hypothetical Democratic administration prosecuting its predecessors over policies considered deadly and destructive.

About two-thirds, 66%, said they wanted to see Trump administration officials prosecuted for actions taken during its aggressive war with Iran, which has led to the deaths of more than 1,700 civilians and wrought economic turmoil.

Nearly three-quarters, 72%, believed Trump officials should face similar accountability for their campaign of extrajudicial strikes on boats in the Caribbean and Pacific, which have killed more than 234 people in what a top United Nations official recently said may constitute “crimes against humanity.”

And more than three-quarters said they wanted to see Trump officials face legal penalties for actions committed by US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP), which have waged a violent mass deportation campaign that has entailed numerous documented due process violations, instances of racial profiling, and several shootings of immigrants and US citizens without clear justification.

The question about Gaza is the only one in the survey in which Democrats were asked about the prospect of prosecuting members of their own party as well as Republicans. And while fewer Democrats ultimately answered yes, it indicates that their ire toward the American politicians supporting the genocide transcends party loyalty.

The poll results come as some activists pursue accountability for the Biden administration in other ways. Last week, organizers launched a campaign to pressure universities and other prominent institutions to cut ties with what they called the “Genocide 20.”

These are officials like former Secretary of State Tony Blinken and former National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan who crafted and defended the administration’s policy of unrestricted military aid for Israel despite mounting evidence that it was killing scores of civilians and enacting a campaign of starvation against the people of Gaza.

The United States provided Israel with at least $17.9 billion in military assistance between October 7, 2023, and the end of former President Joe Biden’s term in January 2025, according to Brown University’s Costs of War project. During that period, more than 47,000 Palestinians were confirmed killed, according to the Gaza Ministry of Health.

Since President Donald Trump returned to office, the US has continued to provide Israel with billions of dollars in military assistance, including $3.8 billion in regular annual military aid, while the Trump administration has approved billions more in arms sales and expedited weapons deliveries. The death toll has risen to nearly 74,000, according to official figures, but independent experts have suggested this may be a significant undercount.

According to Monday’s poll, more than 4 in 5 Democrats said that “foreign policy (including Israel and Iran)” is important to them in deciding which candidates to support, compared with just 4% who said it is not.

Foreign policy has been a critical dividing line in several recent Democratic primaries, in which voters have revolted against candidates backed by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC).

This includes Democratic Michigan Congresswoman Haley Stevens, who was defeated by Abdul El-Sayed in a contest for the US Senate despite her more than $30 million in backing from AIPAC, which helped to turn it into the most expensive Democratic primary ever.

AIPAC-backed House candidates have similarly suffered high-profile defeats at the hands of progressives calling to cut off US funding for Israel. Some of the victors include Chris Rabb in Pennsylvania, Brad Lander and Darializa Avila Chevalier in New York, and Aisha Wahab, who won a special election in California.

An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder


Dear Common Dreams reader,

It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits.

It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do.

Many people said we wouldn’t last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong.

Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.

Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work.

But here’s the urgent message from me today. It’s never been this bad out there. And it’s never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever.

We don’t accept corporate advertising and never will. We don’t have a paywall because we don’t think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you.

When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we.

Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives?

—Craig Brown, Co-founder

Ralph Nader Rips ‘Feeble, Weak, Cowardly’ Democrats for Eschewing Trump Impeachment

September 18, 2026

Ralph Nader Holds News Conference On DC Statehood

Former presidential candidate Ralph Nader listens during a news conference July 2, 2012 at Public Citizen in Washington, DC.

(Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)

“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.”

Brett Wilkins, Common Dreams, ep 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.

RECOMMENDED…

Day Of Action Protests Across The Country Criticize Trump And DOGE Policies

Al Green Files Impeachment Articles Over Trump Using CBP, ICE as ‘Unaccountable Paramilitary Police Forces’

US-POLITICS-NEW YORK

Guess What Happened After New York Raised Taxes on the Rich? More Millionaires Moved In

“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.