URL: https://www.commondreams.org/opinion/trump-lucky-in-enemies
Original Image: https://www.commondreams.org/media-library/image.jpg?id=65101305&width=1200&height=600&coordinates=0%2C417%2C0%2C417

Donald Trump’s astonishing political fortune does not come from brilliance alone. It also flows from opponents who repeatedly document his abuses, warn that democracy is burning, and then respond with the institutional equivalent of a nervous shrug.

The pattern began during Trump’s first term, when the House impeached him in 2019 over his effort to pressure Ukraine into targeting Hunter Biden. Speaker Nancy Pelosi moved forward despite knowing Senate conviction was unlikely, yet declined to pursue numerous additional offenses that advocates considered clearer and more relevant to ordinary Americans.

Trump was impeached again after the January 6 attack on the Capitol and his attempt to overturn the 2020 election. Senate Republicans protected him from conviction, choosing partisan submission over constitutional accountability and teaching Trump that even an assault on the peaceful transfer of power carried few consequences.

When Trump returned to office in 2025, he immediately unleashed executive orders that critics described as illegal and impeachable. Elon Musk and DOGE helped drive that assault on federal authority, public institutions, workers, and basic democratic safeguards.

Yet Democratic leaders have resisted building a serious impeachment campaign, even as much of their own base demands one. Instead of using impeachment hearings to educate voters, organize public anger, and create a detailed record, party leaders appear terrified of discovering that energetic opposition might actually inspire people.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries told a reporter that “he didn’t want to get ahead of that discussion.” That answer might satisfy consultants hiding inside a conference room, but it offers little to voters watching Trump test the boundaries of presidential power every day.

Trump has responded to criticism with escalating threats and increasingly authoritarian rhetoric. He even called for the execution of six congressional Democrats after they reminded military personnel that they must not obey unlawful orders, yet Democratic leadership still refused to treat impeachment as an urgent national campaign.

Representative Al Green attempted to force the issue by introducing an impeachment resolution in June 2025. He sought a floor debate and a prompt vote that would deliver a simple message to Trump, “You’re Fired.”, but Jeffries and his allies opposed the effort.

That resistance leaves the public without the organized congressional opposition the moment requires. Millions of Americans are experiencing the consequences of Trump’s policies through economic insecurity, weakened public services, threats to health, attacks on immigrants, and reckless efforts to dismantle protections built over generations.

The silence also gives major news organizations permission to treat impeachment as politically impolite rather than constitutionally necessary. Editorial boards routinely describe Trump’s attacks on democracy, public health, elections, and lawful government, then somehow wander away before explaining what Congress should do about them.

The New York Times has published extensive warnings about Trump’s conduct, including his election interference and damage to public health. Its columnists have meticulously assembled evidence of abuse, but they have largely avoided demanding the remedy the Constitution provides, as though saying the word impeachment might stain the furniture.

Progressive publications have not consistently filled that vacuum. Some have mentioned impeachment, but too few have mounted a sustained editorial campaign or closely covered citizen groups organizing around the country to demand congressional action.

Democrats could also organize shadow congressional hearings to create a public record, hear from harmed communities, question legal experts, and feature former officials. Such hearings would generate evidence and media attention, but Jeffries and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer have blocked even that avenue of organized resistance.

Congress possesses tools beyond impeachment, including authority connected to Section 4 of the 25th Amendment. Lawmakers can establish a body to evaluate whether a president is unable to perform the duties of office, but congressional leaders show little appetite for challenging Trump through that mechanism either.

The explanation may be fear of retaliation, complacency about Trump’s weak polling, or faith that corporate money and vague promises about affordability will carry Democrats through the next election. It may also reflect concern that Trump will answer by pointing toward past Democratic support for unconstitutional wars and executive overreach.

Whatever the excuse, the result is political surrender. Trump receives the message that he has years to attack climate preparedness, renewable energy, immigrant communities, children, public health, and democratic institutions while pursuing personal enrichment and daring Congress to stop him.

Richard Nixon was driven from office in 1974 after Democrats and frightened Republicans concluded that protecting the constitutional order mattered more than protecting a president. Trump has committed abuses on a scale Nixon could scarcely have imagined, yet today’s congressional leadership keeps searching for a safer talking point.

If Schumer and Jeffries cannot meet this moment, they should step aside. Democratic voters need leaders willing to fight openly, organize nationally, and use every lawful constitutional power available, not caretakers who watch authoritarianism advance while mumbling about process.