President Donald Trump’s bold strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities has Democrats crying foul, but a former party insider calls their impeachment threats pure madness.
Fox News reported that on Saturday, Trump launched "Operation: Midnight Hammer," targeting three key Iranian nuclear sites. The move sparked a firestorm of progressive outrage, with some itching to drag out the impeachment playbook yet again.
Trump’s operation, executed with precision, obliterated Iran’s nuclear ambitions, a win celebrated by the president and echoed by a retired general on MSNBC.
Democrats, however, branded the strike unconstitutional, claiming Trump sidestepped Congress. This knee-jerk reaction ignores the mission’s success and reeks of partisan posturing.
Enter Dan Turrentine, a former Democratic advisor who served under Hillary Clinton and Jared Polis, throwing cold water on his party’s hysterics.
On Sunday, Turrentine took to X, slamming the impeachment calls as "unhinged" and a symptom of "Trump Derangement Syndrome." His blunt critique exposes the left’s obsession with undermining Trump at every turn.
Turrentine didn’t mince words, arguing the strike wasn’t an impeachable offense. "Trump did not need congressional approval for one precision attack," he posted, comparing it to Obama’s Bin Laden raid. This inconvenient truth stings for Democrats who cheered past presidents but now clutch their pearls.
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., led the charge, demanding Trump’s impeachment on the same day as the strike. She called the attack a "grave violation" of the Constitution, warning of a generational war. Her apocalyptic rhetoric conveniently omits the mission’s success in neutralizing a rogue regime’s nuclear threat.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer joined the fray, urging Senate Majority Leader John Thune to enforce the War Powers Act.
He claimed no president should "unilaterally march" the nation into war. Schumer’s selective outrage forgets that decisive action often demands swift leadership, not endless Capitol Hill debates.
From the White House’s East Room on June 21, 2025, Trump addressed the nation, defending "Operation: Midnight Hammer" as a necessary blow to Iran’s nuclear program.
The strike’s success, he argued, protected American interests and allies. Democrats’ silence on this achievement speaks louder than their impeachment threats.
Turrentine’s X posts cut deeper, urging his party to celebrate the mission’s outcome. "Why can’t our Party just say it’s great, we achieved the objective?" he asked. Instead, progressives fixate on process, ignoring the soldiers who executed the flawless operation.
The former advisor’s frustration peaked as he called out Democrats for omitting support for a decades-long party principle: preventing Iran’s nuclear weaponization. Their impeachment obsession, he argued, betrays their values. It’s a damning indictment of a party lost in anti-Trump fog.
Turrentine offered a balanced path forward, suggesting Congress express concern about future actions. He advocated for insisting on congressional approval for any additional steps. This pragmatic approach contrasts sharply with the left’s all-or-nothing impeachment gambit.
Democrats’ rush to impeach feels like a tired rerun, especially when the strike achieved a bipartisan goal. Iran’s nuclear program, a threat for decades, lies in ruins thanks to Trump’s decisive action. Yet, the left’s response is to double down on division.
Fox News Digital reached out to the Democratic National Committee for comment, but the silence was deafening. Their lack of response suggests either disarray or an unwillingness to engage with the mission’s success. It’s a missed opportunity to bridge the partisan gap.
Turrentine’s plea for unity—praising the soldiers and the mission—fell on deaf ears among his party’s leaders. "God bless our country, military, allies," he wrote, urging a focus on intel briefings over political stunts. His words highlight a patriotism that progressives seem reluctant to embrace.
The strike’s critics, like Ocasio-Cortez, paint Trump as a reckless warmonger, yet their alternative remains unclear. Would they prefer Iran with nuclear capabilities? Their selective constitutional concerns ring hollow when national security is at stake.
