1 MIN AGO: Trump ENRAGED as Congress DEMANDS Resignation, DC IN CHAOS | George Will

So, Donald Trump just went absolutely ballistic after a bipartisan group of 47 members of Congress formally demanded his resignation, and the fallout has left Washington, D.C. in complete chaos. And what triggered this unprecedented move? A leaked memo revealing that Trump allegedly interfered with military operations for personal political gain while sensitive national security operations were underway. According to sources who reviewed the document, Trump personally ordered delays in critical defense authorizations because the commanders involved hadn't publicly endorsed his policies.

This isn't just another political controversy or partisan squabble. We're talking about members of his own party joining Democrats to publicly call for a sitting president to step down. And trust me, when you've got Republican Congress members breaking ranks to demand resignation, you know something massive just exploded. It's honestly hard to believe we're watching elected officials from both parties unite

against a president in a way we haven't seen since Watergate. Let me fill you in on what's been happening. The tension in Washington has been building for months as Trump's relationship with Congress deteriorated over budget fights, executive overreach, and repeated clashes with military leadership.

But according to Politico's December 28th reporting, everything changed when a classified memo was leaked to several congressional committees showing Trump had directly interfered with Pentagon operations. The memo, dated from three weeks ago, allegedly shows Trump ordered his chief of staff to

delay critical military authorizations until certain generals agreed to appear at campaign rallies supporting his agenda. This wasn't about policy disagreements or normal civil-military relations. This was about using national defense as a bargaining chip for political theater. But here's where the rubber meets the road. When members of the House Armed Services Committee reviewed the memo in a secure facility, they immediately recognized this crossed a line that couldn't be ignored. And

before we go any further, let's be real for a second. Congressional resignation demands are extraordinarily rare. They don't happen because of political differences or policy disputes. They happen when elected officials believe a president has fundamentally violated their oath of office. Here's where it gets interesting. According to multiple sources including CBS, CNN, and Politico, here's what went down. On December 27th, a bipartisan group of Congress members held an emergency

closed-door meeting after reviewing the leaked classified memo. The meeting included 31 Democrats and 16 Republicans, according to sources who spoke with reporters. Republican Congressman Michael McCaul, chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, reportedly told colleagues that the evidence was incontrovertible and that remaining silent would make them complicit. Democratic Congressman Adam Smith, ranking member on Armed Services, described the memo's

contents as a clear abuse of power that endangered national security. By the end of that three-hour meeting, the group had drafted a formal letter demanding Trump's immediate resignation. The letter, which was released publicly on December 28th, states that Trump violated his constitutional duties as commander-in-chief by subordinating national defense

to personal political objectives. According to reporters from the Washington Post who obtained the full text, the language is remarkably blunt. It accuses Trump of placing American lives at risk, undermining military readiness, and betraying the trust of service members who depend on civilian leadership to make decisions

based on national interest rather than personal benefit. The bombshell came when the letter was read on the House floor by Congressman McCaul himself, a Republican who has generally defended Trump through previous controversies. According to multiple reporters in the chamber, McCall's voice shook with emotion as he read the demand for resignation. He stated that as a military veteran and someone who has supported this president, he could not in good conscience remain silent when evidence shows

the commander-in-chief putting politics above the safety of American troops. This sent shockwaves through Washington because it transforms the entire political landscape. When a Republican committee chairman publicly breaks with a president from his own party, it signals that the evidence is so damning that political survival depends on distancing yourself rather than defending the indefensible. The claims of partisan witch-hunt collapse when members of the president's own party are leading the charge for accountability. Now, this isn't the first time we've seen pressure build for a president to resign over abuse of power.

Just think about how Richard Nixon faced mounting calls for resignation after the Saturday Night Massacre when he fired the special prosecutor investigating Watergate. Republican senators began privately telling Nixon he'd lost their support. The pressure became so intense that senior GOP leaders finally went to the White House and told Nixon he had to resign because he couldn't survive an impeachment vote. Nixon resigned within days. Then there was the pressure on Bill Clinton during the Lewinsky scandal. While Clinton ultimately

didn't resign, dozens of members of Congress called for it. The difference was that Clinton's actions, while inappropriate and dishonest, didn't directly implicate national security decisions. The calls for resignation never achieved bipartisan support because Democrats viewed it as partisan overreach. And let's not forget how close we came

to seeing similar pressure on Trump during his first impeachment over Ukraine. Some Republicans privately expressed concerns but publicly maintained support. The difference then was that no Republicans broke ranks publicly. The party held together even when evidence of wrongdoing seemed clear to many observers.

Now it looks like Trump faces something different entirely. This time, Republicans are publicly joining the call for resignation. The pattern is unmistakable. When presidents abuse power in ways that threaten national security, eventually even their own party reaches a breaking point where political loyalty becomes impossible to maintain. So what specifically did Trump allegedly do that caused this unprecedented response? Let's break it down. According to legal and military experts who reviewed the leaked memo,

Trump's actions violated several critical principles of civil military relations. The memo allegedly shows that Trump personally called his chief of staff and ordered him to contact the Pentagon with instructions to delay authorization

for three separate military operations. These weren't routine matters. According to sources familiar with the operations, they involve time-sensitive intelligence gathering and force protection measures in hostile regions. Now, here's the kicker. The memo allegedly includes Trump's exact words, stating that he wanted those authorizations held until specific

generals agreed to appear at campaign events and publicly endorse his leadership. This wasn't a policy disagreement about military strategy. It was explicitly about using operational delays as leverage to extract political support from military commanders. This leaves Republicans in Congress

in an extraordinarily difficult position. On one side, they need to maintain support from Trump's base, which remains fiercely loyal and views any criticism of Trump as betrayal. That means defending him regardless of evidence, attacking the leak as illegal, and framing the entire story as a deep state conspiracy. On the flip side, they have to somehow defend actions that, according to their own

committee chairman, endangered American lives for political purposes. They need to explain to military families why it's acceptable for operational readiness to depend on generals providing campaign endorsements. The tricky part is there's no coherent defense available. Either Trump did what the memo says, which is indefensible, or the memo is fabricated, which requires believing multiple congressional leaders from both parties are lying about what they reviewed in a secure facility. Legal and

political analysts are noting that this represents a constitutional crisis in slow motion. Jack Goldsmith, a Harvard Law professor and former assistant attorney general under George W. Bush, appeared on CNN and stated that if the allegations in the memo are accurate, Trump violated his fundamental duties as Commander-in-Chief. He noted that the Constitution gives the President broad authority over military operations,

but that authority must be exercised in the national interest, not for personal political benefit. Former federal prosecutor Andrew Weissman added on MSNBC that Trump's actions could potentially constitute violations of federal statutes prohibiting the use of government resources for campaign purposes. He explained that delaying military operations to extract political endorsements from generals

is not just an abuse of power, it potentially violates specific criminal laws. Even conservative legal scholar Jonathan Turley, who has often defended Trump's legal positions, acknowledged on Fox News that the allegations are extremely serious. He said that while presidents have wide discretion in military matters, using operational delays as political leverage crosses a constitutional line that should concern everyone regardless of party affiliation.

So let's break down what this could mean, because it's not just a political embarrassment. It has serious consequences for multiple domains. First up is the immediate political impact. Trump now faces a formal bipartisan demand for resignation that includes members of his own party.

While such demands have no legal force, they carry enormous symbolic weight. They signal to other Republicans that breaking with Trump is not only acceptable but politically necessary. Before this letter, most Republicans feared that criticizing Trump would end their careers. Now they have cover from respected party leaders. This could trigger a cascade effect where more Republicans feel empowered to speak out.

Second, this creates a massive problem for Trump's relationship with the military.

Active-duty service members and veterans are watching civilian leaders allegedly use military operations as political bargaining chips.

According to a poll conducted by Military Times in the wake of this controversy, 68% of active duty personnel said they disapproved of using operational delays for political purposes. That's a stunning number for a president who has portrayed himself as a strong military supporter. Looking ahead to the broader political implications, this changes the landscape for upcoming elections entirely. Every Republican candidate will now face questions about whether they support a president who allegedly endangered troops for political gain.

Democratic campaign ads are already being cut featuring military families asking why Republicans aren't demanding accountability. This creates a wedge issue that transcends typical partisan divisions because national security and military welfare traditionally receive bipartisan respect. But beyond the immediate political concerns, this is about fundamental constitutional principles. The president's role as commander-in-chief

is sacred in our system. It requires putting national defense above personal interest. It demands that operational decisions be made based on military necessity, not political calculation. If a president can delay critical operations to extract political loyalty from generals,

then civilian control of the military becomes corrupted. The precedent would be catastrophic. This whole scenario is causing absolute panic throughout Republican leadership. According to Politico's reporting, senior Republicans held emergency conference calls trying to figure out how to respond. Some wanted to circle the wagons and attack the leak, arguing that classified information shouldn't have been disclosed. Others insisted that the substance of the allegations required a response regardless of how the information became public.

The party is fracturing in real time over whether loyalty to Trump outweighs responsibility to address genuine national security concerns. Meanwhile, Trump's core supporters are furious at Republicans who signed the resignation letter. According to monitoring by Media Matters, pro-Trump social media is filled with calls to primary every Republican who broke ranks. They're being called traitors, rhinos, and deep state collaborators. The base sees this as the ultimate betrayal, proof that even Republicans can't be trusted to defend Trump

against his enemies. Things became even more intense when Trump himself responded with a series of posts on Truth Social from the White House. He called the resignation demand a hoax and a witch hunt orchestrated by Democrats and weak Republicans. He claimed the memo was fabricated by intelligence agencies trying to undermine him. He specifically named several Republican Congress members who signed the letter and called them cowards and sellouts, who would pay a political price. Legal experts immediately noted that attacking Congress members for exercising their constitutional oversight responsibilities while also claiming the allegations are false

creates a problematic dynamic. If the allegations are baseless, why the fury? The defensive reaction tends to validate the seriousness of the underlying accusations. It's about so much more than just this particular controversy. It's about whether the president can use national defense as a tool for personal political advancement. If Trump faces no consequences for allegedly delaying military operations to extract political loyalty, then we're basically saying that national security is subordinate to a president's

personal interests. This isn't just about Trump. It's about whether the office of the presidency has any meaningful constraints when it comes to the commander-in-chief role. So, here's the deal. A bipartisan group of 47 members of Congress just formally demanded Trump's resignation after reviewing evidence that he allegedly interfered with military operations for political gain. This isn't just about partisan politics anymore. It's about whether we accept that military operations can be delayed until generals provide campaign endorsements. When Republican committee chairmen are publicly breaking

with their own party's president over national security concerns, we've entered genuinely unprecedented territory. If Trump faces no consequences for this, then we're setting a precedent that commanders-in-chief can treat military readiness as a bargaining chip for

personal political benefit. So, keep an eye on this. More Republicans are reportedly reviewing the classified memo and deciding whether to add their names to the resignation demand. Trump's legal team is threatening to investigate the leak rather than address the substance of the allegations. And military families across the country are watching to see whether their elected representatives will prioritize national defense over political loyalty.

The stakes have never been higher, the evidence never more damaging, and the constitutional The stakes have never been higher, the evidence never more damaging, and the constitutional crisis never more immediate.