Rep. Jason Crow used a Sunday morning national broadcast to declare he would not hesitate to launch impeachment proceedings against President Trump, the latest signal that House Democrats plan to weaponize congressional power if they retake the majority.
Crow, a Colorado Democrat, appeared on CBS's "Face the Nation" on August 31 and laid out what amounted to a political threat wrapped in the language of accountability. Host Margaret Brennan asked him directly whether two years of impeachment inquiries would define a Democratic House majority. Crow did not deny it. He embraced the premise and dressed it up as duty.
The exchange matters because it confirms what President Trump and Speaker Johnson have already warned: Democrats are telegraphing an impeachment-first agenda before they have even won a single seat. Crow's remarks, paired with Rep. Jamie Raskin's same-morning claim on another network that the president "has undoubtedly committed impeachable offenses," suggest the party's left flank is coordinating its message well ahead of the midterms.
Brennan set up the question cleanly. She noted that both Trump and Johnson have said Democrats would "undoubtedly launch impeachment inquiries" if they take control of the House. She cited Raskin's comments and asked Crow point-blank: "Is that the plan?"
Crow's answer was long, but the operative line was short. As Breitbart reported, the congressman described impeachment as "one tool of many" and added plainly that he would not hesitate to use it.
"Impeachment is one tool of many, and I'm less concerned about, you know, the specific tools, and I won't hesitate to use that tool if we need to. But what we have to do is look at what's available and what's going to deliver results for accountability."
He then went further, calling the Trump administration "the most corrupt administration in the history of America." That is a sweeping claim. Crow offered no specific charges, no documents, no dollar figures, and no formal filings to back it up. He offered rhetoric.
His framing of corruption was broad and emotional, aimed squarely at voters back home in Colorado:
"Because the corruption is boundless. This is the most corrupt administration in the history of America, and what corruption really is is stealing from my constituents. It is taking money out of the pockets of Coloradans, money that should be used for their health care, for their homes, for their farms, and it's going into the pockets of Donald Trump and their cronies. And I'm going to go after that money, and I'm not going to apologize for it."
"Boundless" corruption, "stealing" from constituents, money flowing into the president's pockets, and yet not a single transaction named. Not a single audit cited. Not a single formal complaint filed, at least not one mentioned on the broadcast. That gap between the accusation and the evidence is the story.
Crow is not new to this arena. He reminded viewers that he served as one of the House managers who prosecuted the first impeachment trial of President Trump in the Senate. The New York Post reported at the time that then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi named Crow alongside Reps. Jerrold Nadler, Adam Schiff, Zoe Lofgren, Hakeem Jeffries, Val Demings, and Sylvia Garcia as the seven Democratic impeachment managers. That trial centered on two articles of impeachment, abuse of power and obstruction of Congress, related to Trump's dealings with Ukraine.
Crow described the experience in personal terms on Sunday, saying he "sat on the floor of the Senate in my first term in Congress" and told senators directly that Trump was "a danger" who was "not qualified" and "not competent." The senators, Crow said, "didn't listen to me then, even though there were plenty of warning signs."
They didn't listen because the Senate acquitted the president. Republicans held a 53, 47 majority and the case did not produce a conviction. That outcome is worth remembering every time Crow invokes his prosecutorial experience. He made the case. The case failed. Now he wants another swing.
Democrats later impeached Trump a second time in January 2021 on a charge of "incitement of insurrection" following the Capitol riot, with ten Republicans joining the 232, 197 vote. That trial also ended in acquittal. Two impeachments, two acquittals, and now the same party is floating a third attempt before it even holds the gavel.
Crow was not freelancing on Sunday morning. Brennan noted that Raskin, the Maryland Democrat, appeared on a separate network the same day and said the president "has undoubtedly committed impeachable offenses." Raskin's exact words were not quoted in the broadcast, but Brennan's paraphrase was clear enough. Two senior Democrats, on two networks, on the same Sunday, both talking impeachment. That is not coincidence. That is messaging.
The coordinated rollout fits a familiar pattern. Democrats have struggled to channel voter frustration into a coherent midterm platform. Impeachment talk gives the base something to rally around, and gives the party's cable-news surrogates a reason to book airtime. Whether it gives voters in swing districts a reason to show up is a different question entirely.
Other Democrats have tried this route before with little success. Rep. Al Green of Texas filed four separate impeachment resolutions against Trump, and his own party repeatedly declined to back him. The appetite for impeachment has always been stronger on cable television than on the House floor.
Strip away the rhetoric and what did Crow actually commit to on Sunday? He said impeachment is a tool he would use. He did not identify a single specific impeachable offense. He did not cite a statute, a regulation, a contract, or a financial disclosure. He did not reference an inspector general report, a Government Accountability Office finding, or a whistleblower complaint.
He said the administration is corrupt. He said money is being stolen from Coloradans. He said it is going "into the pockets of Donald Trump and their cronies." Those are serious charges, the kind that, in a functioning system of accountability, would come attached to evidence. On Sunday, they came attached to a television appearance.
The broader impeachment conversation has spilled well beyond Capitol Hill. An active-duty Air Force major was arrested on the Capitol steps after demanding Trump's impeachment, a reminder that the rhetoric carries real-world consequences when it escapes the studio.
Congressional Democrats have also pursued other confrontational strategies against the administration, including resolutions to force lawsuits over executive authority and repeated standoffs between the House and Senate on matters ranging from war powers to agency funding.
Credit to Margaret Brennan for framing the question honestly. She did not ask Crow whether he believed Trump had committed high crimes. She asked whether two years of impeachment inquiries were "the plan", whether Democrats intended to spend an entire Congress relitigating the same fights they have lost twice before.
Crow's answer, for all its length, never actually said no. He said the plan was "accountability." He said he would use "what's available." He said he would not "apologize" for going after money he claims is being stolen. But he never described a single concrete legislative priority that was not impeachment-adjacent. No bill numbers. No committee hearing schedules. No policy proposals for the Coloradans whose pocketbooks he invoked.
That omission tells voters everything they need to know about where the party's energy is pointed. Democrats are not running on a plan to lower grocery prices, secure the border, or resolve the standoffs that have stalled serious legislation. They are running on the promise of a third impeachment.
If the definition of political insanity is trying the same thing and expecting a different result, Democrats are building their midterm message around it. Voters who want accountability deserve more than a congressman who can't name what he's investigating.
