Trump demands Raskin's expulsion from Congress, says Biden pardon kept lawmaker out of jail

President Trump called for the expulsion of Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) from Congress on Thursday, claiming the Maryland Democrat would "be in jail right now" if former President Biden had not pardoned him before leaving office. The broadside, posted on Truth Social, escalated a running feud between the president and one of the House Democrats most closely identified with the effort to impeach him during his first term.

Trump's post came in direct response to conservative commentator Mark Levin, who warned on X that Raskin was "already leading a plot to impeach the President if the Democrats take the House" in November. Trump endorsed Levin's call to remove Raskin, writing on Truth Social that he agreed with the commentator's demand to "EXPEL THE BUM."

The exchange captures a broader reality: with midterm elections approaching and Democrats openly discussing investigations and impeachment scenarios, the political warfare between the White House and its most aggressive congressional opponents shows no sign of cooling. And the pardon Biden extended to Raskin and other members of the House select committee investigating January 6 remains a live flashpoint, one that raises uncomfortable questions about why those pardons were deemed necessary in the first place.

Trump's full attack on Truth Social

Trump's Thursday afternoon post was lengthy and personal. He accused Raskin of wasting taxpayer money during the first-term impeachment proceedings and dismissed the January 6 select committee as a political weapon.

"Jamie Raskin, a Loser in Life, who worked endlessly during my First Term to impeach me, and failed miserably, wasting the Country's money, time, and effort, will guaranteed be trying to do it again, despite one of the most successful Presidencies in History."

Trump went further, referencing Raskin's work on the January 6 committee and framing the pardon Biden issued as proof of underlying wrongdoing.

"He spent time on the Unselect Committee of Political Hacks and Thugs, and was rebuffed on that, just as he has been rebuffed on Impeachment, and many other things. If Biden didn't give him a pardon, he'd be in jail right now!"

The president did not specify what conduct he believed would have landed Raskin in prison. But the implication was clear: Trump views the preemptive pardons Biden granted to January 6 committee members as an admission that those lawmakers had legal exposure, and that the pardons shielded them from accountability.

Trump also called for action beyond rhetoric, writing that "something should be done about people like this who do bad things, but always come up on the short end because of their illegal or unscrupulous behavior, and hurt our Country in the process." He capped the post by declaring that "Congress can never be great" with members who "suffer massively from Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS), casting their vote of HATE!"

The president has previously suggested that lawmakers who served on the January 6 panel "should go to jail." Thursday's post was the most direct call yet for Raskin's removal from Congress.

Raskin fires back with constitutional lecture

Raskin did not wait long to respond. In an interview with Chris Hayes on MSNBC, the Maryland Democrat dismissed Trump's post and offered his own advice to the president. He described Trump as "obviously having nightmare flashbacks about impeachment."

"I'd like to tell the president, since he apparently is listening to me this week, there's a very easy way to not get impeached. Stop committing impeachable offenses, stop committing high crimes and misdemeanors."

Raskin then rattled off a list of what he characterized as constitutional violations by the current administration. He accused Trump of usurping Congress's war powers, spending money in ways that diverge from congressional appropriations, and imposing "illegal taxes and tariffs on the American people without congressional consent." He concluded by saying the president "needs a basic constitutional primer."

It was a polished performance, the kind Raskin has delivered many times. But it also revealed the strategy Democrats appear to be building toward: framing the next election cycle around impeachment-ready charges and positioning members like Raskin as the intellectual vanguard of that effort. That framing aligns precisely with Levin's warning and, by extension, with Trump's decision to go on offense now rather than wait.

The broader landscape of Democratic plans to investigate Trump and his family after the midterms only reinforces the stakes. If Democrats recapture the House, the investigative machinery Raskin helped build during the first term would almost certainly be reassembled.

The pardon question Democrats can't escape

The Biden pardons remain the most revealing piece of this story. Before leaving office, Biden pardoned Raskin and other members of the January 6 select committee ahead of Trump's second inauguration. The pardons were preemptive, issued before any charges were filed.

That decision, at the time, drew criticism from the right and awkward silence from many on the left. If the committee's work was lawful and above reproach, why did its members need a presidential pardon? Biden's team never provided a fully satisfying answer. The pardons functioned as a political insurance policy, and Trump has repeatedly seized on them as evidence that the committee overstepped.

No congressional body has taken procedural action toward actually expelling Raskin. The Constitution sets a high bar for expulsion, a two-thirds vote of the chamber, and Republicans hold only a narrow House majority. Trump's call is, for now, rhetorical. But it serves a strategic purpose: it keeps the pardon issue in public view and forces Democrats to defend conduct that their own party's outgoing president apparently felt required legal protection.

Meanwhile, Trump has continued to reshape the executive branch in ways that generate their own constitutional friction. His recent order directing the acting intelligence chief to begin shrinking ODNI is one example of the aggressive use of presidential authority that Democrats cite when they talk about impeachable conduct.

Levin's role and the midterm calculus

Mark Levin's original post on X set the stage for Trump's response. Levin, a longtime conservative commentator and constitutional lawyer, framed Raskin as the leader of a premeditated impeachment campaign, not a lawmaker reacting to events, but one actively building the legal and political architecture for removal before Democrats even have the votes to try.

That framing matters because it shifts the narrative from defense to offense. If Raskin is already organizing an impeachment effort, then Trump's call for expulsion becomes not a punitive overreaction but a preemptive response to a political threat. Whether voters see it that way will depend in part on what Raskin and other Democrats say and do between now and November.

The intelligence community shake-up offers another lens on the same dynamic. As Bill Pulte prepares to step in as acting intelligence chief, the administration is signaling that it intends to move aggressively on institutional reform regardless of congressional resistance. Every such move gives Democrats fresh material for oversight hearings, or, if they regain the majority, for impeachment articles.

Raskin's specific claims, that Trump is waging unauthorized war, spending outside appropriations, and imposing tariffs without consent, echo arguments Democrats have made for months. Senate Republicans recently blocked a war powers challenge from Sen. Cory Booker targeting the administration's Iran campaign. The pattern is consistent: Democrats are probing for constitutional weak points, and Republicans are closing ranks to defend the president's authority.

What comes next

No expulsion vote is on the horizon. No charges have been filed against Raskin. Trump's post is a political statement, not a legislative motion. But it reflects a real and growing tension: the president believes the January 6 committee acted unlawfully, and the pardons Biden issued confirm, in his view, that the committee's members knew it.

Raskin, for his part, is leaning into the fight. His response Thursday was not the statement of a man trying to de-escalate. It was a campaign speech dressed up as a civics lesson, and it signals that he intends to be at the center of whatever impeachment effort Democrats mount if they win the House.

The legal and political questions surrounding Trump's various court battles will continue to evolve. But the Raskin exchange crystallizes something important about this moment in American politics: both sides are already fighting the next war, and neither is pretending otherwise.

When a president needs a pardon to avoid legal jeopardy, most people call that a scandal. When a congressman needs one, his party calls it a precaution. The double standard tells you everything you need to know.