Dem Teases Impeaching Trump, Vance – Making Jeffries President If Dems Retake House

Rep. Mark DeSaulnier, a California Democrat, suggested this week that a dramatic and highly unlikely transfer of presidential power could occur if Democrats retake the House in 2026—raising eyebrows by refusing to rule out a scenario in which House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries or another Democrat could ascend to the presidency.

DeSaulnier made the remarks during a virtual End Of Year Town Hall on Monday, where participants submitted questions about Democratic priorities and speculative future outcomes. One question, sent by a viewer identified as Peter on YouTube, asked whether the vice president would also face impeachment if enough Republicans resigned and the president were removed from office.

District Director Janessa Oriol relayed the question to DeSaulnier, who responded by outlining the constitutional mechanics of impeachment and succession. He emphasized that impeachment proceedings against a president and vice president are separate actions, adding that if both were removed, the presidency would fall to the speaker of the House.

DeSaulnier noted that if Democrats controlled the House at that time, the speaker would be a Democrat. While he conceded such a chain of events would be a “reach,” he maintained that it was nonetheless possible.

Under the U.S. Constitution and the Presidential Succession Act of 1947, the vice president stands first in the line of succession, followed by the speaker of the House. Next in line is the president pro tempore of the Senate, followed by eligible cabinet secretaries in the order their departments were established.

For Democrats’ hypothetical to materialize, they would need to win the House majority in the 2026 midterms, elect a Democratic speaker—most likely Jeffries—and then successfully remove both President Donald Trump and Vice President JD Vance from office. That outcome would require impeachment by the House and conviction by a two-thirds supermajority in the U.S. Senate for treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.

The obstacles to such an effort would be immense. Democrats failed to secure Senate convictions in either impeachment trial during President Trump’s first term, even when the chamber’s partisan balance was more favorable to them.

Jeffries is widely seen as the frontrunner for the speakership should Democrats regain control of the House, in line with historical midterm trends. If he were passed over, Rep. Katherine Clark of Massachusetts, the current minority whip, and Rep. Pete Aguilar of California, the caucus chairman, are viewed as the next most likely contenders.

The conversation about impeachment and succession also comes as former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi continues to revisit her confrontations with President Trump. In an interview with USA Today’s Susan Page, Pelosi claimed the nation’s founders anticipated the possibility of “a rogue president” but not “a rogue Senate,” as she defended her leadership record and again accused former President Donald Trump of “cruelty and corruption.”

“I’m really not here to talk about the incoherence, the cruelty, the corruption of the current president of the United States,” Pelosi said, attempting to deflect questions about Trump’s renewed political dominance.

Pelosi, now 85 and set to retire at the end of her term in January 2027, told USA Today that passing the Affordable Care Act was her proudest legislative achievement, while her failure to enact gun control laws remained her greatest disappointment.

She also defended the two Trump impeachments she oversaw, arguing they were constitutionally justified.

“The person most responsible for impeaching President Trump when I was speaker was President Trump. He gave us no choice,” Pelosi said. “If he crosses the border again. But that’s not an incidental thing. There has to be cause. There has to be reason. We had review. This was a very serious, historic thing.”

Pelosi further argued that the framers anticipated executive overreach but underestimated the role of the Senate.

“Our founders knew that there could be a rogue president, and that’s why they put impeachment in the Constitution,” she said. “They didn’t know there’d be a rogue president at the same time a rogue Senate that didn’t have the courage to do the right thing. It was bipartisan in the Senate, but it wasn’t enough.”