“Trump is not well. We need him out”: Dem. Congressman claims that Trump screamed at aides for hours during Iran rescue
New York – Calls for invoking the 25th Amendment against President Donald Trump are growing louder among some congressional Democrats after a new report raised fresh questions about his conduct during a high-stakes military operation.
Rep. Dan Goldman of New York ignited the latest round of criticism on Sunday after sharing a summary of a Wall Street Journal report that described how Trump was allegedly kept out of a command room while the U.S. military worked to rescue two American airmen downed in Iran.
Read also: “He lied to Trump”: Close Trump ally drops explosive warning on GOP Congressman, wants him out
According to the report, Trump “screamed at aides for hours,” and officials around him worried that “his impatience wouldn’t be helpful” during such a delicate mission.
Goldman seized on that account as more than a troubling anecdote.
According to Huff Post, it pointed to something deeper and more alarming about the president’s ability to handle the responsibilities of office at a moment of military danger and national consequence.
“The commander-in-chief was excluded from commanding a military operation because he was acting so crazy,” Goldman wrote on X. “Think about that.”
He followed that with an even sharper warning.
“Trump is not well. We need the 25th amendment before something really bad happens on US soil,” he added.
The commander-in-chief was excluded from commanding a military operation because he was acting so crazy.
Think about that.
Trump is not well. We need the 25th amendment before something really bad happens on US soil. https://t.co/PbzWgStK3B
— Daniel Goldman (@danielsgoldman) April 19, 2026
That extraordinary statement placed Goldman among a small but increasingly vocal group of Democratic lawmakers openly suggesting that Trump’s own administration should consider the constitutional mechanism designed for moments when a president is believed to be unable to discharge the powers and duties of the office.
The 25th Amendment lays out that process in clear but politically explosive terms.
It allows the vice president and a majority of the Cabinet to declare that the president is unable to perform his duties, at which point the vice president immediately assumes authority as acting president.
If the president rejects that declaration, the matter moves to Congress, where a two-thirds vote in both the House and Senate would be required to keep the president sidelined.
In practice, it is one of the most dramatic remedies available under the Constitution, and one that lawmakers do not invoke lightly.
Still, Goldman’s remarks show how concerns about Trump’s rhetoric, temperament and decision-making are again becoming central to the political conversation as tensions abroad intensify.
He is far from alone.
Earlier this month, Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut raised the same constitutional question after Trump threatened to destroy Iran so thoroughly that its people would be “living in hell.”
“If I were in Trump’s Cabinet, I would spend Easter calling constitutional lawyers about the 25th Amendment,” he wrote on X. “This is completely, utterly unhinged. He’s already killed thousands. He’s going to kill thousands more.”
https://twtter.com/ChrisMurphyCT/status/2040776740465758422
That was not the first time Democratic lawmakers had floated the idea this year. Sen. Ed Markey of Massachusetts previously urged Vice President JD Vance and Cabinet officials to act under the 25th Amendment after Trump made threats involving Greenland, arguing that the president’s conduct had crossed another dangerous line.
Other Democrats echoed that view, including Rep. Yassamin Ansari of Arizona, who said Trump was “extremely mentally ill.”
The president of the United States is extremely mentally ill and it’s putting all of our lives at risk. The 25th Amendment exists for a reason—we need to invoke it immediately. pic.twitter.com/HaywXdWxDK
— Congresswoman Yassamin Ansari (@RepYassAnsari) January 19, 2026
The statements reflect more than routine partisan outrage.
They reveal a widening argument among Trump’s critics that his words and reported behavior are no longer just politically inflammatory, but potentially incompatible with the demands of the presidency itself.
Whether those calls amount to anything beyond rhetoric is another matter entirely. The constitutional threshold is steep, the political risks enormous, and there is no visible sign that Trump’s vice president or Cabinet is prepared to move in that direction. But with each new report and each new outburst, the discussion keeps returning, and the pressure from some Democrats keeps building.
