Trump: Impeachment or the Illiberal Impossibility of Toppling Narcissus

After the forced invocation of the concept of “rebellion” to deploy troops to parts of California—politicizing a legal mechanism (Title 10; Section 12406 of the U.S. Code) for symbolic purposes, as a display of personal strength and a statement on the alleged “incompetence” of California Governor Gavin Newsom—in a dual maneuver of federal intimidation and political humiliation, any other president would be at risk. But not Donald Trump.

The situation escalated dramatically with the authorization of airstrikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities (Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan) without prior Congressional approval, a clear and serious violation of the U.S. Constitution and the 1973 War Powers Resolution.

This unilateral decision reveals how Donald Trump understands the presidency: a fully unipersonal office, unchecked, unbalanced, and affirming his unmistakably illiberal and autocratic character—a Republican American version of the “Sun King.” With this move, Trump delivers a heavy blow to the principles of liberal democracy, particularly the essential separation of powers, established since Montesquieu as one of the foundations of modern constitutionalism.

Although voices have been raised—from Democrats like Bernie Sanders, who called the attack “alarming” and “grossly unconstitutional,” to some Republicans, like constitutionalist Thomas Massie, who also denounced its illegality—Trump, like all illiberal populists, seems capable of escaping unscathed, thanks to two structural and interconnected factors:
(i) the American electoral system, which is disproportionate and gives rural, MAGA-oriented regions outsized influence; and
(ii) the loyalty of his voter base, which relishes Trump’s shows of strength—whether in war or against American liberal institutions—following him like a charismatic evangelical preacher.

So, while there is a clear legal basis for initiating impeachment proceedings against Donald Trump, recent history shows that such efforts are ineffective. On the contrary, impeachment often serves only to reinforce his political capital, painting him as a victim of the establishment—that is, the political system that cannot tolerate men who claim to be “the voice of the people.”

With both the House of Representatives and the Senate in Trump’s grip, impeachment is unviable, further entrenching his image as untouchable and unremovable. For now, listening to the U.S. Secretary of Defense, one senses that the Trump Doctrine is a fusion of the Cobra Kai motto—“Strike first, strike hard, no mercy”—with Bush Jr.’s imperial illusion of a world under American moral surveillance. That imperial dream may well lead the United States down dangerous paths that could reshape global geopolitics.

In the end, it might well mark the political downfall of Trump. But until then, the American president seems unwavering—proud of his own reflection in the water. We shall see whether he ends like Narcissus—and what world he drags down with him into the waters where he so admires himself.