Rep. Darrell Issa has dropped a resolution that would do something the House has never seriously tried before: formally expunge both of President Donald Trump’s impeachments — wiping them from the official record as if they never happened.

The California Republican, never shy about a constitutional brawl, argues Democrats didn’t just overreach — they allegedly built their impeachment cases on “knowingly false” and politically tainted claims designed to kneecap Trump, not judge him fairly.

The measure, H.Res.1211, has been sent to the House Judiciary Committee and already has backing from Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan — a clear sign Republicans are ready to turn this into more than a symbolic protest vote.

Issa’s argument is blunt: impeachment may be constitutional, but what happens when it’s allegedly weaponized?

“The fact is that the Constitution doesn’t spell out what to do when you’ve wrongfully indicted somebody,” Issa told Fox News Digital. “An impeachment is basically an indictment and it’s an indictment that you can’t really be acquitted from. If you are impeached by the House, famously where do you go to get your reputation back, is the question,”

“And that’s sort of a problem that we’re dealing with, which is that the president was wrongfully accused, the evidence is now out that there was withheld information and false information, but where do we go to unring this bell? And the answer is we go back to Congress and we go to the House floor and we have a vote.”

The resolution takes direct aim at both the 2019 and 2021 impeachments, arguing the first was built on politically biased or unreliable information — including a whistleblower complaint that Republicans say lacked firsthand knowledge and was amplified by partisan actors inside the intelligence community.

Issa and his allies also cite newly declassified material released earlier this year by Tulsi Gabbard, which they say revealed a “coordinated effort” inside parts of the intelligence apparatus to shape the narrative that led to Trump’s first impeachment.

Issa didn’t hold back on the floor strategy either, accusing Democrats of shredding House norms when it suited them.

“They broke every House rule,” he said of the impeachment proceedings.

He also suggested that even some Democrats now privately acknowledge the process left a stain on the institution — not exactly a ringing endorsement of how those impeachments were handled.

The second impeachment, tied to the January 6 Capitol riot, is also in the GOP crosshairs.

Republicans argue it was rushed through in record time — introduced and passed in roughly two days — without what they call a full evidentiary process or meaningful opportunity for defense.

Issa was even more direct:

“They impeached him for essentially an insurrection, a true high crime, and it’s false,” he said.

That charge, of course, remains one of the most politically explosive in modern American history — and Democrats continue to defend the process as justified under the circumstances of the Capitol attack.

House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan didn’t just endorse the effort — he framed it as a correction to what Republicans see as years of political lawfare.

“Democrats weaponized impeachment against President Trump with politically motivated charges,” Jordan said. “We applaud Chairman Issa for leading the fight to expunge this sham from the record.”

Strong language — and a clear signal this isn’t being treated as a ceremonial gesture.

Here’s where things get thorny.

Even some legal scholars — including critics of Trump’s impeachments — argue the Constitution gives the House the “sole Power of Impeachment,” but not necessarily the power to rewrite history after the fact.

Previous GOP-led attempts in 2022 and 2023 never made it to the floor — quietly dying without hearings or votes.

Issa, however, says this isn’t just about procedural housekeeping. It’s about narrative repair.

“Our goal is to show that it’s false and it was maliciously false and, as a result, it should no longer stand as a legitimate accusation,” he said.

And he framed it as a media fairness issue too: “When you’ve been falsely accused, whether it’s days, weeks, months or years later, somebody should be just as interested in printing that retraction on the front page as they were in putting the original charge on the front page,” Issa said. “And that’s what we’re trying to achieve.”