National Review: "Is Joe OK?"
-
Which is why you were an uninformed idiot.
Loveable, but an idiot.
-
@jolly said in National Review: "Is Joe OK?":
Which is why you were an uninformed idiot.
Loveable, but an idiot.
How so? Do a quick Google search for “Trump 25th” and you’ll see all coverage was about it’s use in January of this year, which like I said is when the possibility of it’s use actually gained some traction.
-
@jolly said in National Review: "Is Joe OK?":
Which is why you were an uninformed idiot.
Loveable, but an idiot.
How so? Do a quick Google search for “Trump 25th” and you’ll see all coverage was about it’s use in January of this year, which like I said is when the possibility of it’s use actually gained some traction.
-
Joe Biden is a feeble, demented, senile old man, kind of like most of us here.
He has no business being president.
Everyone knows this.
The change that seems to be beginning now is that some in the MSM seem ready to say this obvious story out loud.
Once this catches on, the cry to make a female black person president, will be deafening.
-
Re' the 25th amendment.
And we talked about it at the old place as well:
https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/the_new_coffee_room/viewtopic.php?p=1458698#p1458698
And Rosenstein, allegedly, talked about it:
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/21/us/politics/rod-rosenstein-wear-wire-25th-amendment.html
And so did Fauxahontas:
And NRO commented on it.
https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/10/donald-trump-25th-amendment-never-trumpers-last-strategy/
I'll be happy to be proven wrong, but there was not this kind of discussion during the administrations of Obama or W.
-
@George-K thanks for the links (and the walk down tapatalk memory lane!)
The talks about invoking the 25th after Jan 6th was really the only time I thought there was an actual possibility of it happening…heck, even democrats and some republicans in congress openly supported it and the house even passed a resolution urging it, so it’s not just my opinion on that.
The other mentions of the 25th earlier in Trump’s presidents weren’t really substantive….such as when Trump fired the FBI Director investigating his administration, even then it was just an internal discussion of what options there were when a president starts to make those types of defensive actions.
Anyway, my point is that talks about invoking the 25th against trump wasn’t just because he was an asshole and people didn’t like him, it was because he was firing FBI directors investigating him, and inciting an insurrection to stop an election he lost.
-
@George-K thanks for the links (and the walk down tapatalk memory lane!)
The talks about invoking the 25th after Jan 6th was really the only time I thought there was an actual possibility of it happening…heck, even democrats and some republicans in congress openly supported it and the house even passed a resolution urging it, so it’s not just my opinion on that.
The other mentions of the 25th earlier in Trump’s presidents weren’t really substantive….such as when Trump fired the FBI Director investigating his administration, even then it was just an internal discussion of what options there were when a president starts to make those types of defensive actions.
Anyway, my point is that talks about invoking the 25th against trump wasn’t just because he was an asshole and people didn’t like him, it was because he was firing FBI directors investigating him, and inciting an insurrection to stop an election he lost.
@89th read the amendment.
It has nothing to do with wrongdoing, it has to do with removing the president if he is removed from office, or is unable to fulfill the duties of the office, and then explains the mechanism whereby that happens.
Section I.
In case of the removal of the President from office or of his death or resignation, the Vice President shall become President.Section 3.
Whenever the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that he is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, and until he transmits to them a written declaration to the contrary, such powers and duties shall be discharged by the Vice President as Acting President.Section 4.
Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.Removing the president because you don’t like him, because he has committed crimes, etc is the process of impeachment.
“Unable to discharge the powers and duties….”
It's not "unable to discharge the powers and duties that I like and agree with..."
Don’t like the guy? Fine. Impeach and convict.
But you had AGA Rosenstein allegedly poling cabinet members to invoke the 25th because of…what, exactly? Andrew McCabe talks about it.
That’s traction. That’s substantive.
Firing Comet is not a 25th amendment case. You can impeach him if you think it’s a criminal act, but it’s well within the president’s duties and rights. It may be wrong, but it’s not “unable to discharge powers…” It’s precisely his power to do that.
And you keep claiming incitement. I’ll grant you that many see it that way, but he was indicted of that crime, and acquitted. Law > Feelings.
Republicans supported using the 25th to remove him from office after Jan 6? I didn’t see that. There was a lot of talk about impeachment, but I didn’t see the 25th being talked about. Can you share a link, please?
But returning to Joe, there's a lot of people, on the left as well, talking about how he's not making sense, unaware of things he said earlier, and seeming confused.
-
@89th read the amendment.
It has nothing to do with wrongdoing, it has to do with removing the president if he is removed from office, or is unable to fulfill the duties of the office, and then explains the mechanism whereby that happens.
Section I.
In case of the removal of the President from office or of his death or resignation, the Vice President shall become President.Section 3.
Whenever the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that he is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, and until he transmits to them a written declaration to the contrary, such powers and duties shall be discharged by the Vice President as Acting President.Section 4.
Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.Removing the president because you don’t like him, because he has committed crimes, etc is the process of impeachment.
“Unable to discharge the powers and duties….”
It's not "unable to discharge the powers and duties that I like and agree with..."
Don’t like the guy? Fine. Impeach and convict.
But you had AGA Rosenstein allegedly poling cabinet members to invoke the 25th because of…what, exactly? Andrew McCabe talks about it.
That’s traction. That’s substantive.
Firing Comet is not a 25th amendment case. You can impeach him if you think it’s a criminal act, but it’s well within the president’s duties and rights. It may be wrong, but it’s not “unable to discharge powers…” It’s precisely his power to do that.
And you keep claiming incitement. I’ll grant you that many see it that way, but he was indicted of that crime, and acquitted. Law > Feelings.
Republicans supported using the 25th to remove him from office after Jan 6? I didn’t see that. There was a lot of talk about impeachment, but I didn’t see the 25th being talked about. Can you share a link, please?
But returning to Joe, there's a lot of people, on the left as well, talking about how he's not making sense, unaware of things he said earlier, and seeming confused.
It comes down to how you read "unable to discharge (his) duties...". Let's expand a bit what happened as a hypothetical. Let's say Trump on Jan 7th said he refused to accept the election results (well, he did say that but let's continue) and said he would be sending the military to arrest Biden. At what point is Trump no longer able to do his duty if he's committing an openly treasonous or coup-like act? Obviously an extreme, but the point is at some point one could argue a president is no longer able to do their duty (to preserve, protect, and defend the constitution) if they are openly taking action that is anti-constitutional?
That being said, overall you are right and I appreciate how you've made me rethink the 25th a bit in this regard. Impeachment is the appropriate method both in the cases of Comey's firing as well as the January 6th anti-election insurrection, among other scenarios.
Although I do wonder again.......what if you did have a president who refused to step down? Would impeachment be fast/effective enough? Would the 25th have any additional "teeth"? An interesting thought.
And yes, Biden's mental stability seems more appropriate for the 25th than Trump's mental ability which.....content aside..... was ridiculously sharp and impressive to watch.
Finally, the house voted (symbolically) to ask Pence to invoke the 25th. One republican joined the yes vote, and prior to that some republicans were openly asking to use the 25th too, or impeachment, as a backup. Yes, this is from CNN but it was the first link I found: https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/06/politics/trump-capitol-impeachment-25-amendment/index.html
-
The dems brought up the 25th amendment and had psychologists and psychiatrists say Trump was not fit for office.
Of course this is tit for tat.
It’s what happens when you escalate threats.
Who started escalations? Grievances are as old as the country itself or more aptly as old as that civilization.
-
The dems brought up the 25th amendment and had psychologists and psychiatrists say Trump was not fit for office.
Of course this is tit for tat.
It’s what happens when you escalate threats.
Who started escalations? Grievances are as old as the country itself or more aptly as old as that civilization.
@loki said in National Review: "Is Joe OK?":
had psychologists and psychiatrist
None of whom examined Trump, by the way. Several GOP have called for an examination of Biden. Can you imagine the howls from Trump had the Dems asked for that?
Of course this is tit for tat.
Yup. "You said our guy was nuts, now prove that your guy isn't!"
-
@loki said in National Review: "Is Joe OK?":
had psychologists and psychiatrist
None of whom examined Trump, by the way. Several GOP have called for an examination of Biden. Can you imagine the howls from Trump had the Dems asked for that?
Of course this is tit for tat.
Yup. "You said our guy was nuts, now prove that your guy isn't!"
@george-k said in National Review: "Is Joe OK?":
@loki said in National Review: "Is Joe OK?":
had psychologists and psychiatrist
None of whom examined Trump, by the way. Several GOP have called for an examination of Biden. Can you imagine the howls from Trump had the Dems asked for that?
Of course this is tit for tat.
Yup. "You said our guy was nuts, now prove that your guy isn't!"
Reminds me of an old joke
Xxxx threw Molotov cocktails at yyyyy. yyyyy lit them and threw them back.
-
@george-k said in National Review: "Is Joe OK?":
@loki said in National Review: "Is Joe OK?":
had psychologists and psychiatrist
None of whom examined Trump, by the way. Several GOP have called for an examination of Biden. Can you imagine the howls from Trump had the Dems asked for that?
Of course this is tit for tat.
Yup. "You said our guy was nuts, now prove that your guy isn't!"
Reminds me of an old joke
Xxxx threw Molotov cocktails at yyyyy. yyyyy lit them and threw them back.
