In fact I do have a sound case for Mr. Trump not being a lunatic, and a medical opinion that backs up that case. Not only was law enforcement in search of a crime to pin on Mr. Trump, they were after information they could pin on him to make it appear he was also mentally incompetent. Put yourself in the President’s shoes. Or, stay in your own shoes, but imagine someone powerful coming after you, whipping up law enforcement and even the medical community, to take their side and trample you to dust.
Then investigate that foreign adversary, not the U.S. citizen, and certainly not the President who already has a vital job on which to focus.
Not 25th Amendment. Impeachment, yes.
It would have been the Vice-President, Cabinet, Speaker of the House who originated this, having back up come from the FBI. This time the FBI wanted to start 25th Amendment proceedings, hoping they could get backing from the Vice-President, Cabinet, Speaker. In President Nixon’s case, people were rightly pursuing impeachment.
From what source?
I hate to get all dark shadowy, but the medical reports put out by Trump both before and after his election are questionable at best, laughable at worst.
You are talking about a case where there is presumably evidence, not a case where people in an agency want insurance against their candidate losing.
This is not the current case.
There was no probable cause or it would have been presented by now.
The 25th amendment was the result of the shooting of Kennedy. It was meant for a case where you had a brain damaged or totally incapacitated President. It was not meant as a method to replace a President that someone disagreed with to the extent they thought they were incompetent or kooky. That is what impeachment is for.
Thank you! 
Well, I think a president who is declared to be unfilt due to mental illness could fall under this category.
As much as Trump leaves us gosmacked about the things he says in public, one can only imagine the things he says and does in private meetings.
I’m sorry Meri but this is pure opinion that is simply not supported by the facts. This had nothing to do with a favored candidate or an investment in a candidate. This had everything to do with the actions and statements of Mr. Trump after he already assumed the Presidency. His decision to fire Comey, and then brag about it to Russians saying that his termination would relieve pressure off of him, while trying to keep Americans from his own administration in the dark over what he was telling them behind closed doors, coupled with his decision to reveal extremely sensitive and highly classified information to them is what caused this discussion to be had. These are the facts.
I believe that Mr. Trump had massive financial entanglements with sketchy Russian actors over many decades of business. And I also believe the CIA and FBI were faced with an almost impossible task of trying to determine whether, and how, to investigate someone who would become the President of the United States for potential conflicts of interest. Not that he was some Russian spy out of a Tom Clancy novel. Real world, serious concerns. Not the hyperbole the media tries to make things about to be on both the right and left.
I’m not sure what you’re driving at here, or the connection to the rest of your post.
They already were. But it makes no sense to not also investigate the incredibly suspicious actions and comments made by Mr. Trump in great deference to Russia, Russian interests, and in direct opposition to the United States, its Intelligence Community, and the interests of the United States.
1 Like
Just to clarify exactly what the 25th is for (from the Reader’s Guide PDF link) I posted:
In particular, the Amendment addresses:
• filling a vacancy in the office of the President in case of removal, death, or resignation of
the President (Section 1);
• filling a vacancy in the office of the Vice President (Section 2);
• the transfer of presidential powers and duties to the Vice President where the
President has declared himself unable to discharge the powers and duties of the office
(Section 3);
• the transfer of presidential powers and duties to the Vice President where the Vice
President and either a majority of the Principal Officers of the Executive Departments
or “such other body as Congress may by law provide” have determined that the
President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of the office (Section 4)
We’re basically talking Section 4, which has nothing whatsoever to do with losing elections despite what supporters claims.
From the Washington Examiner:
"Former FBI general counsel James Baker testified to Congress last fall that he was told by two officials that Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein said a pair of Cabinet officials was “ready to support” an effort to remove President Trump from office.
Addressing a joint task force of the House Judiciary and Oversight committees, Baker did not name the Cabinet officials. Baker did identify the two FBI officials who informed him of Rosenstein’s talk of invoking the 25th Amendment: Former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe and former FBI lawyer Lisa Page, whose anti-Trump text message with ex-FBI agent Peter Strzok has fueled concern among GOP lawmakers that there is rampant bias in the FBI."
Well, Senator Graham has called for bringing in McCabe and Rosenstein to ask them for details. Obviously, you would want to find out from Rosenstein exactly who those cabinet members were and then bring them up for questioning of the basis for their claim. If Rosenstein can’t come up with two names, he needs to go.
But note that alll this, just like the Mueller appointment, go back to people like McCabe, Page and Strzok. This makes the whole thing look purely political, and perhaps part of an “insurance policy”.
1 Like
Hate to break it to you… but there is now and at the time there was evidence that the Trump campaign was working with a foreign country.
So yes… there was probable cause.
But let us go back to my hypothetical. In the instance that I presented, is it right for the DOJ to discuss matters or is it akin to a palace coup?
Welp… by the numbers:
-
You DO have some familiarity with his primary care physician in private life, right?
-
Can’t speak for anyone else, but I never asserted that he’s a lunatic. Prone to nonsensical rambling? Frightfully ignorant of many of the most basic facets of his job? Possessed of a toddler’s level of impulse control? Check, check, check. But as Seth Meyers pointed out, he’s inordinately proud of having aced a Denny’s-placemat-level cognition test, so he probably wouldn’t be adjudicated non compos mentis.
-
But you and I know you’re just deflecting. The question at hand is whether he is compromised by the Russians. As much as you would dearly love to, you cannot dismiss that possibility out of hand.
Of course he was.
No they don’t. They don’t have special “rights”.
And conspiring to secretly record him.
There was a plot to commit sedition. And this is not about collusion, it’s about firing Comey.
Uranium one was just the sale of a Canadian owned company that owned a Uranium mine in the US. The sale requires a sign off of bunch of US admin dept in order to take effect, because it being a DoE/DoC material. All that was transferred was stocks, no Uranium was sold to Russia as that is illegal. And Russia has a very good source of their own U-235. All Russia business did was get profits from the company instead of Canadian company getting it. Stop reading your silly sources that feed your mind full of crap…Clinton was as crocked as a politician figure as there was but this was not one of the things and makes you look like a idiot crying about it.
