Andrew McCabe: 25th Amendment was discussed by Justice Department to remove Trump from office


#954

Unable isn’t defined in any sense.

It could mean anything.


#955

Why are they lying?


#956

So odd that someone who is so stuck on sticking to the explicit, plain and unabridged meaning of “shall not infringe” is making up requirements for the 25th.


#957

No it couldn’t. It couldn’t mean “You fired our friend!”


#958

I’m not making up anything.


#959

If a majority of the cabinet and 2/3 of congress agree, YES IT ■■■■■■■■■■■■■ CAN.


#960

Yes it could.

It is for congress to decide the validity of the submission.


#961

No it can’t.


#962

Show your work. What recourse would there be? It’s a political process.


#963

Answer my question first.


#964

No, it couldn’t. Firing the FBI Director is fulfilling his duties.


#965

No, I asked mine first.

Please don’t defend seditionists.


#966

Revolution.


#967

Lol, the ■■■■■■■ irony is rich. You’re Poeing is.


#968

Guys, the recourse to a constitutional mechanism which some are claiming is seditious and traitorous, is…revolution—which actually is the definition of sedition and treason.


#969

I don’t know what that means.

I mean every word I post.


#970

The mechanism is not sedition, the plotting is.


#971

“Plotting”. The mechanism can’t come about without the “plotting”. Otherwise how else do you ■■■■■■■ know if there’s a majority of the cabinet who agree?


#972

Of course it can. Where in the 25th does it require plotting?

Those two traitors didn’t need to know.

Let’s wear a wire!


#973

No you didn’t.

I asked mine way back in the thread.

Answer my question about the Radical Republicans…seditionists or not?