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

[Jezcoe]

@Oldandtired

John Freerick who was one of the chief architects of the 25 amendment said. The senators who signed the provision into law specified that declaring the president unfit must rely on reliable facts regarding the president’s physical or mental faculties, not personal prejudice. During the debates, it’s was clear that policy and political differences are not included, unpopularity is not included, poor judgment, incompetence, laziness, or impeachable conduct none of that is intended to be covered by the 25 amendment.
Sounds to me that they intended for the vice president and congress to have to provide proof that the president was unable to preform the duties of his office. It also sounds like they didn’t intend for this amendment to be used instead of impeachment proceeding for a president that had broken the law.

If they meant that, then they should have written it in the Amendment.

But they didn’t.

[Plasmaball]

Ah there is the projection…so lets turn this around and see how conan is lubing the truth…

The reality is trump and his administration are traitors to the nation by trying to lift sanctions on russia for money and power…among other things…
But in order to throw shade on that fact we have his supporters accusing people of sedition and being a traitor…

Which is fairly stupid but not uncommon

[Phaedrus]

@WuWei

@adroit

The 25th amendment doesn’t require “evidence”. It requires a majority of cabinet and a 2/3 majority of congress to simply will it.

Yes, it does. Evidence of inability to perform duties.

But great post. Thank you.

25th Amendment, Section 4, in its entirety :
“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.
Thereafter, when the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and
the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that no inability
exists, he shall resume the powers and duties of his office unless the Vice President and a
majority of either the principal officers of the executive department or of such other body
as Congress may by law provide, transmit within four days 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. Thereupon
Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty eight hours for that purpose if
not in session. If the Congress, within twenty one days after receipt of the latter written
declaration, or, if Congress is not in session, within twenty one days after Congress is
required to assemble, determines by two thirds vote of both Houses that the President is
unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall continue
to discharge the same as Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the
powers and duties of his office.”

That’s it. No reference to “proof” or “evidence” that I can see. You? Apparently, like “high crimes and misdemeanors”, it’s whatever the appropriate federal officers think it is.

ETA: You’re welcome!

[Plasmaball]

Ah yes…claim its something and then claim they are above and nothing will get done because reasons…

Classic…

[Plasmaball]

Youve been on here for about 20 years…

[Plasmaball]

Yeah we get it…do you have anything else? Repeating the same thing for 50 posts doesnt move anything along

[DOLOOP]

Pretty clear that Trump has a fantastic ability to recruit enormously emotional support. Very emotional.

[Plasmaball]

Lol…hahahahahahahaa…ahhhhhh thats funny.

[party-free]

Notice that, not a single time, mentions that those invoking the 25th must provide evidence of the inability. Just that the required personnel declare THAT he unable. This is mentioned at least twice in article 4.

[Smyrna]

@dantes

Why does it seem like so many Trump supporters are more concerned with protecting Trump, rather than the country?

My interpretation is that Trump supporters are more concerned with the will of many, who voted honestly, than the will of the arrogant few, who had prejudiced agents among them, believing that they knew better than the deplorables.

[18576]

NK is not firing rockets off because they don’t need to. They did all the misses testing they needed to do under Trump’s watch. They are still doing everything else in building their nuclear armament up.

[Jezcoe]

@Smyrna

@dantes

Why does it seem like so many Trump supporters are more concerned with protecting Trump, rather than the country?

My interpretation is that Trump supporters are more concerned with the will of many, who voted honestly, than the will of the arrogant few, who had prejudiced agents among them, believing that they knew better than the deplorables.

The will of the many would mean a President Clinton.

But we are a Republic so we don’t do that.

[Smyrna]

@Jezcoe

The will of the many would mean a President Clinton.

But we are a Republic so we don’t do that.

No my friend. You’re confused with the will of California.

[Jezcoe]

@Smyrna

@Jezcoe

The will of the many would mean a President Clinton.

But we are a Republic so we don’t do that.

No my friend. You’re confused with the will of California.

California is part of “the many”

[DOLOOP]

@Jezcoe

@Smyrna

@dantes

Why does it seem like so many Trump supporters are more concerned with protecting Trump, rather than the country?

My interpretation is that Trump supporters are more concerned with the will of many, who voted honestly, than the will of the arrogant few, who had prejudiced agents among them, believing that they knew better than the deplorables.

The will of the many would mean a President Clinton.

But we are a Republic so we don’t do that.

The will of the electoral college. Republicans have a hard time getting the actual support of the people.

2 of their last three winning presidential elections couldn’t muster the support of the majority of the people.

[BigBear]

@Smyrna

@Jezcoe

The will of the many would mean a President Clinton.

But we are a Republic so we don’t do that.

No my friend. You’re confused with the will of California.

There’s a reason a lot of The People live in California, rather than Dipweed, NC. You seem to be confused about the definition of The People: it’s not just people you approve of.

[Plasmaball]

Cool story…

[madasheck]

@Smyrna

@madasheck

Nobody was attempting to overthrow an election. Being God-wedded to a President doesn’t mean he’s perfect or invulnerable to being removed with reason. And that’s what they were examining

…to you my friend. I care about us. If I am to use your term of God-wedded, it’s to my country, my family, my friends, my community and my responsibilities. I believe they were…and I expect there will be an investigation that will expose it for all to see. Then I can say…I told ya so.

Keep those on. You’ll need 'em when the dawn comes.

[dantes]

The will of the many? The will of the many didn’t want Trump anywhere near the White House.

The “arrogant” few are doing nothing but trying to expose Trump so that the entire nation may understand what he is to our country.

[Smyrna]

@dantes

The will of the many? The will of the many didn’t want Trump anywhere near the White House.

The “arrogant” few are doing nothing but trying to expose Trump so that the entire nation may understand what he is to our country.

Great…now let’s investigate their actions and examine if they were illegal and whether or not they should be criminally charged?