No they didn’t
And when something keeps getting repeated that has been debunked a myriad of times… yes… it is completely necessary.
Yes, that’s what I said. Thanks for your correct interpretation of what I said.
And what the framers wrote 200 years ago wasn’t clear in the 2nd. “A well-regulated militia” being the first phrase, not defining “arms”, etc.
The 25th was written more recently, and is just more wordy and clear. It states exactly what it intended for the process of invoking it to be. No more, nor less. And it says nothing about discussions of its invocation being sedition.
Lame and weak my friend. You know that didn’t happen.
Yes, they did.
Why is it necessary? Because you are frustrated?
No the SC would go back and look at the debates and written papers of what was said during debates leading up to the 25 amendment and I already posted what one of the people that help write the law had to say about what it was to be used for.
And according to him in all the debates it was stressed that this amendment was not to be used for anything but if a president was so ill that he could no longer perform the duties of office or had passed away for there to be a smooth transfer of power to the vice president.
It absolutely did happen. You know as well as I do there is absolutely no evidence he is unable to discharge his duties and so do and did they.
Somebody brought up Johnson’s impeachment earlier. Interesting parallel, given they both came about because of a firing.
Did Rosenstein the Seditionist reccomend Comey be fired?
Mental illness is a serious problem.
1 Like
No they didn’t.
I am not frustrated. Just find it increasingly unnecessary to do nothing more than outright dismiss things that have been proven false time and time again.
It simply requires a process to be followed. The 25th does not demand justification for invoking the process.
And according to him in all the debates it was stressed that this amendment was not to be used for anything but if a president was so ill that he could no longer perform the duties of office or had passed away for there to be a smooth transfer of power to the vice president.
Only the people mentioned in the 25th get to make the determination about whether the president is able to perform the duties.
Not their process.
That’s what the wire was for. This isn’t that complicated.
Why? Because your fears of truth?
Now you guys are just being silly.
First it is SEDITION… now it is “fear of the truth”
C’mon guys… get a grip.
Libs fears that it was sedition.
Sure… run with that.
If you think that “libs” fear that people working within the confines of the Constitution is Sedition… live that dream my man.
Keep on chasing that rainbow.
I love the truth. I wish they had worn that wire. Then we’d hear the truth.
Authoritarians libs are scared that American people might realize just how corrupt the so-call authorities really are.
That’s what I see here coming from authoritarians.
Not a very “strict constructionist-y” argument.
So why haven’t they been arrested?
The tool is irrelevant, the plot is the problem.
Attempting to convince and recruit others to declare the President as unable to discharge his duties while he is discharging his duties because he fired your chogy boy is sedition