Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

***Official*** 25th Amendment Thread


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, AAABatteries said:

Honestly, considering the actions at the Capitol yesterday I would imagine Cabinet members can't feel too great about their safety if they were to vote Trump out.  I'm torn - I agree with Scooby that maybe we could invoke the 25th on the down low by Pence telling everyone to run stuff through him without fanfare but I also agree with Yankee, IK and many others that Trump absolutely should be impeached and pushed out today. 

This is why nothing will happen - nobody will stand up and take responsibility here.

Congress people are clamoring for the 25th, instead of being in session voting on Article(s) of Impeachment.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 199
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Sadly, its been a legitimate option for a long time. Still, if he isn't removed through the 25th, then the 25th is worthless.  If he isn't impeached and convicted by the end of the week, the impeachme

It's time. Like today.

When you have people literally storming the capital building, we're past the "escalation" point.  The only legitimate option now is to remove Trump from office so he can't do any more damage and arres

6 minutes ago, Sinn Fein said:

Sure he can.

That is not the same as saying they would take it up.  And, he could also take the slow road via District court.

I don't think the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction on this. It would have to go via district court, so it wouldn't get to the Supreme Court within two weeks.

Also, no court is going to entertain this political question. No district court will, no appellate court, definitely not the Supreme Court.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Maurile Tremblay said:

I don't think the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction on this. It would have to go via district court, so it wouldn't get to the Supreme Court within two weeks.

Also, no court is going to entertain this political question. No district court will, no appellate court, definitely not the Supreme Court.

But, that is what makes it messy.

I think Trump would have a legitimate (not necessarily a winning) argument on the merits of improper use of the 25th Amendment, which leads to "If its not valid, I'm still in charge!"  And, then you have a bunch of people standing around not really sure how to resolve that conflict.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Sinn Fein said:

But, that is what makes it messy.

I think Trump would have a legitimate (not necessarily a winning) argument on the merits of improper use of the 25th Amendment, which leads to "If its not valid, I'm still in charge!"  And, then you have a bunch of people standing around not really sure how to resolve that conflict.

It's resolved by Pence and the cabinet until Congress weighs in up to 20 days later. It's not a gray area.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Maurile Tremblay said:

It's resolved by Pence and the cabinet until Congress weighs in up to 20 days later. It's not a gray area.

Ok.  You must be new here.

When Trump claims an illegal attempt to remove him from office, and orders someone to arrest Pence for insurrection, or some such thing - I am not so sure everyone will be crystal clear on their roles and responsibility.  

Imagine when the AG weighs in as one of the non-8 and offers his legal opinion that this is not a valid invocation of the 25th Amendment.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, AAABatteries said:

Honestly, considering the actions at the Capitol yesterday I would imagine Cabinet members can't feel too great about their safety if they were to vote Trump out.  I'm torn - I agree with Scooby that maybe we could invoke the 25th on the down low by Pence telling everyone to run stuff through him without fanfare but I also agree with Yankee, IK and many others that Trump absolutely should be impeached and pushed out today. 

Several outlets are reporting that Pence is the one who authorized the activation of the National Guard, which raises a bunch of questions that haven't been answered. Was that a clear violation of the law? Or is there some fine print somewhere that allows Pence (or Congress or some other authority) to activate the Guard? Or did Pence not technically make the call, but basically pressured Trump to do it by threatening to invoke the 25th? Seems like a huge story and it's not getting much run.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Sinn Fein said:
12 minutes ago, Maurile Tremblay said:

I don't think the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction on this. It would have to go via district court, so it wouldn't get to the Supreme Court within two weeks.

Also, no court is going to entertain this political question. No district court will, no appellate court, definitely not the Supreme Court.

But, that is what makes it messy.

I think Trump would have a legitimate (not necessarily a winning) argument on the merits of improper use of the 25th Amendment, which leads to "If its not valid, I'm still in charge!"  And, then you have a bunch of people standing around not really sure how to resolve that conflict.

I don't think it matters if Trump has a legitimate argument about improper use of the 25th Amendment.

The amendment would put Pence in charge immediately. Period.

If Trump ignores the order, then it's no different than if Trump ignored being impeached, or if Trump ignored the transfer of power on the 20th.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Amendment states:  "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."

 

So aren't there 15 cabinet members?  So they need Pence + 8, is that corrrect?  I'd imagine with Chao leaving they still need 8.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

There just simply isn't enough time or support to get this done. Trump has isolated himself and is on an island. Just keep the nuclear codes away from him and let the clock run out.

Then for the inauguration, don't invite him to participate and hold the event somewhere that is secure and cannot be interrupted--like a military base or heck, even do it virtually. . 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Courtjester said:

There just simply isn't enough time or support to get this done. Trump has isolated himself and is on an island. Just keep the nuclear codes away from him and let the clock run out.

Then for the inauguration, don't invite him to participate and hold the event somewhere that is secure and cannot be interrupted--like a military base or heck, even do it virtually. . 

 

You can't. He's the President.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sinn Fein said:

Ok.  You must be new here.

When Trump claims an illegal attempt to remove him from office, and orders someone to arrest Pence for insurrection, or some such thing - I am not so sure everyone will be crystal clear on their roles and responsibility.  

Imagine when the AG weighs in as one of the non-8 and offers his legal opinion that this is not a valid invocation of the 25th Amendment.

I think it falls pretty squarely into the political question doctrine. Just like impeachment. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sinn Fein said:

This is why nothing will happen - nobody will stand up and take responsibility here.

Congress people are clamoring for the 25th, instead of being in session voting on Article(s) of Impeachment.

Couldn't agree more.  The 25th I've always understood to be for some sort of incapacity due to medical condition.  Maybe I'm wrong but I believe that narrow reason is how it originated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No 25th.  No impeachment.  Just take the nuke-ball away and put trump on AF1 and send him to Mar-a-Lago to go golfing the next 13 days.  If he's truly guilty of committing crimes his time in court is coming.  Get him then.  Him and his supporters revolution attempt was a total disaster and 4 of his disciples died for their delusional cause.  Let that be the end of it.     

Edited by beef
Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, whoknew said:

 

You can't. He's the President.

Well then create a fake suitcase with a Simon in it. 

"Yes Mr President, Red and Green are Russian. Blue and Green are China" 

That would keep him busy for a bit.

  • Laughing 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Courtjester said:

Well then create a fake suitcase with a Simon in it. 

"Yes Mr President, Red and Green are Russian. Blue and Green are China" 

That would keep him busy for a bit.

"Which one is CNN and Facebook?"

Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, beef said:

No 25th.  No impeachment.  Just take the nuke-ball away ...

Taking the nuke-ball away from him without using the 25th Amendment would be an honest-to-god coup -- something we should be trying to avoid, IMO, when there are better options available.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, shader said:

The Amendment states:  "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."

 

So aren't there 15 cabinet members?  So they need Pence + 8, is that corrrect?  I'd imagine with Chao leaving they still need 8.

Worst TLC reality show, ever.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Maurile Tremblay said:
53 minutes ago, beef said:

No 25th.  No impeachment.  Just take the nuke-ball away ...

Taking the nuke-ball away from him without using the 25th Amendment would be an honest-to-god coup -- something we should be trying to avoid, IMO, when there are better options available.

This is why I'm so curious about the National Guard thing. If Pence unilaterally called in the National Guard, isn't that coup-adjacent?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Sea Duck said:

This is why I'm so curious about the National Guard thing. If Pence unilaterally called in the National Guard, isn't that coup-adjacent?

I suspect he had Trump's okay to call them in on Trump's behalf (maybe under threat of using the 25th).

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Maurile Tremblay said:

Taking the nuke-ball away from him without using the 25th Amendment would be an honest-to-god coup -- something we should be trying to avoid, IMO, when there are better options available.

Yeah, we shouldn't get into the habit of ignoring the President that way. There are constitutional ways to deal with it. The other elected officials need the spine to do it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Yankee23Fan said:

Yeah, we shouldn't get into the habit of ignoring the President that way. There are constitutional ways to deal with it. The other elected officials need the spine to do it.

It took an angry mob breaking into the Capitol to get SOME of them to have the spine to simply remove their objections to the election certification. I can't imagine what it would take to move them to have the spine to remove him from office.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Maurile Tremblay said:

Taking the nuke-ball away from him without using the 25th Amendment would be an honest-to-god coup -- something we should be trying to avoid, IMO, when there are better options available.

 

14 minutes ago, Ramsay Hunt Experience said:

Just a little one.  

 

10 minutes ago, Yankee23Fan said:

Yeah, we shouldn't get into the habit of ignoring the President that way. There are constitutional ways to deal with it. The other elected officials need the spine to do it.

Yeah, I get it now and how wrong that would be.  Thanks gents.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, dgreen said:

It took an angry mob breaking into the Capitol to get SOME of them to have the spine to simply remove their objections to the election certification. I can't imagine what it would take to move them to have the spine to remove him from office.

On some level part of me is proud of our political system at the moment. We didn't devolve.  The system held, and the work of the people went on. Strong countries can deal with this. Democracies where all people, no matter their position, have a voice will deal with this from time to time.

And for now, we held. We have bumps and bruises. We have scars. But our founders never said this was going to be easy. In fact, they said the exact opposite.  

Doesn't mean any fight is over. But it does mean the fight is worth having. Its just sad we had it this way, because of this coward that occupies our highest office. But we are better than him. 

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, beef said:

 

 

Yeah, I get it now and how wrong that would be.  Thanks gents.  

I was joking a bit, but not really at your expense. 
 

The 25th Amendment works fine in the Woodrow Wilson situation where a President is incapacitated for the long term.  It doesn’t really work here. 
 

And impeachment/removal is hard in a short turnaround.   I’m not sure that in some situations (imagine a distraught Trump looking to bomb Iran) that a quiet little short-term coup isn’t the best way to handle it. 
 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m afraid Trump will do something really crazy if they try to invoke the 25th. 

Like someone else said, he can just go golf the next 13 days. He’s golfed more than he’s done anything else anyway. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Sinn Fein said:

I am not 100% sure that is true.

A better argument is that the 25th Amendment exists for when a president is physically incapacitated - in a coma.  Its a little stretch to include "We don't trust the way he would execute his duties".

 

The argument is there - but it would be a legitimate Supreme Court challenge to the use.

On Jan 5th, it was a stretch. All his fraud talk was just hot air.

On Jan 6th, that changed. When he broke the oath of office, the stretch disappeared and it became real.

It's not a matter of if there will be another act of sedition by him and his supporters, but when. 

Edited by Death Bytes
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, beef said:

No 25th.  No impeachment.  Just take the nuke-ball away and put trump on AF1 and send him to Mar-a-Lago to go golfing the next 13 days.  If he's truly guilty of committing crimes his time in court is coming.  Get him then.  Him and his supporters revolution attempt was a total disaster and 4 of his disciples died for their delusional cause.  Let that be the end of it.     

This is my leaning.  With less than two weeks remaining, try not to stir the pot and let him drift away.  I'm almost more worried about his base of supporters, both in terms of what they might do now if current action is taken or the longer term ramifications from any late attempt to dethrone their dear leader ...I worry such action would create a simmering desire for payback over the months and years ahead.  As it is, and as I've said, I believe Trump's political goose is cooked.  He'll never get enough broad-based voter support or sufficient party leadership endorsement to make any headway (and recall that he'll be 78 years old for the 2024 election).  His words of sedition have forever changed the lens through which his blustery rants will be viewed, and as a former, disgraced president, mainstream media can more easily downplay or ignore him.

 

It's like the children of Robin Williams' Peter Banning say to him in Hook -

Maggie: Daddy, let's go home, please? He's just a mean old man without a mommy.

Jack: Yeah, dad, let's go. He can't hurt us anymore.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/7/2021 at 4:28 PM, Ramsay Hunt Experience said:

Maggie Haberman tweeted last night that Trump eventually relented on the National Guard thing, so that mystery is at least solved. 

Not really.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/7/2021 at 3:51 PM, Ramsay Hunt Experience said:

And impeachment/removal is hard in a short turnaround.   I’m not sure that in some situations (imagine a distraught Trump looking to bomb Iran) that a quiet little short-term coup isn’t the best way to handle it. 

Impeachment is only hard because we're making it hard.  The House should have thrown together articles of impeachment on Thursday and the Senate should have convicted on Friday.  As you noted above, impeachment is a political act, not a criminal trial.  There's no need for hearings, witnesses, long soliloquies, or anything else when it's plainly clear to everyone that this president needs to be removed from office.  I think it's low-key scandalous that the House took the weekend off to watch the wildcard games instead of addressing open insurrection led by a sitting president (!).  

Also, I don't like living in a world where we openly debate whether maybe a coup is our best bet.  You may be right -- it just sucks that this is where we are.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, IvanKaramazov said:

Impeachment is only hard because we're making it hard.  The House should have thrown together articles of impeachment on Thursday and the Senate should have convicted on Friday.  As you noted above, impeachment is a political act, not a criminal trial.  There's no need for hearings, witnesses, long soliloquies, or anything else when it's plainly clear to everyone that this president needs to be removed from office.  I think it's low-key scandalous that the House took the weekend off to watch the wildcard games instead of addressing open insurrection led by a sitting president (!).  

Also, I don't like living in a world where we openly debate whether maybe a coup is our best bet.  You may be right -- it just sucks that this is where we are.

Doesn’t seem clear to enough Republican Senators to get him removed/disqualified.  I’m sure there would be more urgency if she thought she had the votes  

Democrats don’t have the power to remove him from office  they don’t even have the power to schedule the trial  (which McConnell has indicated would take place on the 19th at the earliest ).  
 

Once we didn’t have Pence, the Cabinet, Pelosi, and McConnell all standing together to call for removal on the 7th, this all became kind of academic.  

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Ramsay Hunt Experience said:

Doesn’t seem clear to enough Republican Senators to get him removed/disqualified.

So hard to tell what the political calculus might look like if/when this gets to the senate, but Kasie Hunt was reporting this morning that she thinks - today - there are enough Republican votes to convict.

Given that a trial would not be until Biden's term, its hard to say if the anger of the moment will still exist then.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I’d say that Murkiwski, Sasse, and maybe Toomey have given us enough public indication they would convict. Romney indicated on the 7th he’d rather ride it out through the inauguration, but maybe assume he’d convict as well. 
 

But even if we assume they have the votes, they certainly don’t have Republican buy-in to fast track a vote so that it protects the country before Biden takes office.  Which was my point. The Constitutional provisions work fine in the world of theory, where our constitutional design has always really shined. But not in the real world where partisanship exists. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ramsay Hunt Experience said:

I’d say that Murkiwski, Sasse, and maybe Toomey have given us enough public indication they would convict. Romney indicated on the 7th he’d rather ride it out through the inauguration, but maybe assume he’d convict as well. 
 

But even if we assume they have the votes, they certainly don’t have Republican buy-in to fast track a vote so that it protects the country before Biden takes office.  Which was my point. The Constitutional provisions work fine in the world of theory, where our constitutional design has always really shined. But not in the real world where partisanship exists. 

Honestly, we could have two members of congress, I mean literally two people making up the entirety of congress, and you might see a slight difference in what comes out of congress. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Ramsay Hunt Experience said:

I’d say that Murkiwski, Sasse, and maybe Toomey have given us enough public indication they would convict. Romney indicated on the 7th he’d rather ride it out through the inauguration, but maybe assume he’d convict as well. 
 

But even if we assume they have the votes, they certainly don’t have Republican buy-in to fast track a vote so that it protects the country before Biden takes office.  Which was my point. The Constitutional provisions work fine in the world of theory, where our constitutional design has always really shined. But not in the real world where partisanship exists. 

Yeah - McConnell already said - the absolute earliest the Senate could take up an impeachment is 1-hour after Biden takes the oath of office.  More likely is 25 hours after the oath.

 

But, I think it is still important to move ahead for a variety of reasons.  First, you have to address the conduct - you can't simply sweep it under the rug and pretend it never happened.  Second, and this could appeal to some Republicans, you ban Trump from holding Federal office again.  You also take away the perks of being an ex-President - pension, security - ability to use tax payer money to fund your businesses.  

Trump has the money to pay for his own security.

But, maybe most important - you can't move on, until there is a reckoning/accounting of how badly it all went on January 6.  Pretending it never happened is the worst thing we can do as a country.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Sinn Fein said:

But, maybe most important - you can't move on, until there is a reckoning/accounting of how badly it all went on January 6.  Pretending it never happened is the worst thing we can do as a country.

If removal can't be achieved, then there should probably be a pause anyway. There should absolutely be a reckoning. But it shouldn't be emotionally fueled. Examine everything in the cold light of day. 

  • Love 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, IvanKaramazov said:

I think it's low-key scandalous that the House took the weekend off to watch the wildcard games instead of addressing open insurrection led by a sitting president (!).  

Doesn't the House need unanimous consent to stay open?

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/7/2021 at 2:55 PM, tri-man 47 said:

This is my leaning.  With less than two weeks remaining, try not to stir the pot and let him drift away.  I'm almost more worried about his base of supporters, both in terms of what they might do now if current action is taken or the longer term ramifications from any late attempt to dethrone their dear leader ...I worry such action would create a simmering desire for payback over the months and years ahead.  As it is, and as I've said, I believe Trump's political goose is cooked.  He'll never get enough broad-based voter support or sufficient party leadership endorsement to make any headway (and recall that he'll be 78 years old for the 2024 election).  His words of sedition have forever changed the lens through which his blustery rants will be viewed, and as a former, disgraced president, mainstream media can more easily downplay or ignore him.

 

It's like the children of Robin Williams' Peter Banning say to him in Hook -

Maggie: Daddy, let's go home, please? He's just a mean old man without a mommy.

Jack: Yeah, dad, let's go. He can't hurt us anymore.

I don't think you can make decisions based on this.

  • Thinking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

You need to send a message that actions have consequences. 

The reason you send these messages is so that people understand what happens when they travel down this road. It must be clear to everyone by now that folks across the board truly didn’t believe there would be any consequences for their actions. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Rich Conway said:

So I've heard.  Pelosi and crew should refuse to seat those who voted against.

Dems must make this bipartisan. Moving forward must be together, not divided. 

This is why it’s important to get votes on the record. Constituents need to see where there politicians allegiances lie. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...