As MAGA as Vance is, how different would those two lists be?
I just brought the scenario up as another way we get a doomsday Trump x 3
Vance has four years to create a power base loyal and beholden to him, that will be dedicated to his version of MAGA.
I agree that your scenario is a way for it to happen; I don’t think it’s a viable one for Trump to take because he would be dependent on someone else acting against their interests.
Assuming for the sake of argument that the majority of voters really WANT a third Trump term, the easy way to do it without mucking about with the Constitution would just be to elect one of his dumbshit family members, who aren’t smart enough to create their own power bases and would reliably just do whatever the cheeto-faced shitgibbon told them to do.
Does anybody think that the people flagrantly violating court orders and core elements of the Constitution are concerned with such rules-lawyering gotcha-yas? I’m still thinking that the man who has this level of cogency at age 79 in 2025 is not going to be able to make the argument. If we’ve learned nothing from the medieval petty kingships that are his model of government (even if he doesn’t know it), it’s that there are always people willing to lie, cheat, steal, and kill in order to get the power that he has. I can’t imagine that his core of sycophants actually like him or want him in power; they just like the access to power they get through him.
I agree BUT how senile will he be in 3.5 years to think all will do his bidding.
Yes because it serves their purpose if SCOTUS says there is an end around for him o become President.
Group dynamics create a wondrous cohesion, I don’t see how somebody would ever invoque the 25th bar coma or the already mentioned disabling shot in the brain. People stay together and sometimes even die together, and it is not necessarily out of loyalty. Here, for instance, is the story of Mussolini’s last three days as told in The Atlantic at the time it happened:
Not only his mistress, but 17 other loyalists stayed by his side until the end. The same happened mutatis mutandis with Reagan, Biden, and will happen with trump too. I think the OP is right: it is very very unlikely that it ever happens, except if the president is obviously a vegetable. A lettuce, for instance.
That is fine if the senate is not Trump toadies, who already long since been told who they would ultimately affirm
Which means he’s also ineligible to be elected Vice President.
Right. Political failure, or for that matter trade policy failure or just being a dick, are not disabilities.
We’ve gone over his in another thread. Proof was shown that that is not true. Congress purposely changed becoming President to elected President.
I think those here who have said that the 25th amendment could only be successfully invoked in the case of a fully incapacitated president are correct.
The big problem is that, in most cases, it is in the self-interest of the cabinet to keep the president propped up to maintain the veneer of a viable administration as well as not to incur the president’s wrath and potential retribution by trying to remove him or her.
To take the current psychopathic and demented president as an example, I’m sure, if faced with the prospect of removal via the 25th, Trump would use every resource at his disposal to prevent it, including the declaration of martial law or otherwise appealing to the military. If the removal failed, everyone involved would be in very hot water.
It’s like the impeachment process: broken from the beginning and not going to work.
And TBF that seems to have been the intent by design — as seen how it provides explicitly for the case that the POTUS is still in shape enough to actually dispute his own relief.
As with impeachment, if removal is too easy, then it can be used as a political weapon, but if it’s too difficult… then it can’t be used at all. It’s hard to see how to get the balance right. Probably another reason why most countries have a parliamentary system instead of what we have.
Some very credible people are speaking out. I don’t believe these 4 books can be easily dismissed.
The Democrats missed an opportunity to field candidates in a national primary. Find a candidate that possibly could have challenged the Republican front runner.
Klain has clarified his earlier comments. He is more supportive of his former boss.
I’ve seen the 25th Amendment mentioned in some other threads and wanted to give more reasons why it can never happen.
The big one may be that to last more than a short period against Trump’s will, both houses of congress have to approve the coup by a 2/3 margin. This compares to impeachment, where removal only requires 2/3 in the senate.
And given that some members of Congress are rather legalistic, there’s another barrier. In the literal wording of the 25th amendment, the President has to be “unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office.” This is high barrier. Suppose he murders a family member. Then he has committed a high crime and might, conceivably, maybe, actually be impeached and removed on grounds of having committed a serious crime. But a murderer, or other criminal, can still discharge the powers of office. This is another reason why the 25th amendment takes a more votes than impeachment removal.
Vance is often mentioned as part of the process. Yes. It is in his interest to elevate himself. But what about the part where the majority of the “principal officers of the executive department” have to go along? What do they get out of it? Bupkis, so they would do nothing except run to Trump and denounce the coup plot.
Yeah, aint happening. IMHO even if trump goes into a coma will Congress approve this on a permanent basis- altho maybe it could be declared on a temp basis, but likely not.
Acting with the permission of the Constitution is in no way a “coup”.
A Constitutional coup?! ::Places fingertips on skull, then moves them outward while making a prolonged p‘khew sound effect::
The only way the 25th will ever be implemented is when the prez is alive but a vegetable. If it had been in force during Woodrow Wilson’s second term, I doubt Congress could get away with 25th-ing him. Edith would have stopped that in its tracks.
According to the Constitution, the veep, and a majority of the principal officers of the executive departments, have to give “their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office.” If Trump is protesting his dethronement, that shows he can indeed, however badly, discharge the powers and duties of his office. So it would be, at best, a constitutional coup, and it is highly questionable whether it is even constitutional.
Now, if Trump was unable to weigh in on his removal from office, such as after a very severe stroke, that would be different. I admit that kind of 25th amendment usage can happen. What can’t happen is use of the 25th amendment to remove a President against their will. Impeachment removal, however unlikely, would happen first.
No, it does not. This isn’t bizarro Catch 22.