She is not claiming special knowledge, just expertise. How do you place your insights above hers? Are you in the field?
I think she is trying to bring something home that we are missing in our media coverage and internet yakking. Certainly what she is saying is not a public failure or disservice, like say for instance, the medias confusion at covering tirnp, a maze which we are still in and wondering how to get the fuck out of.
Let me correct your proposals:
A body of expert, impartial, unassailable psychological experts is recognized. They administer ink blot tests to every elected official. Based on their expert, objective, state of the art assessment of the officials’ inkblot tests, each one is allowed to either see to his or her elected duties, on probation, under the benevolent, expert monitoring of the psychological experts; or if they have a mental health issue revealed by the inkblot test, or later flagged under the vigilant monitoring, they are relieved of their duties, to undergo psychiatric treatment, until such time they are deemed mentally fit to carry out the duties originally assigned by the voters.
We suspect the head of the organization is mentally unfit to perform his duties competently. We therefore demand that he AND every single senior leader in the organization be subjected to the same evaluation. Despite the fact that few if any of them have shown similar signs of mental incompetence, or serve at a sufficiently high level to warrant similar concern.
This smacks of the continued efforts to normalize Trump’s behavior by projecting and distracting the focus from the epicenter of the actual problem.
Good point. What a waste of resources. The evaluation mechanism is no doubt infallable, but think of the cost. We will let the state propaganda arm, I mean mainstream media, decide which elected officials need scrutiny, to narrow down the scope and reduce costs.
A) Fix/replace the left front tire.
B) Insist that all tires be fixed/replaced.
C) Keep driving with the flat to avoid wasting valuable resources.
D) Blame the Waze app for the cost and inconvenience.
Back in the day was a phrase, “Closing the barn door after the horse has bolted,” meaning to apply a fix too late. Evaluating politicians’ mental states AFTER they take office is too late. I doubt citizens could persuade legislators to enact candidate screening requirements that cover themselves too, so voter referendums in the states are needed. Running for state or federal office? Pass a psych review - weed out the sociopaths - but then, who’s left?
This POTUS is not going to be removed for mental instability. It’s too late for that.
She is, absolutely, not his co-worker. She’s a member of a co-equal branch of government. Nothing more. To think otherwise is to misunderstand the separate but equal branches of government.
As for Trump being evil? I have no doubt you’re correct. But being evil is not an incapacity. Trump is placed in his position by something two hundred plus years of history respects more than anything else: a free election. Disagreeing with that result also isn’t an incapacity.
And in terms of her expertise? I’m sure she’s very knowledgeable in her field. But that field isn’t government nor constitutional law. It’s a pointless argument made by an angry person. Sound and fury, signifying nothing.
I’m an emergency room nurse, I routinely deal with involuntary mental health holds, I believe we had 4 on the last shift I worked.
I know little about the 25th amendment, but when Lee says
she’s talking about something I work with often. Something that, in my professional opinion, based on what I’ve seen and read, doesn’t apply to Trump.
Expertise notwithstanding, since she ‘translates’ Trumps’ tweets on her own twitter feed as a ‘public service’, I consider her professional objectivity forfeit until proven otherwise.
Have you ever worked for an organization, one that had an HR dept?
When you are on your job there are coworkers, customers, maybe some other words. But you can’t claim anyone you interact with professionally is not a coworker for the purposes of labor laws.
The fact that he might have made it out of the woods and may stay continent for the next year is not a reason to avoid creating the future for trornp wherein he leaves office as someone who needed to defend his sanity. He needs to because we have lived with the insanity long enough.
People want to see this as static, but I just can’t see the world that way.
Doesn’t Trump technically work for Pelosi, that is to say, doesn’t he work to fulfill the directives of and serve at the pleasure of the organization (congress) of which Pelosi is arguably the most powerful member?
I’m sorry to go back to this but “It’s a pointless argument made by an angry person. Sound and fury, signifying nothing.” is really pretty outrageous in the context of such a professional warning. I didn’t notice that she was angry at all. Are you?
Are you an anti-trumper defending democracy by saying this? Fake news from the left now everybodys doing it…? I don’t get the point of slagging on the warning.
It is a canon of the psychiatric profession not to diagnose anyone they have not personally examined. She is in violation of her ethics. And politically speaking, she’s far crazier than Trump.
I told you before that expecting Trump to be committed involuntarily was wishful thinking. That obviously wasn’t strong enough. It’s delusional thinking. You’re also coming off crazier than Trump. You’re the one who’s making the anti-Trump movement look deranged. The left is supposed to be the bastion as reality and real-world thinking. As of this moment, you’re part of the far right. Hope you like the food there.
Serious question… if he were incapacitated, how would we know? I mean, obviously he doesn’t appear in public with food in his pockets or wearing his underwear outside of his pants. But on the other hand, he often talks like that kind of person, and he’s clearly surrounded himself with people who would prevent us from seeing him like that.
So how/when do we know when he’s lost his marbles?
“I told you before that expecting Trump to be committed involuntarily was wishful thinking. That obviously wasn’t strong enough. It’s delusional thinking. You’re also coming off crazier than Trump. You’re the one who’s making the anti-Trump movement look deranged. The left is supposed to be the bastion as reality and real-world thinking. As of this moment, you’re part of the far right. Hope you like the food there.” Have fun in the straw. Not one meaningful syllable.
“I told you before” is just not a good start either.
They would hide him as much as possible. And the dems should be trying to pry him out of that hiding every minute. Hopefully they don’t read this thread and get discouraged.
Trump and Pelosi are not employees. They are both office-holders, holding offices created by the Constitution itself: Pelosi by Article I, Trump by Article II. Labour laws do not apply to them and they are not co-workers.