NOTE, May 21, 2026: I am REpublishing this after Blogger said it was
"unpublishing" it because it allegedly violated community guidelines. I
was just given a link
to all community guidelines without saying WHAT guideline was violated.
That's more gaslighting than Elmo and his minions on Shitter.
There
is NO adult content here. There is LESS THAN NO child exploitation or
abuse. Nothing dangerous that I can tell, and certainly nothing illegal.
(Describing a hypothetical-only quasi-coup under the 25 Amendment is
certainly not illegal.) Skipping down the list, there is no misleading
comment related to democratic principles, or to other things. Nothing
deceptive, fraudulent or scammy. No harassment; it's legitimate talk of
Trump's psychiatric background.
I got an email about this as well, from a "no-reply" Blogger account, which had no more explanation than the note on Blogger.
That
said, fuckers on Blogger? I'm also copy-pasting this to Substack. Per
the email, I'll click your link. I'll also copy-paste it here, anew.
How's them apples?
If it was the one dead link I removed, you're still shitheads for not telling me yourself.
Good old Rusty Douthat is proposing that we look at the 25th Amendment, rather than the impeachment process, as a way of dethroning President Trump.
Update: Proving that Peter Principleship stupidity is bipartisan for
inside-the-Beltway / Acela Corridor pundits, Richard Cohen halfway makes the same call, though he doesn't go full Douthat.
Beyond my continuing to reject the idea of a Trump-Putin conspiracy, I
do agree with Douthat that Trump probably hasn't risen to the level of
"high crimes and misdemeanors" prescribed by the Constitutional
impeachment process in part because he's too dumb to do that.
So, yes, let's look at the 25th Amendment.
Section 4 is the applicable portion:
Section 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.
Several thoughts.
First, this is an invitation to a quasi-coup by a savvy Veep. Mike Pence
is certainly more savvy than Trump. And, people like Rusty Douthat
would greatly prefer him. In fact, I've half-jokingly tweeted that Trump
tapped Pence as sort of a hostage against Congressional Democrats.
You just have to round up half the cabinet, plus one, and say, "Voila, I'm the acting president."
Then, if Trump contests it?
Oops, you're back to a quasi-impeachment setting.
Two-thirds vote of both houses of Congress.
So, first, for this quasi-coup to succeed, Pence has to be a good vote-organizer, and a good vote-counter along with that.
Second, Members of Congress must have gonads nearly as big as they would
for impeachment. Charles Cooke at National Review talks about the "
psychic shock"
of invoking the amendment. He's primarily referring to Trump voters,
but this must also be extended to Congress, whose members in general
like the daylight of responsibility about as much as cockroaches.
Third, it seems pretty clear this provides for a JFK-type situation, as
Cooke also notes; in fact, it was in the wake of his assassination, and
wonders about where U.S. leadership would have been at had Lee Harvey
Oswald not killed him, but, say, the head shot did permanently
incapacitate him, that the amendment were passed.
In this case, even for the initial coup, let alone two-thirds of
Congress, Pence would have to get a psychiatrist sign off on a mental
health evaluation. First, is Trump "diminished" in that sense? Probably
not. Is he an idiot? Yes.
(Sidebar and addendum: If a threat of the 25th Amendment could be used to force Trump to take ADHD meds [dead link removed], if that's what he needs, well, in that limited sense, it might work. But, the threat has to be credible in the first place.)
And, Oliver Wendell Holmes, from the Supreme Court bench, long ago spoke
about the rights of America to have idiotic laws and, presumably and
tacitly behind that, idiotic government officials.
For example:
I always say, as you know, that if my fellow citizens want to go to Hell I will help them. It's my job.
And, unless something is unconstitutional, judges theoretically rule by statute, then common law.
So, no, Rusty, it's a non-solution. And I think you know that.
Basically, you're trying to fart in already stinking bath water and
pretend you're giving us a bubble bath.
There's also
this sidebar,
written about impeachment but also applicable to use of the 25th
Amendment. What if it fails? You think Trump is stark raving mad NOW? To
add to that,
Bruce Bartlett notes that Faux News et al would likely have shielded Nixon today while sheepdogging Congressional Republicans.
==
Sidebar: This is yet another argument for parliamentary, or at least
quasi-parliamentary, government. (A Donald Trump would have never risen
to run the GOP. Unfortunately, a Paul Ryan might have, and a Hillary
Clinton almost certainly would have headed the Democratic Party. Of
course, quasi-parliamentary government would theoretically provide more
openings for third parties.)
And, I also think Rusty knows THAT.
Per my review of "
Frozen Republic,"
the real answer is constitutional reform that goes well beyond
eliminating the Electoral College. All of this is badly, badly needed.
Sidebar 2: This is the second blog post in a row where I've had to note
the Peter Principle class of inside-the-Beltway, Acela Corridor
"journalists" has limited understanding of the U.S. Constitution. That's
not to mention the Texas Legislature's ongoing cluelessness, mixed with
willfulness, about that document.
==
Update, Feb. 14, 2019: It's clear that
Andrew McCabe knows little
about how the 25th Amendment operates, as far as who invokes it, and
what it can and cannot do. Ergo, I'll still assume it's more likely that
he, not Rod Rosenstein, is lying about the idea of invoking it.
