40 thoughts on “The 25th Amendment”

  1. Since the bar set for impeachment proceedings is as low as a totally innocuous telephone call to Ukraine and a totally innocuous telephone call to a State of Georgia official, one would think that this utter debacle would cause Pelosi and Schiff to get right on it and start the impeachment proceedings…..

    …yeah right.

      1. irrelevant.

        Who said anything about:
        ” getting up in the House of Representatives and demanding “Let us have done with you” followed by the U.S. president resigning over a military/foreign policy failure.”

        Certainly not I.

        I spoke about House of Representative impeachment proceedings.

    1. I’m guessing the thought has crossed her mind, but Dr. Jill won’t leave her alone with him.

  3. If they did somehow either 25th Amendment Biden out the door or just get him to resign in favor of Harris:

    “So, Kamala Harris becoming the President via the 25th Amendment means the Democrats lose their tie-breaking vote in the Senate, and without a 51st vote, there is no way for the Democrats to break a tie in the Senate in order to confirm a replacement Vice President.”

    Maybe she would be so unpopular that not only would that derail their legislative agenda she would be impeached once the Republicans take over the House after the ’22 November elections.

    Then maybe if Trump runs and wins that seat in Florida (or even if he doesn’t) the Republicans make Trump speaker of the House. Of course you wouldn’t likely have enough defecting democratic Senate votes in the Senate even if the Republicans retake it to remove Harris from office, so I guess this is just an idle (but fun) speculation.

  4. To paraphrase Taylor Swift, the USA has a long list of ex-allies. They’ll tell you the federal government’s insane.

  6. There is one way around this. Throw in a RINO. President Harris appoints Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska [R] to be the next VP. The Republicans then have to vote to reject one of their “own”. I don’t think the Turtle would do that, because he’d have Ms. Murkowski’s ear on a lot of things and possibly votes (same could be said for Harris) and as a side benefit I presume he gets back the Senate majority leader post? It’s a small risk for Harris, who gets the Presidency and at least another year of House control.
    The Dems would love the idea of TWO women executives and an [R] with a track record they can’t completely condemn and why would they if insures a smooth transition and they maintain hold of the executive? And maybe those two would not be so far off on the big issues anyway. It’s the first time we’d have a President and Vice President from an opposing party since the founding of the country. But ideologically, they’d be very close. I could see Murkowski as a swing vote PRO [D] on key legislation. It’d be the end of Murkowski’s political career tho. She’d get ‘primaried’ for sure. But hey, good of the country, or some such, or maybe she’d just switch parties afterwards and run for her old seat in the Senate as a [D].

    1. It’s the first time we’d have a President and Vice President from an opposing party since the founding of the country.
      By that I mean yes, it happened once before, around the founding of the country. Adams/Jefferson ?? Can’t quite remember[1]. But the ability of VP to be chosen by who got the 2nd most votes was quickly changed, to a political nominee, for obvious reasons.

      [1] Yes that was it: https://www.battlefields.org/learn/articles/election-1800-adams-vs-jefferson

      1. Lincoln-Johnson, March 4, 1865 to April 15, 1865.

        Andrew Johnson was a Democrat; he was put on Lincoln’s “National Union” ticket in 1864.

        1. Ah right. There you go, example #2. Funny that did come vaguely to mind but I didn’t follow through. That situation is even more apropos to today than the previous one which was the result of an
          Election law glitch.

      2. There is no mention of ‘party’ in the Constitution (or popular voting). And the only requirements for VP are that they qualify as President, and be from a different state than the President.

    2. “as a side benefit I presume he gets back the Senate majority leader post?”

      Only after a special election which a Republican wins (or if the current governor appoints one, whichever is relevant in Alaska), and if it’s another RINO it won’t actually help anything except Democrats.

  7. “There is one way around this. Throw in a RINO.”

    What if the Republicans in the Senate make it clear they won’t vote to accept any VP unless the dems agree to:

    1) What you said appoint a Republican (Rino) into the vacated VP spot.

    2) Remove Nancy Pelosi as Speaker of the House in favor of someone else hopefully competent. Have no one in particular in mind; any suggestions?
    At that point maybe it gets interesting after the ’22 elections; Harris impeached, possibly even removed in favor of said new VP. Or impeach/remove both in favor of new speaker of the House.

    1. No I don’t think the Dems need to offer more than dangle the opportunity for the Turtle to become Majority Leader again. Very powerful position in the Senate. Basically gets to set the agenda. Probably more important to him than getting back-stabbed occasionally by Murkowski…

  8. “No I don’t think the Dems need to offer more than dangle the opportunity for the Turtle to become Majority Leader again.”

    What if “President harris” nominated a democratic Senator to be the new VP from a state with a Republican controlled legislature and governor? One which would surely appoint/approve a Republican to serve out the remainder of said senate democrat’s term. One who would therefore give “the Turtle” a clear 51 Vote Republican majority in the Senate, with no need to worry about the new VP’s “tie-breaker” vote?

    1. No the Dems would not give up the store w/o a fight or at least a fighting chance. The Reps could always block, but that just means the Dems aren’t any worse off than before invoking the 25th. If the Dems can’t horse trade sotto voce (i.e. in a backroom, with knives for Joe at the ready), with the Reps, prior to the event, the 25th just won’t happen. This will all be settled politics before the 25th is even invoked.

  9. “If the Dems can’t horse trade sotto voce (i.e. in a backroom, with knives for Joe at the ready), with the Reps, prior to the event, the 25th just won’t happen.”

    After a few more inevitable Biden debacles they (the dems) would likely feel they didn’t have a choice accept to “horse trade” with the Republicans. Yes they would lose the Senate (narrowly) but retain the house and have a dem as both prez and VP; they in desperation might decide that is their best hope of keeping the presidency in 2024. Or even the House in 2022.

      1. “You maybe right there….”

        Also consider this possibility; part of the “horse trade” is that “the turtle” has to agree to allow the dems radical agenda to at least come to a vote in the senate. After all his argument for filibustering it primarily is the lack of any Republican input into it. If he has a clear 51 vote majority in the Senate he might have to risk letting the “for the people act”, DC/Puerto Rico statehood, evening stacking the courts come to a vote. And hope that RINO Murkowski or some RINO doesn’t back-stab him (and by extension us as well).

        1. The Turtle will never let the “For The People Act” see the light of day. Like Climate Change is an existential issue for the Dems, the FTPA is one for the Reps.

          Of course he can promise anything behind closed doors, what he actually does is of course a tune being played on a radio with a different frequency…

        2. “If he has a clear 51 vote majority in the Senate”

          He will not as long as Romney and Susan Collins are around.

  10. “Of course he can promise anything behind closed doors, what he actually does is of course a tune being played on a radio with a different frequency…”

    Yes but if he agreed to allow the “For the People Act” to come to a vote in the then republican controlled Senate, that would put pressure on the dems to alter its more extreme positions in order to peel off some Republican votes for any hope of passage.

      1. These are not your father’s (or grandfather’s) Democrats. They’re ideologues led by an uncompromising ‘squad’ of executioners.

  11. There are titular republicans who would provide the votes for the dems – mittens, the hag from Maine, the thug from Alaska…

    1. “There are titular republicans who would provide the votes for the dems – mittens, the hag from Maine, the thug from Alaska…”

      Prez Harris administration with her decidely lack of charisma personality of a braying mule wouldn’t be able to necessarily keep all the dems in the Senate in line let alone cleave off republicans. Her popularity would quickly crater; moderate dems wouldn’t want to be associated with her and or the rads in the House. Imagine McConnell apponting a special counsel to investigate how Biden’s cognitive issues that must have been apparent to the dem leadership nontheless supported/enabled his disfunction. Future grounds for impeachement; “beyond the pale” to willfully perpetrate a fraud on the American People by hiding biden’s cognitive issues to get elected.

      2. Actually some Senate Dems would defect only because they see a new opportunity to advance themselves at the cost of Harris.

    2. Along with a cratering economy the debacle of not only Afghanistan but the ongoing border crisis; Covid resurgence etc. don’t see how the “harris administration” would be able to get much through the Senate.

  12. “Only to have it get killed in the House. What’s the point?”

    The point (from the dems’ view) is that they got their vote on some/most of their radical agenda. Run on that next fall, appeal to their base on that.

    “They’re ideologues led by an uncompromising ‘squad’ of executioners.”

    Who in their incompetence will likely end up executing themselves (hopefully). Not denying it would be risky on the republicans’ side to allow said vote(s); but it would be as you succinctly described it a “horse trade”.

    1. Not to put too fine a point on it, but there’s a difference between a “horse trade” and taking the barn doors off their hinges…. 🙂

  13. I like the idea that Harris and the cabinet declare SloJo* to be incapacitated, and SloJo objects– it goes to the Congress, where, if we had a real opposition party, the Stupid Party would refuse to confirm and they’d keep SloJo* in office unless the Dems commit to do things like appoint a Stupid Party VP. In the name of “Unity!” How could the Dems object?

  14. The assumption here is that voting actually matters, and I don’t think that it does after last fall. No matter how unpopular the Dems might be, they count the votes, and I suspect that in the 2022 elections, the Dems will win every House and Senate race, as well as most, if not all of the races at the state level.
    After all, nothing really happened after the claim that Biden stole the election(For the record, I voted for Biden because of Trump’s dismal record with regard to technical contractors. I know a lot of people in the engineering contract community, and I doubt that more than five percent voted for Donnie Dismal).
    The article was interesting, but I suspect that Joe will still be in office until at least January 20, 2025. Harris, maybe not. Pete Butttieg will probably replace Harris at the nxt election.

  15. Harris could resign and Pelosi could step aside. Which would mean that we would have a President who had had the Joker shove a knife in his mouth and say, “You know, you remind me of my father. And I HATED my father.”

  16. What will happen is that Biden’s handlers will start ignoring what he wants to do in favor of making all “his” decisions for him and making sure Biden himself only ever talks in public about ice cream and the like.

    If they can hold down the covers on that until after November 8, 2022, they can deal with the political fallout, if any, then. Meanwhile they get more of what they want accomplished and the only people complaining will be DOCTOR Jill and the hyena.

    1. “What will happen is that Biden’s handlers will start ignoring what he wants to do in favor of making all “his” decisions for him and making sure Biden himself only ever talks in public about ice cream and the like.”

      In my opinion that’s what HAS been happening since Biden announced his candidacy for president. Actually before.

      Recall how they took a dead Biden campaign and cleared off all opposition.

  17. What’s that you say? The Dems are caught between a rock and a hard place. You hate to see it. What a shame.

Comments are closed.