25th Amendment after Trump supporters riot in the Capital

[Tzupy]

Terrence K. Williams tweeted:

Wait. So white supremacists stormed the Capitol to overthrow the white supremacist government but were stopped by the white supremacist police force and are now being tracked down by the white supremacist FBI?

[BADecker]

^^^ And not only that. But there are 30,000 troops surrounding the capitol to protect Biden from Trump patriots. But Biden wants them to be disarmed, because he is afraid they will assassinate him on behalf of Trump. Take their guns away so that a million Trump supporters can run them over and squash Biden?

Who ever heard of 30,000 troops being stationed at the capitol for an inauguration? Did something like this happen anywhere from 1900 to the present? There's something else going on. Disarming troops wouldn't prevent them from assassinating Biden if that's what they wanted to do.

Is Biden afraid that they might not let his Antifa and BLM troops stop his arrest by MPs for - get this - breaking his oath of office by swearing it? How could he break it by swearing it? Because his (and Obama's) foreign money transactions don't allow him to hold Federal office, according to Title 15, for enriching family members (Hunter) through foreign transactions, as well as bribing foreign governments by threatening to withhold money unless demands were met. http://themillenniumreport.com/2020/08/united-states-code-joe-biden-is-permanently-disqualified-from-holding-any-public-office-in-the-u-s-federal-government/

So you see? Legally Biden absolutely can't hold federal office of any sort. I wonder if that includes Federal dog catcher, or Federal garbage collector?

[sirazimuth]

..... <bollocks>...

So you see? .....

Yeah I see bud.
I see you are either batshit crazy or 2nd to none champion troll extraordinaire on p+s.
Or far more likely...both.
Not that I need to let anyone who frequents these boards know that....

[BADecker]

..... <bollocks>...

So you see? .....

Yeah I see bud.
I see you are either batshit crazy or 2nd to none champion troll extraordinaire on p+s.
Or far more likely...both.
Not that I need to let anyone who frequents these boards know that....

Awwww. Poor baby. Why is it that you can't come up with some proof that this doesn't count, or something of value? I know. You might have to work for your troll living, right?

[franky1]

^^^ And not only that. But there are 30,000 troops surrounding the capitol to protect Biden from Trump patriots. But Biden wants them to be disarmed, because he is afraid they will assassinate him on behalf of Trump. Take their guns away so that a million Trump supporters can run them over and squash Biden?

Who ever heard of 30,000 troops being stationed at the capitol for an inauguration? Did something like this happen anywhere from 1900 to the present? There's something else going on. Disarming troops wouldn't prevent them from assassinating Biden if that's what they wanted to do.

Is Biden afraid that they might not let his Antifa and BLM troops stop his arrest by MPs for - get this - breaking his oath of office by swearing it? How could he break it by swearing it? Because his (and Obama's) foreign money transactions don't allow him to hold Federal office, according to Title 15, for enriching family members (Hunter) through foreign transactions, as well as bribing foreign governments by threatening to withhold money unless demands were met. http://themillenniumreport.com/2020/08/united-states-code-joe-biden-is-permanently-disqualified-from-holding-any-public-office-in-the-u-s-federal-government/

So you see? Legally Biden absolutely can't hold federal office of any sort. I wonder if that includes Federal dog catcher, or Federal garbage collector?

threatening an international organisation with not paying them unless they up their game.. is a crime??
well trump threatening WHO with not paying them unless them unless they up their game, must make trump a criminal

[sirazimuth]

. You might have to work for your troll living, right?

I have been gainfully employed for past 26 years as a CNC programmer/developer, so yeah I do indeed work for a living.
How's your job working out for ya bud?
(Besides this one that you volunteer for with no pay, plastering nonsense 24/7 all over these boards)

[BADecker]

. You might have to work for your troll living, right?

I have been gainfully employed for past 26 years as a CNC programmer/developer, so yeah I do indeed work for a living.
How's your job working out for ya bud?
(Besides this one that you volunteer for with no pay, plastering nonsense 24/7 all over these boards)

Good for you. But its your side job we were talking about. Besides, I have to give you credit. Your trolling isn't nonsense much of the time. But as you can see by what you call my nonsense, the thing I am not is a troll. Trolls make sense or they don't get paid.



EDIT: Why is it that you keep on making sense out of my nonsense? If you could avoid doing that, you might become a better troll.

EDIT: All right. Sorry for calling you a troll. I realize that we simply have differences of opinion. I shouldn't have been so hasty.

[sirazimuth]

peace bro! Have a merit.
Tomorrow I'll be like... I sent a merit to WHO???  WTF was I thinking!? , lol.

[PrimeNumber7]

GOP leadership is firmly not behind Trump right now. Trump's behavior is also a risk to the future of the Republican party, so [...]

In 2016, Trump was supposed to be the challenger for Americans who distrusted the GOP after decades of being betrayed by them.  He has always been disliked by the corrupt career-politician GOP leadership, and especially by the neocons.  It was as much an upset for him to win the party nomination as it was for him to win the general election; but the GOP leadership had no choice but to go along, because Trump was overwhelmingly popular.

In 2016, Trump was widely thought as the only person who could lose to Clinton in the general election. GOP leadership was afraid of losing the House, Senate and Presidency if Trump was nominated. In 2016, none of this turned out to be true, but the House was lost in 2018, and the Senate and Presidency were lost in 2021/0.

I think Trump lost in 2020 because he made the election a referendum on himself. Trump has consistently been less popular personally than his policies. Ditto with his tweeting, his personal attacks on his critics, and the chaos that he caused. I don't think Trump had the right people helping him at the top of his reelection campaign. 

With there being a day and a half left in Trump's Presidency, I don't think he is going to be removed from office via the 25th amendment.

[nullius]

I will be the one to say it:

Terrence K. Williams tweeted:

Wait. So white supremacists stormed the Capitol to overthrow the white supremacist government but were stopped by the white supremacist police force and are now being tracked down by the white supremacist FBI?

DEFUND THE RACIST POLICE!

Let us all now take the knee to protest the racist white supremacist police murder of Ashli Babbitt, who was killed for peacefully protesting.

—Or what would have been peacefully protesting, by the standards of the liberal media, if but only she had indulged in looting and arson, in addition to breaking some windowglass.  Amateur!

Right-wingers suck at rioting.  Protip:  To avoid being accused of “insurrection”, you need to declare a Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone where the government has no authority.  Also, you need to be black and/or Communist.  If you meet these criteria, then Twit-@jack will look the other way while you tweet overtly violent rhetoric!

GOP leadership is firmly not behind Trump right now. Trump's behavior is also a risk to the future of the Republican party, so [...]

In 2016, Trump was supposed to be the challenger for Americans who distrusted the GOP after decades of being betrayed by them.  He has always been disliked by the corrupt career-politician GOP leadership, and especially by the neocons.

In 2016, Trump was widely thought as the only person who could lose to Clinton in the general election. GOP leadership was afraid of losing the House, Senate and Presidency if Trump was nominated. In 2016, none of this turned out to be true, but the House was lost in 2018, and the Senate and Presidency were lost in 2021/0.

That would be the rhetoric of the morally and politically bankrupt GOP leadership.  —The leadership of the same GOP that numerous right-leaning Americans have despised for decades.  Trump had presented himself as a political reformer; is a reformer ever welcomed by the establishment that he promises to reform?

Now, according to Rasmussen Reports for 18 January 2021 (archive of what I am seeing), “48% of Likely U.S. Voters approve of President Trump’s job performance.  Fifty-one percent (51%) disapprove.”  35% “Strongly Approve”, and 42% “Strongly Disapprove”.

Those are excellent numbers for a President who has been smeared in the mass-media, deplatformed by Big Tech, unbanked by the banks, and declared a “domestic terrorist” by a corrupt Goldman Sachs alum and subsequent White House employee whom Trump had FIRED!  (Loser.)

Just imagine if the media were to report on Trump at least semi-honestly.  Or at least, imagine if they were to stop hurling at him a 24/7 nonstop barrage of easily-debunked total lies.  He would now have one of the highest approval ratings of any president in American history!


The foregoing began an essay that I don’t have time to finish now.  Something about why I depicted Trump as Coca-Cola because he had turned out to be just another GOP politician.  —Contrary to his promises, and exactly as I had predicted in 2015–16.  I only like him now because, frankly, it is impossible for me not to sympathize with someone who is being censored, lied about, and targeted for personal destruction by tyrants who demand the repeal of the freedom of speech.

Food for thought:  Look back to what I mentioned earlier, the 1994 Republican Revolution.  After the stunning midterm victory of the GOP in 1994, Bill Clinton was reëlected by a minority of voters in 1996.  Because people hated the cowardly Republicans for breaking their promises.  Many of the voters who swept the GOP into power in 1994 either voted for Perot in 1996, or just stayed home in disgust.

The GOP needs to stop blaming Trump for the failure of a corrupt party whose only consistent behaviour is the betrayal of their hapless votaries voters.

* nullius says:  Don’t vote!  (Unless, perhaps, you can vote for Trump again—or unless you are in a position to vote for Senator Josh Hawley, Senator Ted Cruz, or one of the other Republicans who are now being cancelled for actually, amazingly doing their jobs for a change.)

My perspective:  I have made a detailed study of modern American political history, but I rarely keep up with current events in American politics.  When I do, from where I sit, the voices of people in Idaho, Wisconsin, Oklahoma, or West Virginia come through to me just as loudly as the voices of people in New York or California.  I definitely have no attachment whatsoever to any American political party.

The historical perspective:  Trump himself is definitely not radical.  As recently as 50–60 years ago (never mind longer!), mainstream American Conservatives would have considered today’s Trump to be at best a pale hue of pink, if not a Red.  American “conservatives” are spectacularly incompetent at conserving their own positions, let alone conserving their country.  The whole country has moved left—and “conservatives” have moved with it.  Trump’s stated agenda is to return America to what was a semi-moderate American liberal’s position, immediately before the cultural cataclysm of the 1960s and the concomitant collapse of American Conservatism.

Note:  I am not a conservative, let alone an American conservative.  I see modern “conservatism” as a tangle of self-contradictions, for modernity itself is inherently liberal; and in principle, I am altogether strongly opposed to democracy, i.e. the notion that wolves must obey sheep because sheep are many, and wolves are few.  But at least, unlike liberals, conservatives tend not to be hate-crazed maniacs hellbent on remodelling the universe according to childish fantasies.  I appreciate that.

Tomorrow I'll be like... I sent a merit to WHO???  WTF was I thinking!? , lol.

To whom.  —I need to point that out, because reality-inverting liberals enjoy pretending that they are “educated”, and Trump supporters are all just a bunch of illiterate rubes.  No, really.  To whom, you knuckle-dragging troglodyte!

[Mpamaegbu]

In 2016, Trump was widely thought as the only person who could lose to Clinton in the general election.

Honestly, my take home from the Clinton — Trump election was that Americans were not yet ready for a female president despite all their mouthed speeches about democracy. They loved Hilary Clinton but couldn't close her up to win the presidency. They had to choose controversial Trump instead. Even if Clinton had contested again against Trump in 2020, Americans still wouldn't have voted her in.

On invoking the 25th Amendment, I like how succinctly the Vice President of the US put it. I saw that letter online I thought I should share it. It's spot on:

[nullius]

Honestly, my take home from the Clinton — Trump election was that Americans were not yet ready for a female president despite all their mouthed speeches about democracy. They loved Hilary Clinton but couldn't close her up to win the presidency. They had to choose controversial Trump instead.

That is the worst type of liberal identity politics, here weaponized ad hominem to deny the existence of the many of millions of Americans who loved Trump—who found him inspiring!  (I thought that they overestimated him.  They certainly existed, and some of them called me nasty names.)

Liberals always do this.  They don’t want to believe that anybody out there actually disagrees with their goodthinkful opinions.  I get liberals trying to rationalize me away quite frequently.

Anyway, I will have you know, there were American right-wingers who voted for Hillary in 2008.  They voted for her in the Democrats’ primaries, in states with open primaries.  Indeed, as I recall, there were whole websites devoted to urging American right-wingers to vote for Hillary in the primaries.  When she didn’t win the (D) nomination, they turned around and voted for Sarah Palin in the general election—they wanted so much to vote for a woman!  They were very disappointed and aggrieved that the country just was not yet ready to elect a woman.

(Nobody gave a hoot about McCain, except for those who are more loyal to the GOP than to anything else.  McCain was just another corrupt party political jobber.  Like it or not, Palin was wildly popular.)

And in 2016, they inadvertently elected President Ivanka.  So there.  Stick that in your feminist pipe and smoke it.

To be mistaken in the fundamental problem of “man and woman,” to deny here the profoundest antagonism and the necessity for an eternally hostile tension, to dream here perhaps of equal rights, equal training, equal claims and obligations: that is a TYPICAL sign of shallow-mindedness...

Even if Clinton had contested again against Trump in 2020, Americans still wouldn't have voted her in.

Because she’s a woman, or because she is another corrupt, uninspiring political jobber?

—By the way, how did you fail to notice that the incoming fraudulently selected Vice President is a woman, whom many people expect will probably replace the frail and demented President due to natural causes?  Oh, apropos this thread’s topic:

—Or is that merely a fast-track for President Harris?

On invoking the 25th Amendment, I like how succinctly the Vice President of the US put it. I saw that letter online I thought I should share it. It's spot on:

Indeed, it is—except that it could have been more strongly worded, e.g., “This is an attempted coup under the rubric of Soviet-style pathologization of dissent, based on armchair diagnoses that amount to, ‘I don’t like him; therefore, he is deranged and mentally incapacitated.’”

[PrimeNumber7]

That would be the rhetoric of the morally and politically bankrupt GOP leadership.  —The leadership of the same GOP that numerous right-leaning Americans have despised for decades. 

The GOP has long been afraid of what the left-wing propaganda arm of the Democrat party will say about them. This has played a role in the lack of GOP effectiveness in governing, and the lack of their kept promises.

Just imagine if the media were to report on Trump at least semi-honestly.  Or at least, imagine if they were to stop hurling at him a 24/7 nonstop barrage of easily-debunked total lies.  He would now have one of the highest approval ratings of any president in American history!

As I alluded to above, the media is the propaganda arm of the Democrat party. I think Trump was upset that Fox News was not willing to be his propaganda machine late in his term, and after the election. If Trump was constrained by facts and was more articulate, he would have a stronger case in overturning the election, and none of this would probably have happened.

In 2016, Trump was widely thought as the only person who could lose to Clinton in the general election.

Honestly, my take home from the Clinton — Trump election was that Americans were not yet ready for a female president despite all their mouthed speeches about democracy. They loved Hilary Clinton but couldn't close her up to win the presidency. They had to choose controversial Trump instead. Even if Clinton had contested again against Trump in 2020, Americans still wouldn't have voted her in.

Clinton was willing to say anything to get elected, and I think many Americans saw right through this. She was the most unlikeable major-party Presidential candidate in history. Despite what the polls said, I don't think there was any real chance she was ever going to win against anyone.

[Mpamaegbu]

And in 2016, they inadvertently elected President Ivanka.  So there.  Stick that in your feminist pipe and smoke it.

Your argument distracts here. I thought we were talking about the number one seat in the US — The US President, and not some subsidiary position. You made it sound like Ivanka is the nickname of Donald Trump.

Because she’s a woman, or because she is another corrupt, uninspiring political jobber?

Of course, because she's a woman and America isn't yet ready for that history to be made for a woman president. BTW, is there any politician who doesn't have a strain of corruption in them?

—By the way, how did you fail to notice that the incoming fraudulently selected Vice President is a woman, whom many people expect will probably replace the frail and demented President due to natural causes?  Oh, apropos this thread’s topic:

Well, expectations aren't reality. This also you should know that people don't die based on age and that man isn't God to determine whose turn is next to die.

[TwitchySeal]

Indeed, it is—except that it could have been more strongly worded, e.g., “This is an attempted coup under the rubric of Soviet-style pathologization of dissent, based on armchair diagnoses that amount to, ‘I don’t like him; therefore, he is deranged and mentally incapacitated.’”

A coup is a sudden, illegal, usually violent overthrow of a government or political party.

The 'Amendment' part of the 25th Amendment refers to an addition to the actual US constitution.

It requires the majority of the Presidents cabinet + the VP (all hand picked by the president) to agree that the President should be removed from office.

Asking the VP to invoke the 25th amendment is not an attempted coup, despite what you may read in right wing media - they're just trying to get you fired up (and it seems to be working).

[nullius]

Newsflash:  As of 20 January 2021, Rasmussen Reports has Trump at 51% approval.  Although their index of his approval is still negative, they measure him as having the approval of a majority of Americans, with approval now (barely) exceeding disapproval by a statistically significant amount.

I observe that as the Biden inauguration has approached, Trump’s numbers have slowly increased by a statistically significant amount.

Liberals who believe they have incited universal hatred of Trump are living in a psychotic fantasy.

In President Trump’s final Presidential Tracking Poll, 51% of Likely U.S. Voters approved of his job performance. Forty-eight percent (48%) disapproved. Those figures include 36% who said they Strongly Approve of the job Trump was doing and 41% who Strongly Disapprove. This gave him a Presidential Approval Index rating of -5.

[...]

The margin of sampling error for the full sample of 1,500 Likely Voters is +/- 2.5 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.

PrimeNumber7, I suggest that the GOP will shoot itself in the foot if they are seen throwing under the bus a President who has somehow managed to gain the approval of a majority of likely American voters, even when the mass-media lie-machine has been in overdrive against him, and he is banned from social media.

And it is critical to support the Senators and Congressional Representatives who raised objections to various Electoral College votes.

I began to write a long essay in reply to you.  I will try to finish it later.  Now, the above information must be posted timely—while Trump is technically still President.

Meanwhile, PN7, my condolences on your plight in a banana republic where Biden somehow managed put the Capitol in a de facto state of undeclared martial law, before even taking office (!).  Hey, wasn’t Trump supposed to be the one who would rule by brute force?

Indeed, it is—except that it could have been more strongly worded, e.g., “This is an attempted coup under the rubric of Soviet-style pathologization of dissent, based on armchair diagnoses that amount to, ‘I don’t like him; therefore, he is deranged and mentally incapacitated.’”

A coup is a sudden, illegal, usually violent overthrow of a government or political party.

The 'Amendment' part of the 25th Amendment refers to an addition to the actual US constitution.

It requires the majority of the Presidents cabinet + the VP (all hand picked by the president) to agree that the President should be removed from office.

Asking the VP to invoke the 25th amendment is not an attempted coup,

Yeah, gee, thanks.  I had no idea how the 25th Amendment works.  I needed to be informed by the same ignoramous whom I previously had to school on the history of liberals’ attempts to pack the SCOTUS so that they could ram through blatantly unconstitutional legislation.  Which the “liberals” are now talking about doing under Biden!

Just because something is done under colour of law, does not make it legal; and just because something is done under the colour of a constitution, does not make it constitutional.  The bad-faith abuse of a constitutional provision based on a transparent pretext by people who just want to overthrow the President would indeed be a coup, under a thin façade of constitutional procedure.

despite what you may read in right wing media - they're just trying to get you fired up (and it seems to be working).

Ladies and gentleman of the forum, refer hereby to what I said previously about liberals’ attempts to rationalize me away.

In fact, as a perspicacious observer with no political party attachments, I myself independently reached my above-quoted conclusion.  I actually have not seen anyone else saying what I said; I am the first and only, to the best of my knowledge.  If anyone else said the same thing, I must have missed it.  But no—that cannot be!—it is impossible!  I must be regurgitating agitprop from some mysterious dark force, vaguely identified as “right-wing media”.

Just remember that I am the same nullius whose cultural and political forum oeuvre more usually consists of neoclassical nude statues of Phryne, Nietzschean condemnations of Christianity, rage against American world-police invasions of countries that are not America, and anti-feminist tirades that squarely blame men for inventing feminism.  (Because I know history.  Feminism is men’s fault, and men need to take responsibility for that.)  Surely, I am one to parrot whatever the “right-wing media” (!) brainwashed me to say.  

You made it sound like Ivanka is the nickname of Donald Trump.

I was obviously sarcastic.  And if you thought that I “made it sound like Ivanka is the nickname of Donald Trump”, then either you have a serious problem with reading comprehension, or you are so ill-informed about U.S. politics that you should not be commenting on the matter.

Trump is frequently criticized by his own supporters for the position that he gave his daughter despite her utter lack of qualifications, and her contradictions to the promised Trump platform.  “President Ivanka” is not a term that I invented—whoops, there I go, being brainwashed by “right-wing media”!

BTW, is there any politician who doesn't have a strain of corruption in them?

I’m sure that you apply the same argument, whenever a Republican and/or a male politician is accused of anything corrupt.  

man isn't God to determine whose turn is next to die.

As a strict rationalist, I don’t believe in “God”—except for the god of Bitcoin, and the apotheosis of the Catbat Witch.  —Whoops, there I go, being brainwashed by “right-wing media”—um—wait a minute...

[TwitchySeal]

Newsflash:  As of 20 January 2021, Rasmussen Reports has Trump at 51% approval.  Although their index of his approval is still negative, they measure him as having the approval of a majority of Americans, with approval now (barely) exceeding disapproval by a statistically significant amount.

I observe that as the Biden inauguration has approached, Trump’s numbers have slowly increased by a statistically significant amount.

You seem to be only considering the single poll from Rasmussen.  Look at all their previous polls: https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/trump_administration/trump_approval_index_history

Also you should consider many pollsters instead of just one.  Here are the results of nearly every poll since he's been elected (although it doesn't include the ones that just came out today):



And how he compares to previous Presidents:

[squatz1]

Newsflash:  As of 20 January 2021, Rasmussen Reports has Trump at 51% approval.  Although their index of his approval is still negative, they measure him as having the approval of a majority of Americans, with approval now (barely) exceeding disapproval by a statistically significant amount.

I observe that as the Biden inauguration has approached, Trump’s numbers have slowly increased by a statistically significant amount.

You seem to be only considering the single poll from Rasmussen.  Look at all their previous polls: https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/trump_administration/trump_approval_index_history

Also you should consider many pollsters instead of just one.  Here are the results of nearly every poll since he's been elected (although it doesn't include the ones that just came out today):



And how he compares to previous Presidents:

See but why use poll aggregators that weight different polling groups when you can just pick the polling group that favors your guy and then run with it to keep your narrative going.

It’d be too easy to do that when you can just lie yourself into your own views.

LOL.

[philipma1957]

Newsflash:  As of 20 January 2021, Rasmussen Reports has Trump at 51% approval.  Although their index of his approval is still negative, they measure him as having the approval of a majority of Americans, with approval now (barely) exceeding disapproval by a statistically significant amount.

I observe that as the Biden inauguration has approached, Trump’s numbers have slowly increased by a statistically significant amount.

Liberals who believe they have incited universal hatred of Trump are living in a psychotic fantasy.

In President Trump’s final Presidential Tracking Poll, 51% of Likely U.S. Voters approved of his job performance. Forty-eight percent (48%) disapproved. Those figures include 36% who said they Strongly Approve of the job Trump was doing and 41% who Strongly Disapprove. This gave him a Presidential Approval Index rating of -5.

[...]

The margin of sampling error for the full sample of 1,500 Likely Voters is +/- 2.5 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.

PrimeNumber7, I suggest that the GOP will shoot itself in the foot if they are seen throwing under the bus a President who has somehow managed to gain the approval of a majority of likely American voters, even when the mass-media lie-machine has been in overdrive against him, and he is banned from social media.

And it is critical to support the Senators and Congressional Representatives who raised objections to various Electoral College votes.

I began to write a long essay in reply to you.  I will try to finish it later.  Now, the above information must be posted timely—while Trump is technically still President.

Meanwhile, PN7, my condolences on your plight in a banana republic where Biden somehow managed put the Capitol in a de facto state of undeclared martial law, before even taking office (!).  Hey, wasn’t Trump supposed to be the one who would rule by brute force?

Indeed, it is—except that it could have been more strongly worded, e.g., “This is an attempted coup under the rubric of Soviet-style pathologization of dissent, based on armchair diagnoses that amount to, ‘I don’t like him; therefore, he is deranged and mentally incapacitated.’”

A coup is a sudden, illegal, usually violent overthrow of a government or political party.

The 'Amendment' part of the 25th Amendment refers to an addition to the actual US constitution.

It requires the majority of the Presidents cabinet + the VP (all hand picked by the president) to agree that the President should be removed from office.

Asking the VP to invoke the 25th amendment is not an attempted coup,

Yeah, gee, thanks.  I had no idea how the 25th Amendment works.  I needed to be informed by the same ignoramous whom I previously had to school on the history of liberals’ attempts to pack the SCOTUS so that they could ram through blatantly unconstitutional legislation.  Which the “liberals” are now talking about doing under Biden!

Just because something is done under colour of law, does not make it legal; and just because something is done under the colour of a constitution, does not make it constitutional.  The bad-faith abuse of a constitutional provision based on a transparent pretext by people who just want to overthrow the President would indeed be a coup, under a thin façade of constitutional procedure.

despite what you may read in right wing media - they're just trying to get you fired up (and it seems to be working).

Ladies and gentleman of the forum, refer hereby to what I said previously about liberals’ attempts to rationalize me away.

In fact, as a perspicacious observer with no political party attachments, I myself independently reached my above-quoted conclusion.  I actually have not seen anyone else saying what I said; I am the first and only, to the best of my knowledge.  If anyone else said the same thing, I must have missed it.  But no—that cannot be!—it is impossible!  I must be regurgitating agitprop from some mysterious dark force, vaguely identified as “right-wing media”.

Just remember that I am the same nullius whose cultural and political forum oeuvre more usually consists of neoclassical nude statues of Phryne, Nietzschean condemnations of Christianity, rage against American world-police invasions of countries that are not America, and anti-feminist tirades that squarely blame men for inventing feminism.  (Because I know history.  Feminism is men’s fault, and men need to take responsibility for that.)  Surely, I am one to parrot whatever the “right-wing media” (!) brainwashed me to say.  

You made it sound like Ivanka is the nickname of Donald Trump.

I was obviously sarcastic.  And if you thought that I “made it sound like Ivanka is the nickname of Donald Trump”, then either you have a serious problem with reading comprehension, or you are so ill-informed about U.S. politics that you should not be commenting on the matter.

Trump is frequently criticized by his own supporters for the position that he gave his daughter despite her utter lack of qualifications, and her contradictions to the promised Trump platform.  “President Ivanka” is not a term that I invented—whoops, there I go, being brainwashed by “right-wing media”!

BTW, is there any politician who doesn't have a strain of corruption in them?

I’m sure that you apply the same argument, whenever a Republican and/or a male politician is accused of anything corrupt.  

man isn't God to determine whose turn is next to die.

As a strict rationalist, I don’t believe in “God”—except for the god of Bitcoin, and the apotheosis of the Catbat Witch.  —Whoops, there I go, being brainwashed by “right-wing media”—um—wait a minute...

I corrected your title.

[suchmoon]

It's very unfair that you're all trolling nullius with a few lines and his nature makes him respond with massive walls of text.


Back to the topic, sort of. The good news for Trump is that the 25th amendment is no longer in play. The better news is that he can enjoy Florida and not worry about all that pesky presidential stuff.