Is invoking the 25th amendment against Shrub really that far off?

[RiverStone]

There are hushed voices out there already pondering just when can we invoke the 25th amendment? That amendment which stipulates 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.

http://www.usconstitution.net/xconst_Am25.html

Are we that truly question the President's metal faculties (with no sarcasm) on the lunatic fringe, or are we being run by a lunatic?

The compelling and unified evidence against a "surge" or "escalation" is well documented in many threads throughout DU; there are NO SURGE voices from the military all the way up to generals, NO SURGE from politicians in the House and Senate representing both parties, No SURGE op ed pieces throughout the land, and most importantly We The People are expressing NO SURGE by an overwhelming majority.

IMHO, the President suffers from a personality disorder (antisocial would be a good fit), delusions of grandeur, and by any definition would fit the description of an egomaniac. He either refuses or simply can't hear voices of reason around him. My fear is he will carry this tragic Iraq conflict forward at a cost of $8+ billion a month not to advance a noble cause, but to salvage his fragile ego from losing an already un-winnable war. How many more American men and women will Shrub place in harms' way because he can't see the Iraq forest through the trees.

How much blatant disregard for not only the will of the people, but rational thought would you need to see from Shrub before you felt we really could invoke the 25th amendment?

:think:




on edit: added link to definition 25th Amendment

[villager]

1. I think it is imperative

and have been saying so for the last two years...

[northzax]

5. all the Congress has to do

is pass a law stating that not one cent can be spent in Iraq after a certain date. If they can't pass that law, how would they get a 25th resolution through?

[madinmaryland]

2. Wouldn't that make Cheney president?

:scared:

[NYCGirl]

3. Considering that Reagan was pretty much out of it for most of his second

term and Nixon was walking around the White House having discussions with the portraits, I can't imagine how much it would take.

[northzax]

4. absolutely zero chance

this amendment is intended to deal with someone living, but unable to resign due to a medical condition or accident (for instance, a stroke that incapacitated the President without killing him) before the 25th, the only way to deal with that situation would be impeachment, and if no crime was committed you'd be stuck with a vegetable president.

There are no serious whispers about invoking the 25th, don't be silly. it is a tool that should only be used in the most dire circumstances. And this is not one of them.

[villager]

7. seems pretty dire to me -- I don't know if the framers reckoned on "bughouse crazy"

inhabiting the Oval Office...

[Ravenseye]

11. hmm no bughouse crazy clause?

Bughouse Crazy Clause

Article 2 Section 4
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

[northzax]

17. no need for it though

the Congress can simply refuse to allocate money. Pass a law saying that no money can be spent in Iraq after X date. That is all. You think all those soldiers are going to fight without ammunition, or food, or pay? I think not. If the President violates that law, you can impeach him. no need for this radical solution that would be enacted by any congress of the opposition party from now on.

[RiverStone]

14. Granted, its a long shot...yet it's been pondered by many before.

There may be no "serious" attempt on The Hill that is in the public eye, but whispers have been around regarding Shrub's mental state for years. A couple of examples here:

http://www.unknownnews.net/insanity101704.html

Or even from longer ago:

http://elandslide.org/elandslide/petition.cfm?campaign=madgeorge

The absurd nature of his actions are also unprecedented in history. I think it's a valid question.

[Kelly Rupert]

22. Military interventionism is hardly unprecedented.

It may be pigheaded and idiotic, but it's not like Bush is the first bad politician in history.

[RiverStone]

24. Agree - military interventionism...

...is hardly unprecedented. Though this level of disdain and vitriol against the President in war time may only parallel one other President in modern times. That of Nixon - of course, he left before he had to face his charges.

Would Shrub do the same faced with similar recrimination?

[Kelly Rupert]

26. Here's hoping. n/t

[aquart]

6. And get Gung Ho Cheney? Fat chance.

Bush would have to go into a coma on national television first.

[Life Long Dem]

8. It's a fact that the generals have told Bush they already tried the surge in Baghdad and failed. nt

[William769]

9. Ain't gonna happen.

I would be one of the first to scream for Impeachment of the one's who tried.

[Strawman]

10. Here's a thought...

It would take 2/3 majority to remove him from office if he protested the invocation of the 25th Amendment. But a congressional majority could remove him for a day or so that way.

And I'm pretty sure there is no limit to the number of times a majority could initiate the process. The majority could just keep removing him in 48 hour intervals to gain leverage. I don't advocate that, but technically they could.

[Kelly Rupert]

13. Only if the Vice President agrees the President is incapacitated.

What are the odds Cheney's going to do that?

[Strawman]

16. You're right...the VP AND not the VP OR

There would have to be a vacant Vice Presidency and a ruthless and/or determined Congressional majority from the opposition party for it to go down the way I suggested was technically possible. It's a very very far out scenario.

[Kelly Rupert]

20. Yeah. It seems our best bet on this plan

is to impeach, convict and remove Cheney at the same time the 25th is invoked (within a matter of hours from the plan's inception). Of course, if you can pull of this ridiculous bit of Rube Goldberg trickery (and avert a major Constitutional crisis), why not just impeach and remove Bush and Cheney?

[Strawman]

25. In an age of "nuclear options" and other such power manuevers

absent the barrier of Vice Presidential cooperation, is a discussion of "majority removals" through this tactic really so far out? That was my thinking until you pointed out that the Vice President AND a majority of the cabinet or the Congress have to agree upon involuntary removal.

It's just another one of those potential constitutional crises waiting to happen. If the Vice Presidency were vacant, and there were any grounds for a hostile Congressional majority to justify pulling this move, it probably would never happen, but just the fact that it's sitting there waiting to be exploited is interesting.

To be clear, I'm not advocating it as something that the Democrats ought to do, or suggesting that it is anything but a remote possibility, since a scenario would have to exist for it to be possible that doesn't currently exist, but I think it's a legal interesting vulnerability in the Constitution. But for Al Gore, would you really have put it past Gingrich to think about it?

[Kelly Rupert]

12. Absolutely zero chance whatsoever.

The 25th Amendment provides for a means of replacing a President who is incapacitated, not one who is pigheaded. I would suggest you read the text of the amendment more closely.

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.

Basically, it would go like this:

1. Congress declares Bush crazy.
2. Bush writes a letter saying "No I'm not."
3. Cheney says, "I agree; he's really not crazy."
4. Bush remains President.

So we've just abused the Constitution for political purposes and humiliated ourselves on the national stage, and for what? Nothing.

This is some creative thought, and creative thought is a good thing. But while this is an interesting idea, it's not a very practical one.

[cosmik debris]

15. You've been watching too many movies

There is a huge difference between political disagreement and inability to discharge duties.

If the Dems try that they will look even more stupid than the Repubs looked when they tried to remove Clinton for a blow job.

[RiverStone]

18. Ummmm. Illegal war + death & distruction vs a blow job?

With all due respect cosmik, trying to invoke the 25th on a delusional President who lied his way into a tragic war and continues to inexplicably ignore sane reason to stop it seems LESS crazy then trying to impeach Clinton for a blow job.

Bush keeps this same irrational behavior up, there will come a point in time will asking the question will seem a very sane thing to do.

[Kelly Rupert]

21. Bad policy is not incapacitation.

Not only is this plan ridiculous, it wouldn't even work. All Bush has to do in order to get his office back is just write a letter saying "No, I'm okay," and have Cheney sign off on it.

[Bill McBlueState]

19. read the amendment more carefully

This process has to be initiated by the executive, not the legislative branch -- either by the President or by the Vice President in league with a majority of the Cabinet.

[onenote]

23. exactly - the OP misunderstands the amendment

There are two ways that a President who cannot function can be replaced, on a temporary basis, by the VP:
One is that the President him/herself transmits a message to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives a written declaration that he/she is unable to discharge the powers and duties of the presidency.

The other is that the Vice President and either a majority of the executive branch department heads (essentially the cabinet) or a majority 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 the office.

So, in order to invoke the 25th amendment, either chimpy would have to call in sick on himself, or Cheney and a majority of the cabinet would have to drop a dime on him. Theoretically, Congress could pass a law substituting some other "body" for the cabinet, but it would still require the VP to participate and the likelihood that congress would pass such a law is less than zero.