top 90 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 124 points 6 months ago* (13 children)

I was about to complain yet again "that's not how it works", but then I looked up the text again and this is explicitly allowed. Congress can set up a commission that basically takes the place of the Cabinet for 25th Amendment purposes. So now all this talk of the 25th amendment makes a bit more sense to me.

They still need a 2/3 margin in both houses even after the commission makes their determination, because the idiot is guaranteed to contest it. But maybe there is some truth to the idea that Republicans won't vote to impeach but would vote to declare him incompetent, based on his dumb tweets

  • source
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 55 points 6 months ago (3 children)

    I think the chances that republicans will admit their guy is incompetent is close to 0. They will rather lock him up in the white house basement for 2 years.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    As soon as he's no longer useful he'll be discarded. Right now they can push through an agenda, blame it all on him and he'll just lap it up. Any attention to him is a good thing. He's an idiot but he's managed to attract some vile, politically savvy people to his cabinet. They know what they're doing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago

    No, the optics here are very important. If they get rid of a sitting president during the next elections democrats will say "the last guy they nominated was so bad they had to get rid of him, you can't trust them". This damages the brand and they don't want that. They always have to project confidence and never admit mistakes. It was the same with Biden. People around him new for a very long time that he was unfit for office but were hiding it for as long as they could. Republicans will do the same but Trump doesn't have to do any debates. He just has to wave at people from a distance and sign papers.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    Yeah far easier to impeach, which requires a simple majority in the House and 2/3rds of the Senate.

    The 25th Amendment is a higher bar, since it requires 2/3rds of both the House and the Senate.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

    Impeachment is a claim of malfeasance. 25th is a claim of simple incompetence. The standards of evidence in an impeachment are effectively similar to that of a criminal trial: guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

    The standards of evidence in a 25th amendment action are "reasonable belief".

    To impeach him for, say, threatening nuclear annihilation, prosecutors would have to prove that threat was illegally beyond his authority to issue that threat. Which would be difficult, because the president does, indeed, have the power to use nuclear weapons. Congress is free to refuse to act, or to drag their feet for months before acting.

    To invoke the 25th amendment, Vance merely has to say that the president is not acting reasonably.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 71 points 6 months ago
    [–] 184 points 6 months ago* (16 children)

    “Lightweight Jamie Raskin is a stupid person’s idea of a smart person,” said White House spokesperson Davis Ingle.

    Trump is a poor white trash person's idea of a rich person.

  • source
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 46 points 6 months ago (11 children)

    Judging by how much the billionaires back him, I don't think that's true. The idea that billionaires are anything other than scammers and abusers like Trump is pretty obviously false. He just doesn't mask it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 47 points 6 months ago (3 children)

    He's a useful idiot. Back in the 90s when he was doing fast food commercials, he lost massive amounts of money. The appearance of bring a billionaire helped him become a billionaire again. The dude's a grifter and a puppet.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    When Trump opens his mouth, you can SEE Putin's hand.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    Why reach for Putin when American capital is right there?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 6 months ago

    Liberals, especially middle-class liberals who had a little economic privilege, will not question the system that privileged them.

    So they reach for other explanations that vibe with the things they already believe. Evil foreigners, bad people doing capitalism wrong, maybe both conspiring together.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 17 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    No he's right. Trump before becoming president likely wasn't a billionaire. Trump is gold leaf trash amongst his peers, he's the bullshitter his peers play golf with to make fun of. He's the stupid face for the real Billionaires with tens and hundreds of billions. A Tool of no pedigree, his grandpa dodged the draft and made it opening a whore house.

    The billionaires don't see him as one of them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -5 points 6 months ago (3 children)
  • [–] 16 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    Every billionaire that opens their mouth. How do you think they got all that money? Hard work and ethical business practices?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -2 points 6 months ago* (2 children)
  • [–] 6 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    We aren't arguing with each other trying to say the same thing. You are trying to argue with me because you misread my comment twice.

    Billionaires are soulless scammers. I said that pretty clearly in my original comment.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] -2 points 6 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 6 points 6 months ago*

    My comment was perfectly understandable and used a really common phrase. You're being a patronizing asshole despite the misunderstanding being entirely on you. I didn't make you comment.

    Edit: and then you delete the entire comment chain to hide it. Is lemmy holding a clown convention today?

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 4 points 6 months ago

    Oh no he didn't just insult my favorite congressman!

    It's not even true either. Jamie Raskin is highly intelligent, and professional, and he even kept serving while undergoing cancer treatment. He's a hero.

    trump on the other hand, is trash.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 18 points 6 months ago

    That's basically saying "No u".

    Gross
    Old
    Projection

    Seriously, people have (rightly) been saying this about Trump for decades!

  • source
  • [–] 18 points 6 months ago (9 children)

    Congress has the power to create a commission to exercise the power to remove a mentally unfit president from office. The biggest worry is that this would inevitably be politicized. I say, let it happen! Let it be political. Let's have an openly political "mental health commission" that will rule that being a member of the opposite political party is a mental illness. Hell, let it become a formality. It will simply be expected that the president will be removed from office after a change in Congressional control. Whenever a change in control of Congress happens, the new Congressional leadership will stuff it with political ideologues. And they'll inevitably rule a president of the opposing party to be mentally unfit. Eventually it just becomes a formality, no one even considers it unusual. We just expect the presidency to be able to flip every two years. And we giggle that it has to be done by formally declaring the previous guy to be crazy. I think this would be a good idea.

    Why? Because this would effectively transform the US into a Parliamentary democracy. A simple majority in both houses of Congress would be enough to install a new president. They effectively become a Prime Minister at that point. Parliamentary democracies have proven much more resilient to strong-man dictatorial takeover. It's not as perfect a solution as amending the constitution to formally remove the office of president entirely, but it would be a decent hack to do something similar. And going to a Parliamentary system isn't a magic cure-all, but it does have quite a bit of merit. As a plus, we would have the bonus of being "that nation that regularly declares its former leaders legally crazy." And you know what? I think that works well with America's energy.

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 6 months ago* (4 children)

    as an aussie that has a parliamentary system, and in that system has had a period where we frequently ousted the PM, it’s not that great of an idea

    you want governments to be able to plan for the long term. really, even 4y is not great for long term planning because it kinda implies you need to show results before the term is up

    we had a bunch of policy flip-flops during that period, which is very inefficient

    i guess it doesn’t really matter if you get 2y no matter what: there’s no more after your 2y, but i think that’d lead to leaders doing a bunch of the “fuck it” last term stuff because they have no reason to make a good impression for their potential reelection

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago

    But, to my knowledge, Australia has never faced the prospect of dictatorial takeover.

    When an absolute monarchy works well, it can really work well. Give absolute authority to the rare person that is just, kind, determined, and with a vision? They can work miracles. But a good king is an exception rather than the rule. And the loss of freedom exists regardless of how good the king.

    Having a president, does, as you note, have certain practical benefits. But giving one person independent elected authority and control of the military and bureaucracy has proven time and time again to be a recipe for authoritarian takeover. It can still happen in a parliamentary system, but it's a lot harder when the guy controlling the army can be dismissed with a simple majority vote.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    I think the US has failed to plan for the long term enough that it no longer has to 🫠

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago* (1 child)

    that was certainly in the back of my head the whole time… policy flip flop and lack of long term planning in modern politics is pretty much the norm anyway… but i think to encode that into a kind of standard way of operating is perhaps not a good thing… adding an extra layer that’s hard to undo before fixing the core problem is how the US got to where it is now

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago

    I totally get where you're coming from. It's hard for me not to view the US (being a recovering seppo myself) as an empire doomed to walk the path of all empires. I still really love the idea of a country based on rule of law by the consent of the governed and all that jazz. But, at some point I stopped believing the US government is even able to reform itself adequately in its current form. Too much of that apparatus is of no interest to anyone who could have a positive impact. The sheer un-coolness of local politics means only the deeply uncool get involved. To say nothing of the bad campaign finance laws!

    I wish I knew enough about Australian politics to make a worthwhile comparison. For what it's worth, I think the main thing that makes a government unfit to be reformed is sheer size - your government could never be so large as the US one, so at least there I'm hopeful for positive change towards more stability. Just don't let them build empires!

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 6 months ago

    I thought the benefits of parliamentary systems come from the fact that that they're more proportional. They have a balance of power going on in the fact that you can win a seat from being popular in your district, but you can also win from being popular in your party, which gives a chance to minority parties that are spread thin across the country.

    Winning a district directly gives you those "maverick" politicians that don't fit into the major parties but they reflect the unique local politics. But those people can be corruptly beholden to their local industries. Winning off the party list results in members who represent their parties.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 14 points 6 months ago

    Hilarious how everyone here complains they take the (slow) bureaucratic route.

    This is a political party and that's how they can act.

    If you want fast results, take it to the streets. Kicking him out outside of bureaucratic procedures is everyone's responsibility, not specifically the elected parties

  • source
  • [–] 12 points 6 months ago

    I haven’t seen this on Reddit yet. It’s interesting to compare what’s posted on lemmy and reddid.

  • source
  • [–] 90 points 6 months ago (14 children)

    Oh great another 2 year circus side show.

    A commission to assess?

    Ffs.

    Nuke us from space.

  • source
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 36 points 6 months ago (6 children)

    Your request for "nuke us from space" has been filed. It may take up to 15-20 years before you get a reply.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 6 months ago

    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.

    This "other body" is the commission they are talking about.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 6 months ago (3 children)

    If we should be nuked from space for anything, it’s Trump’s insanity, not calling it out. Yesterday people complained that Democrats don’t even put up any opposition. Now we’re complaining when they begin the process of removing him from office. 🤷‍♂️

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    His mental fitness is being assessed constantly. They just don't care about his decline. Putin will have him as long as he think he can serve his purpose as being a useful idiot.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 22 points 6 months ago

    Man, woman, felon, camera.

  • source
  • [–] 31 points 6 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 16 points 6 months ago (4 children)

    Jesus Christ just go for impeachment. If you can 25th, you can impeach. What a waste of time.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 6 months ago (3 children)

    Is impeachment much better? He's been impeached twice already, what did that accomplish?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    That's because they didnt get the 2/3 in the Senate they needed to remove him. But they need that 2/3 to 25th him... So yeah.

    Plus if they 25th he can just write a letter saying he is competent and resume being president whenever he wants.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 6 months ago

    they may get 2/3 if those Republicans on the fence feel like they have a good excuse to throw him under the bus. Their insane base might still vote for them if they say "we had to he was really sick" instead of "we had to he's breaking things you don't give a fuck about"

    It's politics.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago

    Claiming Trump is crazy is much more vulnerable to rebuttals that the accusers are political and suffer from "Trump Derangement Syndrome". Some of the shittiest politics comes from chopping up video clips to make people look crazy or stupid. Or just reading transcripts. Every transcript of extemporaneous speech makes the speaker sound stupid. That's just how it natural speech works and the leeway you have in performing a transcript.

    Impeachment puts the focus on the crimes he's committing and the actual damage he's doing.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    As A Brit being a third party I will believe it when I see it

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    Also a Brit, I agree. Plus, even if the Democrats get their shit together (which they won't) and the impeachment goes ahead and doesn't go the exact same way as the other impeachments and even if he is somehow actually removed from the presidency (which is incredibly unlikely IMO), then what? He certainly won't go to jail or face any other consequences and even if he did, it still doesn't fix any of the massive, fundamental problems in the US political system that led to this situation in the first place. Russia will still be meddling with the system, Project 2025 will keep chugging forward, Fox News will still keep spewing bullshit from every available media source and someone else will just fill the vacuum.

    Even if the unthinkable happened and the US somehow managed to purge every Mitch McConnell/Lindsay Graham/Ted Cruz/Peter Thiel/Elon Musk type of character out of the system (and those are just a few names off the top of my head, there are probably hundreds that would need to be removed from power/sent to prison realistically) I still don't know if that would be enough. I can't really think of many empires in history that reached this depth of corruption and decline and managed to rise back out of it.

    And that's just me talking about the legal ways. By which I mean, they could impeach Trump for years, finally remove him and the MAGA base could very well just be like "fuck it" and storm the capital again or something and put him back in. Nothing would surprise me at this point TBH.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 25 points 6 months ago (10 children)

    His craziness needs to stay in until December.

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 6 months ago (8 children)
  • [–] 23 points 6 months ago* (3 children)

    47 needs to go ASAP, if vance has to serve more than 50% of the remaining term then he can only run for reellection once. If 47 croaks or is removed after that point, the couch-fucker can run with some incumbant advantage twice

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    "We are going to file a request to create a vote in order to create a commission, that can create a petition to allow us to file the article to vote on whether or not we can impeach the seditious, blackmailed. child raping, human trafficker that sold out our country".

    The rules are pretty hilarious at this point.

    They REALLY WANT HIM GONE GUYS

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›