this post was submitted on 07 Sep 2024
177 points (94.9% liked)

politics

19107 readers
3091 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Former President Donald Trump vowed to change the 25th Amendment to allow for the removal of the vice president if they hide the “incapacity of the president.”

During a Saturday rally in Mosinee, Wisconsin, Trump offered a new proposal to modify the 25th Amendment. Trump and his supporters have often attacked Joe Biden by alleging he is mentally unfit to serve as president while claiming Kamala Harris has hid this fact from the public.

The 25th Amendment in the U.S. Constitution is designed to set up a line of succession if the president dies or becomes incapacitated. It allows the vice president to become president if the president dies, resigns, or is removed from office by impeachment.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Rhaedas@fedia.io 19 points 2 months ago (1 children)

The impeachment process relies on good faith of both parts of Congress. The Senate, controlled by Republicans, at first denied there was evidence, then when presented with obvious evidence decided that they were okay with it and no punishment was needed on a verdict already established (the actual impeachment from the House). It's like the jurors agreed there was a crime, but the judge said it wasn't a big deal and let him free.

[–] meco03211@lemmy.world 13 points 2 months ago (1 children)

There was literally a republican senator that said he was convinced of all the charges but that he didn't think trump should be removed.

[–] Rhaedas@fedia.io 6 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Mitt Romney. Had a chance to do the right thing, but followed the party line.

[–] bamboo@lemmy.blahaj.zone 15 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Mitt Romney was literally the only Republican senator who voted to remove Trump for both impeachment trials. Not sure what you're referring to but all the other Republicans voting party over country are to blame.

https://www.romney.senate.gov/romney-delivers-remarks-impeachment-vote/

https://www.romney.senate.gov/romney-statement-impeachment-vote/

Had they impeached Trump after Jan. 6th the. Trump would be ineligible to run for president now and we wouldn't be in this mess

[–] Rhaedas@fedia.io 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I stand corrected on part of it. He did vote guilty on the first impeachment article, just not the second for obstruction of Congress. I guess at that point it didn't matter, as the Senate overall wasn't going to remove Trump anyway.

[–] bamboo@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 2 months ago

Right, there were 52 other Republican senators who could have had some spine and voted for their country over their party, but didn't. If anyone should be singled out for being at fault, it's Mitch McConnell, who voted against Trump's second impeachment conviction, even though he stated "There's no question that President Trump is practically and morally responsible for provoking the events of the day". As the senate majority leader, he could have whipped the other Republicans to stand up to Trump, but didn't, effectively finalizing handing the party over to Trump.