Vice President Pence hasn't ruled out taking action to remove Trump from office

Vice President Mike Pence has not ruled out using the 25th Amendment against President Trump in case his state of mind becomes more unstable in the days leading up to Inauguration Day, according to a report.

Pence’s team is worried invoking the 25th Amendment — which can be used to remove a president from office — or starting an impeachment process, might trigger Trump into action which puts the nation at risk, a source told CNN.

Pence’s goal for now is to ensure there’s a smooth transition between the Trump administration and President-elect Joe Biden’s team, as well as making sure Biden is prepared to deal with the COVID-19 pandemic, the source told the network.

Trump and Pence have not spoken to each other since the Capitol Hill attack on Wednesday, CNN reported. Thousands of Trump supporters attended the violent attempted siege, which killed at least five people, including a police officer and an Air Force veteran.

Source: New York Post

A new poll shows a majority of Americans hold Trump responsible for the violence and think he should be removed from office, according to the Guardian:

A majority of Americans believes Donald Trump should be removed from power before Joe Biden is sworn in to replace him, according to a poll released on Sunday.

Trump attempted a coup: he must be removed while those who aided him pay | Robert Reich
In the survey by ABC News and Ipsos, 56% of respondents said Trump should be removed before inauguration day, 20 January.

A higher number, 67%, held Trump responsible for the violence at the US Capitol this week which left five people dead.

At the Ellipse near the White House on Wednesday, the president told supporters to “fight like hell” to overturn an election defeat he claims without evidence was caused by voter fraud.

Shortly after that a mob broke into the Capitol, smashing, stealing and confronting law enforcement.

Ben Reilly wrote:Vice President Mike Pence has not ruled out using the 25th Amendment against President Trump in case his state of mind becomes more unstable in the days leading up to Inauguration Day, according to a report.

Pence’s team is worried invoking the 25th Amendment — which can be used to remove a president from office — or starting an impeachment process, might trigger Trump into action which puts the nation at risk, a source told CNN.

That's what we get when we elevate someone above the law.  If this were an ordinary criminal case, at a bail hearing the judge would determine whether the defendant is a threat to himself or others.  Any worries that he would "put the nation at risk" would surely result in remand to a jail cell.  But, right now, the president is above the law...he can commit crimes with impunity, including crimes that threaten the nation, and there is no bail hearing.

The 25th-Amendment was intended for a non-partisan crisis situation.  It is intended for hospital emergencies, comas and the like.  It is of no use with an alive and well agent in the form of a president, even if he is crazy.

Of course, Trump will pardon everyone involved, including himself, and there will be no consequence to his actions.  The institutions of law and the Constitution will be that much weaker.  Only a precedent could stop the next demagogue from borrowing on Trump's tactics, and we are letting precedent slip away like sand between our fingers.  The tactics of Trump will be ratified by silence.

Ben wrote:A majority of Americans believes Donald Trump should be removed from power before Joe Biden is sworn in to replace him, according to a poll released on Sunday.

56% is an awfully slim majority. People are thinking, wtf...it's only ten more days. They are not thinking of the precedent that it sets to allow the killing and plunder to go unpunished; they are only thinking of getting him out of office.

It's probably a waste of time if he just sits around and sulks. No doubt its been made clear to Trump that Pence will use it if he tries something say involving the military. The problem is you have to get half the cabinet to agree and then Trump can appeal it.

Ben Reilly wrote:Vice President Mike Pence has not ruled out using the 25th Amendment against President Trump in case his state of mind becomes more unstable in the days leading up to Inauguration Day, according to a report.

Pence’s team is worried invoking the 25th Amendment — which can be used to remove a president from office — or starting an impeachment process, might trigger Trump into action which puts the nation at risk, a source told CNN.

Pence’s goal for now is to ensure there’s a smooth transition between the Trump administration and President-elect Joe Biden’s team, as well as making sure Biden is prepared to deal with the COVID-19 pandemic, the source told the network.

Trump and Pence have not spoken to each other since the Capitol Hill attack on Wednesday, CNN reported. Thousands of Trump supporters attended the violent attempted siege, which killed at least five people, including a police officer and an Air Force veteran.

Source: New York Post

When Hillary and Donald campaigned in the 2016 POTUS election,  a number of pathetic reasons were cited by Trump fanatics why she was not fit for office. I will give 3 of those reasons  - and the 3rd one is quite relevant for this thread and it makes a compelling case for invoking Article 25 or impeachment.


1. ''She forgave her husband's philandering''.  Wait until the law suits against Trump emerge in the next few weeks to see the extent of HIS own philandering!

2. ''She was  too frail for office''.  Cue those pathetic photoshopped clips of her 'shaking', as proof  of her 'epilepsy'- even a 4 year old could have made better fake videos.

3.''The Benghazi incident in Libya''.    Yes the last time a USA govt building was violently stormed, was in Benghazi. Hillary was blamed for this and at best it was poor judgement. MORE people died in the storming of capitol and this time it was a very deliberate decision planned well in advanced by him.

Hilary had nothing to do with Benghazi. It was a CIA outpost. The CIA was directed by CIA Director David Petraeus at the time.

https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/nation-politics/benghazi-panel-to-interview-former-cia-director-petraeus/

Original Quill wrote:Hilary had nothing to do with Benghazi.  It was a CIA outpost.  The CIA was directed by CIA Director David Petraeus at the time.

https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/nation-politics/benghazi-panel-to-interview-former-cia-director-petraeus/

How come you constantly spell Hillary with one "L".

It's weird.

If you like: "Hillary had nothing to do with Benghazi."

Original Quill wrote:If you like: "Hillary had nothing to do with Benghazi."

It's just weird. Brits do that all the time (not sure why either). Americans don't.

Original Quill wrote: Hilary had nothing to do with Benghazi.   It was a CIA outpost.  The CIA was directed by CIA Director David Petraeus at the time. https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/nation-politics/benghazi-panel-to-interview-former-cia-director-petraeus/

She accepted responsibility for it, Q.
On the basis that she was in overall charge of security and there had obviously been a lapse of security.

JulesV wrote:

Original Quill wrote: Hilary had nothing to do with Benghazi.   It was a CIA outpost.  The CIA was directed by CIA Director David Petraeus at the time. https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/nation-politics/benghazi-panel-to-interview-former-cia-director-petraeus/

She accepted responsibility for it, Q.
On the basis that she was in overall charge of security and there had obviously been a lapse of security.

She sorta did.

Y'all bugged out based on intell saying how hot the place was getting.

We had about a 12 hour gunfight with no help on the way.

Most people don't blame Hillary for the attack. It's the fact that help was never sent.

In any event, I think Hillary would have lost without the Benghazi debacle.

And back to the OP.

Pence isn't going to use the 25th.

Seems Trump is basically behaving now and he'll let congress decide his fate for his past actions.

JulesV wrote:

Original Quill wrote: Hilary had nothing to do with Benghazi.   It was a CIA outpost.  The CIA was directed by CIA Director David Petraeus at the time. https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/nation-politics/benghazi-panel-to-interview-former-cia-director-petraeus/

She accepted responsibility for it, Q.
On the basis that she was in overall charge of security and there had obviously been a lapse of security.

The reason why she accepted responsibility was, to even discuss a covert CIA operation is to reveal facts about it.  This had recently been made evident as former VP Cheney found out, being named an unindicted co-conspirator in another case [United States v. Libby, 429 F. Supp. 2d 1 (2006)].  She had no alternative but to duck and ride out the storm.

This caveat allowed the RW lies to go forward and, in fact, gather momentum.  But we need not indulge them now.