Andrew Puzder likely to withdraw nomination

[Ralin]

If Congress was that determined to get rid of the president they wouldn't need to word-lawyer the 25th amendment. At that point they could just pass a "Arrest Trump and Don't Follow Any Of His Orders" bill.

I don't see how that would work. Without the 25th amendment you have no means to transfer the president's power under such a circumstance, and without a president it's really hard to pass any laws.

The means is "Everyone who matters agrees that he isn't the president anymore and no one listens to his orders."

Do you really think that sort of strict adherence to the letter of the law would be a concern in this incredibly out there scenario where Congress declares Trump unfit to be president because he's really fucking stupid and bad at running things?

[SCRawl]

The means is "Everyone who matters agrees that he isn't the president anymore and no one listens to his orders."

Do you really think that sort of strict adherence to the letter of the law would be a concern in this incredibly out there scenario where Congress declares Trump unfit to be president because he's really fucking stupid and bad at running things?

That's fine for as far as it goes. In your scenario, Congress passes a law that says that the guy isn't president anymore. Fine. What happens the week after, when they pass a bill they intend to become a law? Who signs it? If that law is to become an actual law, you need someone with the actual legal authority to sign it or it isn't legitimate. The 25th amendment provides that legitimacy to an acting president, no word-lawyering required.

[Flagg]

Thank you for clarifying the fact that a turnip is a root vegetable (and that calling Trump that should he get a severe head injury knocking a few cogs loose means brain death or close enough), that was very appreciated and in no way made you look like a smarmy douche .
But IMO, as long as Trump acts as a rubber stamp and doesn't get caught making more President Pussygrabber tapes, the GlOP will defend him.

I believe that I applied the appropriate level of smarm (level four, if you're keeping track). My only substantive purpose to that post was to point out that traumatic brain injury (or the like) is not actually required; the cabinet (with the presumed support of Congress) could make a sober judgment that the president is just not up to the job, is going to fuck up something serious sooner rather than later, and pull the rip cord built into the 25th. I would judge that that's a very unlikely scenario, but it's all there if they need it, its original purpose be damned.

The smarm level was a tad high but not in an uncalled for level .

But Trump being braindead would only make things less obnoxious with Pence, with no real policy changes. So...

[Gaidin]

The means is "Everyone who matters agrees that he isn't the president anymore and no one listens to his orders."

Do you really think that sort of strict adherence to the letter of the law would be a concern in this incredibly out there scenario where Congress declares Trump unfit to be president because he's really fucking stupid and bad at running things?

That's fine for as far as it goes. In your scenario, Congress passes a law that says that the guy isn't president anymore. Fine. What happens the week after, when they pass a bill they intend to become a law? Who signs it? If that law is to become an actual law, you need someone with the actual legal authority to sign it or it isn't legitimate. The 25th amendment provides that legitimacy to an acting president, no word-lawyering required.

As amusingly outrageous as that situation is, what usually happens when the guy isn't the president anymore? The VP?

[Rogue 9]

Thank you for clarifying the fact that a turnip is a root vegetable (and that calling Trump that should he get a severe head injury knocking a few cogs loose means brain death or close enough), that was very appreciated and in no way made you look like a smarmy douche .
But IMO, as long as Trump acts as a rubber stamp and doesn't get caught making more President Pussygrabber tapes, the GlOP will defend him.

I believe that I applied the appropriate level of smarm (level four, if you're keeping track). My only substantive purpose to that post was to point out that traumatic brain injury (or the like) is not actually required; the cabinet (with the presumed support of Congress) could make a sober judgment that the president is just not up to the job, is going to fuck up something serious sooner rather than later, and pull the rip cord built into the 25th. I would judge that that's a very unlikely scenario, but it's all there if they need it, its original purpose be damned.

If Congress was that determined to get rid of the president they wouldn't need to word-lawyer the 25th amendment. At that point they could just pass a "Arrest Trump and Don't Follow Any Of His Orders" bill.

They actually couldn't; such a bill would be blatantly unconstitutional. They would have to impeach, and impeachment would be easier than overriding a Presidential veto anyway.

[Simon_Jester]

They will never Impeach because impeachment doesn't just remove Trump, it removes everyone.

I don't know where you get this. Presidents have been impeached before.

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. The Constitution, Article I, Section 3: The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments.

25th amendment section 4 on the other hand allows a majority vote to remove the president and place the Vice President in charge

No, Broomstick is right.

Impeachment proceedings target one person at a time. Removing the president doesn't automatically remove "all civil officers of the United States." Conversely, removing the vice president doesn't remove the president, and so on.

Most successful impeachment proceedings in US history have actually been against federal judges- but impeaching and convicting a judge doesn't mean all the judges get fired.

[Flagg]

The means is "Everyone who matters agrees that he isn't the president anymore and no one listens to his orders."

Do you really think that sort of strict adherence to the letter of the law would be a concern in this incredibly out there scenario where Congress declares Trump unfit to be president because he's really fucking stupid and bad at running things?

That's fine for as far as it goes. In your scenario, Congress passes a law that says that the guy isn't president anymore. Fine. What happens the week after, when they pass a bill they intend to become a law? Who signs it? If that law is to become an actual law, you need someone with the actual legal authority to sign it or it isn't legitimate. The 25th amendment provides that legitimacy to an acting president, no word-lawyering required.

As amusingly outrageous as that situation is, what usually happens when the guy isn't the president anymore? The VP?

The only way congress can make a President not the President (barring the swearing in and all that) is through impeachment and conviction in the Senate. They can pass 20 bills every day in both chambers declaring Donald Trump "not President" but unless President Pussygrabber signs one (which would just be a resignation, nothing more, nothing less) they may as well pass 20 bills every day declaring him a Space Alien from the planet Egam Ueefq, in the Fterbirtha system.

[Ziggy Stardust]

Yeah, it isn't clear to me how just "not listening" to the President and somehow passing a law to get rid of him is at all a means of solving the problem, or why the entire government structure would (or should) be so willing to just toss all constitutional and legal conventions out the window in order to get rid of Trump (when a legal means already exists). That would spark a constitutional crisis on par with the secession crisis, because then we've basically reached the point where every single influential member of the government has decided that our current legal structure is worthless. It's almost a singularity in terms of trying to predict what would unfold after that, and how the U.S. government would restructure itself in the aftermath of something that bizarre and unprecedented.

It's like saying you should burn down your house to scare off the burglar, instead of just calling the police. Yes, technically it solves the immediate problem of the burglar, but it leaves you with a much bigger problem instead.

[Gaidin]

The only way congress can make a President not the President (barring the swearing in and all that) is through impeachment and conviction in the Senate. They can pass 20 bills every day in both chambers declaring Donald Trump "not President" but unless President Pussygrabber signs one (which would just be a resignation, nothing more, nothing less) they may as well pass 20 bills every day declaring him a Space Alien from the planet Egam Ueefq, in the Fterbirtha system.

Fine I'll spell out my post for you. The key word I used was 'outrageous', and all legal ways to get rid of the President make the Vice President replace him and hilariously the government still functions. Get used to the idea that if you get rid of Trump in any fashion, questionable or otherwise that works in a Constitutionally legal way for the powers to succeed, you have to and will get to deal with Pence.

Bear in mind, we've actually seen Congress do a rather nasty job of 'not work with the president' but if he is still Constitutionally the President they can do a rather good job of it if they choose to. But if he is legitly not the President, guess what fucking happens.

[Simon_Jester]

Pence at least knows how to run a government. Having him in charge is bad from an ideology point of view, and it's double-plus-super-bad if you're on the fundamentalist hit list. But he's not a goddamn clown.

From the point of view of the Republican Party leadership, Pence actually looks a lot more like the kind of president they wanted than Trump does- which may actually reduce their resistance to impeachment in the event that impeachment proceedings ever happen (no, I'm not holding my breath for that either).

[TheFeniX]

Pence at least knows how to run a government. Having him in charge is bad from an ideology point of view, and it's double-plus-super-bad if you're on the fundamentalist hit list. But he's not a goddamn clown.

Yea, I don't see how this is hard to understand. We're basically eating from the opposite end of a shit sandwich we would have risked with a McCain/Palin presidency. Say what you will about McCain, but he was infinitely more capable than the idiot VP pick who would destroy GW in a "can you believe the stupid shit he/she just said?" contest.

We'd be much better off with a Pres. Pence saddled with massive amounts of damage-control due to his boss getting a boot in the ass. So, I'd like to think he'd get about jack-shit done while all the lazy fucks get off their ass to vote in 2020. Hopefully....

[Broomstick]

Pence at least knows how to run a government. Having him in charge is bad from an ideology point of view, and it's double-plus-super-bad if you're on the fundamentalist hit list. But he's not a goddamn clown.

Yeah, this can't be said enough. As I have said numerous times, I have experience of Pence as governor of my state and while there's a lot I didn't like he at least acts like an adult and a professional.

[The Romulan Republic]

Which makes me wonder why he signed on with Trump. But you could ask that of most of the Republican leadership.

I guess they just were willing to look the other way for power, or out of fear of their base. Or they were stupid enough to think that they could control Trump, Bannon, etc.

Funny. You'd think a devout Christian like Pence would be familiar with the concept of a deal with the Devil.

[SCRawl]

Which makes me wonder why he signed on with Trump. But you could ask that of most of the Republican leadership.

I guess they just were willing to look the other way for power, or out of fear of their base. Or they were stupid enough to think that they could control Trump, Bannon, etc.

Funny. You'd think a devout Christian like Pence would be familiar with the concept of a deal with the Devil.

Perhaps you're not seeing Trump's appeal from the other side. Let me try an analogy.

Let's say that the Democratic party's candidate was most liberals' wet dream: hated by Wall Street, strong on environmental and most progressive issues, promising to appoint Supreme Court justices that will check all the boxes for you. But this candidate is an asshole in many of the same ways as your current president, and the guy on the other side is the absolute antithesis of your dream candidate -- let's say it's Mike Pence.

Who would have gotten your vote in November, given that binary decision?

[The Romulan Republic]

Given a choice between an inconsistent pathological liar and likely rapist with zero political experience who pandered to my ideological views, and a far Right ideologue who wasn't as obviously personally loathsome...

I don't know. I hope that I'd have the integrity not to vote for either if it came down to that choice.

And while I get what you're saying,you know, its not like Trump was the only candidate who checked those ideological boxes (well, unless the boxes in question included shit off the Klan's wish list, in which case, I have zero sympathy). Their were plenty of pro-big business fellows with theocratic and anti-refugee leanings they could have voted for. They chose Trump.

[SCRawl]

And while I get what you're saying,you know, its not like Trump was the only candidate who checked those ideological boxes (well, unless the boxes in question included shit off the Klan's wish list, in which case, I have zero sympathy). Their were plenty of pro-big business fellows with theocratic and anti-refugee leanings they could have voted for. They chose Trump.

The voters who chose Trump in the primaries were not enough to elect him. It was the evangelicals plus the "hold your nose and vote against Hillary, who is the competent professional but is wrong about everything I believe" contingent that put him over the top.

I don't know. I hope that I'd have the integrity not to vote for either if it came down to that choice.

There's still no viable third option that could possibly have won, so it's still got to be either A or B. So in such a scenario your best option is to let someone else choose for you?

[The Romulan Republic]

And while I get what you're saying,you know, its not like Trump was the only candidate who checked those ideological boxes (well, unless the boxes in question included shit off the Klan's wish list, in which case, I have zero sympathy). Their were plenty of pro-big business fellows with theocratic and anti-refugee leanings they could have voted for. They chose Trump.

The voters who chose Trump in the primaries were not enough to elect him. It was the evangelicals plus the "hold your nose and vote against Hillary, who is the competent professional but is wrong about everything I believe" contingent that put him over the top.

My point is that the Republican Primary electorate could have gone with someone else who would have checked the same ideological boxes while being less utterly vile personally.

Though I think this is partly a consequence of how large the primary field was this time around- those who didn't want Trump were split between a dozen candidates, and several major candidates. I can't help but wonder if Cruz, Rubio, or Kasich could have smoked the Donald one on one.

There's still no viable third option that could possibly have won, so it's still got to be either A or B. So in such a scenario your best option is to let someone else choose for you?

Believe me, as a frequent critic of third party bullshit, I am not unsympathetic to the problem.

But frankly, if the best your party can offer is Donald Trump, its time to suck it up and take a loss for the good of the country/world.

And yes, I know some people would say the same about Hillary, but the simple fact is that, conspiracy theories aside, she is objectively more fit for high office than Trump.

[Simon_Jester]

Which makes me wonder why he signed on with Trump.

Aside from the point that there turn out to be a lot of Republicans who actually believe that Hillary Clinton would be even worse to have in office than Donald Trump...

One might cynically note that Trump has "IMPEACH ME" painted on his butt in big bright letters. If the conventional wisdom about him is correct he is unlikely to secure re-election; if the conventional wisdom about him had been right prior to the election he would have been unlikely to win.

In the former case Pence is (in theory) well positioned to make an independent presidential bid as "the reasonable Republican," or so he might hope. In the latter, he has, again, managed to raise his political profile to a national rather than state level, without the stigma of losing a primary the way Rubio, Cruz, Kasich, etc. did.

My point is that the Republican Primary electorate could have gone with someone else who would have checked the same ideological boxes while being less utterly vile personally.

As I've mentioned, Trump (by some kind of avatar of the god of used car salesmen, plus obvious psychopathy) is very very good at pushing people's buttons. Very hard.

I don't disagree with your criticism, but frankly this was the inevitable outgrowth of Fox News and the RNC trying to convince their voter base that Hillary Clinton is the Antichrist, that George W. Bush was a good president, and that Barack Obama is prooobably a secret traitor.

The Republican leadership and propaganda machine lit a fire that sucked most of the fact-based, qualification-based oxygen out of the room that is the Republican primary process. It is unsurprising that an anaerobic bacterium would become the dominant form of life.

Though I think this is partly a consequence of how large the primary field was this time around- those who didn't want Trump were split between a dozen candidates, and several major candidates. I can't help but wonder if Cruz, Rubio, or Kasich could have smoked the Donald one on one.

I wouldn't be surprised. On the other hand, I think any one of those candidates would have struggled because they'd have to deal with Trump going 'haha, I can push the buttons of your own supporters harder than you can, because I'm willing to bullshit harder than you are.'

There's still no viable third option that could possibly have won, so it's still got to be either A or B. So in such a scenario your best option is to let someone else choose for you?

Believe me, as a frequent critic of third party bullshit, I am not unsympathetic to the problem.

But frankly, if the best your party can offer is Donald Trump, its time to suck it up and take a loss for the good of the country/world.

I don't disagree.

[Flagg]

The only way congress can make a President not the President (barring the swearing in and all that) is through impeachment and conviction in the Senate. They can pass 20 bills every day in both chambers declaring Donald Trump "not President" but unless President Pussygrabber signs one (which would just be a resignation, nothing more, nothing less) they may as well pass 20 bills every day declaring him a Space Alien from the planet Egam Ueefq, in the Fterbirtha system.

Fine I'll spell out my post for you. The key word I used was 'outrageous', and all legal ways to get rid of the President make the Vice President replace him and hilariously the government still functions. Get used to the idea that if you get rid of Trump in any fashion, questionable or otherwise that works in a Constitutionally legal way for the powers to succeed, you have to and will get to deal with Pence.

Bear in mind, we've actually seen Congress do a rather nasty job of 'not work with the president' but if he is still Constitutionally the President they can do a rather good job of it if they choose to. But if he is legitly not the President, guess what fucking happens.

Yeah, I beat you there with one post, so kindly tone-down the douche-meter.

[Flagg]

Pence at least knows how to run a government. Having him in charge is bad from an ideology point of view, and it's double-plus-super-bad if you're on the fundamentalist hit list. But he's not a goddamn clown.

Yeah, this can't be said enough. As I have said numerous times, I have experience of Pence as governor of my state and while there's a lot I didn't like he at least acts like an adult and a professional.

Which is why from a purely ideological, "fuck the people, they made their choice (if you ignore the popular vote, but oh well) now live with it" stance, I'd rather have 4 years of President Pussygrabber with shit running down his legs being a bombastic fuckwit that puts our way of life and national security at jeopardy while getting very little accomplished at the detriment of the country as a whole for 4 years as opposed to Mike Pence being someone Congress can/will work with getting a lot accomplished to the greater detriment to the country as a whole for 8 years.

If that makes me a bad person, I'll wear the mantle.

[Flagg]

Which makes me wonder why he signed on with Trump. But you could ask that of most of the Republican leadership.

I guess they just were willing to look the other way for power, or out of fear of their base. Or they were stupid enough to think that they could control Trump, Bannon, etc.

Funny. You'd think a devout Christian like Pence would be familiar with the concept of a deal with the Devil.

Perhaps you're not seeing Trump's appeal from the other side. Let me try an analogy.

Let's say that the Democratic party's candidate was most liberals' wet dream: hated by Wall Street, strong on environmental and most progressive issues, promising to appoint Supreme Court justices that will check all the boxes for you. But this candidate is an asshole in many of the same ways as your current president, and the guy on the other side is the absolute antithesis of your dream candidate -- let's say it's Mike Pence.

Who would have gotten your vote in November, given that binary decision?

Russian roulette with a 12 gauge pump action. You may always lose, but at least you know the outcome every time.

Plus, wasn't that Bill Clinton?

[Flagg]

And while I get what you're saying,you know, its not like Trump was the only candidate who checked those ideological boxes (well, unless the boxes in question included shit off the Klan's wish list, in which case, I have zero sympathy). Their were plenty of pro-big business fellows with theocratic and anti-refugee leanings they could have voted for. They chose Trump.

The voters who chose Trump in the primaries were not enough to elect him. It was the evangelicals plus the "hold your nose and vote against Hillary, who is the competent professional but is wrong about everything I believe" contingent that put him over the top.

I don't know. I hope that I'd have the integrity not to vote for either if it came down to that choice.

There's still no viable third option that could possibly have won, so it's still got to be either A or B. So in such a scenario your best option is to let someone else choose for you?

See, the problem is, if the guy who is a dick, and was just an insufferable asshole like Donnie Douchebag, without the whole pedophile rapist and serial liar shitshow, it's an easy decision. Since a capable asshole who doesn't stand for everything I despise is 1000x better than "nice guy who will wipe his ass with 7/10 of the Bill of Rights", I'm going with giant dickburger every time.

[Simon_Jester]

Which is why from a purely ideological, "fuck the people, they made their choice (if you ignore the popular vote, but oh well) now live with it" stance, I'd rather have 4 years of President Pussygrabber with shit running down his legs being a bombastic fuckwit that puts our way of life and national security at jeopardy while getting very little accomplished at the detriment of the country as a whole for 4 years as opposed to Mike Pence being someone Congress can/will work with getting a lot accomplished to the greater detriment to the country as a whole for 8 years.

If that makes me a bad person, I'll wear the mantle.

The big caveat to this is that, from that same ideological viewpoint...

If Trump turns out to be a hideous failure, Trump's supporters won't admit it, and everyone else will blame the problems on Trump's (literally) raging personal defects. A reduced share of the blame will land on the Republican policies that would in many cases be toxic no matter who was backing them.

If Pence gave running the government his best shot for four years and we're worse off in 2020 than we were in 2015 (as seems likely), Trump's supporters still wouldn't admit it... but everyone else would have nothing to blame except the policies themselves.

As it stands, the 2020 presidential election is probably going to be a referendum on Trump- even if he gets impeached. Had the Republicans nominated a normal human being to win in Trump's place, then the 2020 presidential election would most likely be a referendum on Republican policy, as modified by Tea.

The latter would arguably be better than the former, even from an ideological point of view.

[SCRawl]

See, the problem is, if the guy who is a dick, and was just an insufferable asshole like Donnie Douchebag, without the whole pedophile rapist and serial liar shitshow, it's an easy decision. Since a capable asshole who doesn't stand for everything I despise is 1000x better than "nice guy who will wipe his ass with 7/10 of the Bill of Rights", I'm going with giant dickburger every time.

This is how Trump got his votes: by not being Hillary Clinton, standing up for things the Republican coalition believes in, and pandering to those who feel ignored by the current system. The fact that he's an enormous ass is just the thing they had to live with, or else turn the country over to the communists and baby-killers and the degenerates (as they see it).

[Flagg]

Which is why from a purely ideological, "fuck the people, they made their choice (if you ignore the popular vote, but oh well) now live with it" stance, I'd rather have 4 years of President Pussygrabber with shit running down his legs being a bombastic fuckwit that puts our way of life and national security at jeopardy while getting very little accomplished at the detriment of the country as a whole for 4 years as opposed to Mike Pence being someone Congress can/will work with getting a lot accomplished to the greater detriment to the country as a whole for 8 years.

If that makes me a bad person, I'll wear the mantle.

The big caveat to this is that, from that same ideological viewpoint...

If Trump turns out to be a hideous failure, Trump's supporters won't admit it, and everyone else will blame the problems on Trump's (literally) raging personal defects. A reduced share of the blame will land on the Republican policies that would in many cases be toxic no matter who was backing them.

If Pence gave running the government his best shot for four years and we're worse off in 2020 than we were in 2015 (as seems likely), Trump's supporters still wouldn't admit it... but everyone else would have nothing to blame except the policies themselves.

As it stands, the 2020 presidential election is probably going to be a referendum on Trump- even if he gets impeached. Had the Republicans nominated a normal human being to win in Trump's place, then the 2020 presidential election would most likely be a referendum on Republican policy, as modified by Tea.

The latter would arguably be better than the former, even from an ideological point of view.

The problem is that the GlOP (in whatever form or shape it is in) never takes responsibility or admits that their policies were bad, they (just like in 2008) say that their policies didn't go far enough. So Trump, Pence, or White Jesus losing in 2020 just weren't conservative enough.