politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- 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 other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. 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.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have 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. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Nothing in here about a commission. A Congressional majority could just announce the President unfit and kick power over to the VP immediately.
Obviously, Republicans aren't going to agree with this. Obviously, JD Vance is a fucking hack who would continue the atrocities. That's why Dems needed to block the 2026 NDAA back in December when they had leverage over the Pentagon's budget. Now they've already rubber stamped the checks and there's little left to obstruct or apply leverage against.
But this just illustrates why "Forming a Commission" is bullshit. Is this really their plan for 2027? Spend a year fucking around on a vote to form a committee to research a bill to have another vote? So they can maybe hand JD Vance the keys to the White House? Assuming some dissident Fetterman tier Senator doesn't spike it while drapping himself in an Israeli flag?
Pathetic.
There certainly is, you're just not understanding what role that commission will perform. The commission is the "some other body" that Congress may provide to serve in lieu of the heads of the executive department.
No, actually, they can't. Incompetence is not an impeachable offense. They would have to hold what is effectively a criminal trial in the Senate. They would have to find him guilty of something beyond a reasonable doubt. That's the evidentiary standard they would have to meet.
With the 25th, they merely have to indicate they have lost faith in his ability to perform the job. That's it.
His tweets threatening nuclear war with Iran are not enough to impeach him. He technically has the authority to make those threats. He can't be impeached for those threats.
Those same tweets are a perfectly valid justification for removing him under the 25th.
This commission is the "some other body" that Democrats in "Congress may by law provide."
They don't need "some other body" because it already empowers Congress.
"Some other body" is quoted from the 25th Amendment, which empowers Congress not to do the same thing that the Vice President and Cabinet can do but to create "some other body" that can do what the Vice President and Cabinet can do. They could pass a law that empowers Congress to do that, but that would be less likely to pass than passing a law that empowers some committee because Congress has other things to do.
Impeachment action is limited to "Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors".
Impeachment is not permitted for simple incompetence.
Congress is only empowered to remove the president by convicting him of a criminal act. Congress does not have the power to remove the president for dementia. Dementia is not a "high crime" or "misdemeanor".
To remove the president for dementia (or simple incompetence or other non-criminal disqualification) requires the 25th amendment. The VP needs the support of either the majority of the cabinet, or a majority of "some other body" that Congress has established for the purpose.