| |||||||
|
Sunday, January 10, 2021
DC attorney general ready to press charges against Giuliani
US diplomats: Pompeo must denounce Trump
| |||||||
|
RSN: FOCUS: Trump Allies Helped Plan, Promote Rally That Led to Capitol Attack
10 January 21
Do Not Let RSN Struggle for Basic Funding
You collectively have the power to ensure that a truly independent voice can stand in opposition to the commercial giants. Drop your drop in the bucket.
Don’t wait.
Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News
If you would prefer to send a check:
Reader Supported News
PO Box 2043
Citrus Hts
CA 95611
10 January 21
It's Live on the HomePage Now:
Reader Supported News
FOCUS: Trump Allies Helped Plan, Promote Rally That Led to Capitol Attack
Will Steakin, ABC News
Steakin writes: "In the days before a violent mob of Trump supporters stormed the U.S. Capitol building on Wednesday, President Donald Trump's political apparatus worked behind the scenes with pro-Trump groups to plan and promote events in Washington, D.C., that ultimately led to Wednesday's attack on Congress."
n the days before a violent mob of Trump supporters stormed the U.S. Capitol building on Wednesday, President Donald Trump's political apparatus worked behind the scenes with pro-Trump groups to plan and promote events in Washington, D.C., that ultimately led to Wednesday's attack on Congress.
Speaking at the "March to Save America" rally at the Ellipse in President's Park on Wednesday, President Trump urged a sea of supporters to march to the Capitol in protest of the Electoral College vote count -- telling the crowd he'd join them but ultimately not doing so -- after delivering a speech pushing baseless and unfounded claims that the election was rigged and telling the rowdy crowd that "you'll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength."
Trump's order sent thousands of his supporters marching to the Capitol, where some would overpower law enforcement, topple barricades and riot inside the halls of Congress in an unprecedented attack that left five people dead.
While the "March to Save America" rally was publicly promoted as being organized by groups not directly tied to the president's team, including "Women for America First" and "Stop the Steal," behind the scenes White House staff and close allies of the president, including former Trump campaign staff, worked with the organizers to plan and promote the events on Wednesday that would ultimately erupt into the deadly storming of the Capitol, sources said.
A permit for the rally submitted by "Women for America First" Executive Director Kylie Jane Kremer -- the daughter of the group's founder, former Tea Party activist Amy Kremer -- was approved on January 4. The permit stated that the event would take place from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. with 30,000 attendees, according to documents obtained by ABC News.
"Women for America First" is a nonprofit 501(c)4 organization that was founded in 2019. Since the November election, the group has taken the lead in organizing events, bus tours, and protests challenging the results of the election, which often feature members of the president's campaign and family.
Sources tell ABC News that many staffers who had worked on the president's 2020 campaign were involved in setting up and taking down the event space, including the stage on the National Mall. The Trump campaign denied that any active members of its team were involved in the planning of the rally, telling ABC News in a statement, "We did not organize, operate or finance this event. No campaign staff was involved in the organization or operation of this event. If any former employees or independent contractors for the campaign worked on this event, they did not do so at the direction of the Trump campaign."
Following the attack on the Capitol, "Women for America First" posted a statement on its website from Kremer denouncing the violence and distancing itself from any responsibility.
"We unequivocally denounce violence of any type and under any circumstances." the statement read. "We are saddened and disappointed at the violence that erupted on Capitol Hill, instigated by a handful of bad actors, that transpired after the rally."
"Unfortunately, for months the left and the mainstream media told the American people that violence was an acceptable political tool. They were wrong. It is not. We stand by and strongly support the men and women of the Capitol Hill police and law enforcement in general and our organization played absolutely no role in the unfortunate events that transpired," Kremer's statement said. "What is truly sad, is that the misdeeds of a handful of people will overshadow the overwhelming success of the peaceful event -- attended by hundreds of thousands of Americans -- that we sponsored today. The movement that was launched by President Donald J. Trump is one that respects the rule of law, supports our law enforcement and believes that violence has no place in politics today."
Kremer and "Women for America First" did not respond to ABC News' request for comment. The group has not disclosed its funding, and unlike other political committees that are required to disclose donors to the Federal Election Commission, its 501(c)4 status means it is not required by law to disclose its donors. A disclosure reviewed by ABC News that was filed to the FEC shows that "Women for America First" donated $19,000 in February 2019 to a super PAC called "Women Vote Smart," which supported Rep. Greg Murphy, R-N.C.
On a private call following the election, the Trump campaign called on outside surrogates and organizers to be ready to put on events and show public support for the president, according to audio obtained by ABC News.
"At a moment's instance, we may need your help at protests in your state to make sure that the president is represented and our side of the argument shows," Trump Campaign Manager Bill Stepien said on the call. "At a moment's notice, we may need your help and support on the ground, you know, waving the flag and yelling the president's name and support."
Trump first promoted the event in mid-December before he was announced as a speaker. His participation wasn't publicly announced until just days before the rally. Beyond the president himself promoting the rally weeks ahead of January 6, his campaign also used its large social media presence to boost the rally to millions of followers on Twitter and Facebook.
On "Good Morning America" Friday, Washington, D.C., Attorney General Karl Racine said his office will investigate those who incited Wednesday's violence, including President Trump.
"Clearly, the Capitol was ground central in the mob's behavior. Donald Trump Jr, Rudy Giuliani, even the president were calling on supporters and hate groups to go to the Capitol, and in Rudy's words, 'exercise combat justice,'" said Racine. "We're going to investigate not only the mob, but those who incited the violence."
Since the November election, the president's campaign has significantly trimmed down its staff despite massive fundraising hauls, and has largely leaned on the behind-the-scenes help of outside groups like "Women for America First" and "Stop the Steal," a pro-Trump group contesting the 2020 election results, to conduct events that show support for the president following his loss.
A short time before President Trump spoke at the rally, a video posted on Facebook by Donald Trump Jr. showed the president, surrounded by aides and family members including Chief of Staff Mark Meadows and top adviser Dan Scavino, surveying the crowd.
Online, a "March to Save America" event page showed plans for protesters to head to the Capitol following the president's speech.
"Take a stand with President Trump and the #StopTheSteal coalition and be at The Ellipse (President's Park) at 7 am. The fate of our nation depends on it. At 1:00 PM, we will march to the US Capitol building to protest the certification of the Electoral College," the event signup page read.
A flyer was also circulated online by the group "Stop the Steal" showing a planned protest at the Capitol following the president's remarks.
And as the protesters swarmed the Capitol, "Stop the Steal" national organizer Ali Alexander posted a video of himself overlooking a sea descending onto the nation's capital saying, "I don't disavow this. I do not denounce this."
RSN: FOCUS: Josh Hawley Becomes Public Enemy Number 1 on Capitol Hill
10 January 21
Feed the Greedy Corporation, Starve the Truth-Teller
The vast majority of our readers are far more likely to hand their money to the very Corporations whose abuses they rely on us to monitor than they are to give us — any money at all — to monitor them. It's not that you do not come to RSN, it’s that most of you do not help out.
As a result the abusive corporate entities thrive while smaller honest organizations are left without means. Stop funding the problem and start funding the solution!
Now would be a good time.
Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News
If you would prefer to send a check:
Reader Supported News
PO Box 2043
Citrus Hts, CA 95611
10 January 21
It's Live on the HomePage Now:
Reader Supported News
FOCUS: Josh Hawley Becomes Public Enemy Number 1 on Capitol Hill
Allan Smith, NBC News
Smith writes: "One of his most important early backers now says supporting him 'was the worst mistake I ever made in my life,' and a top donor called for him to be censured by the Senate."
The Missouri freshman is under fire from Democrats and members of his own party after the riot at the Capitol.
ne of his most important early backers now says supporting him "was the worst mistake I ever made in my life," and a top donor called for him to be censured by the Senate.
That's just some of the condemnation that's come Sen. Josh Hawley's way since the Missouri Republican became the first senator to announce he would object to the counting of Electoral College votes and then moved forward with his plan even after a mob of President Donald Trump's supporters had stormed the Capitol on Wednesday.
The largest newspapers in his home state called on him to resign. His publisher canceled its contract with him for an upcoming book. He's been pilloried by both Democrats and Republicans for leading the futile objection effort.
And a viral photo of Hawley entering the Capitol before the riot, showing the senator in a slim-fitting suit, hair perfectly coiffed and raising his fist toward the gathered crowd, has already become a lasting image of a day that won't soon be forgotten.
"It was like a Dukakis-on-the-tank moment," one Republican strategist said in a reference to a famous attack ad on the 1988 Democratic presidential nominee, "in that he just looked phony and out of place and like a doofus."
At 41, Hawley is the youngest sitting senator and is thought of as a possible 2024 Republican presidential candidate. Since his election to the Senate in 2018, he's carved out a space for himself as the leading Republican critic of the tech giants — a policy area that had generated him a substantial following and coverage in the press. That's now been overshadowed by his objection effort.
Following the riot, Hawley condemned the violence at the Capitol and said he was simply objecting to the electors to give voice to his constituents in Missouri, a state that went for Trump by 15 points in 2020.
"I don't think blaming him for what happened... is the right person to point the finger at," a senior Republican aide said. "I think Trump was the one at the rally right before, firing everyone up. Trump is the one who's been doing all this for weeks, since the election. He's been getting everyone fired up, and I think the reason Sen. Hawley did what he did was pressure from his constituents."
Yet Hawley's counterpart, Sen. Roy Blunt, R-Mo., was not among the handful of Republicans to make any objections. Nor were others from states where Trump won resounding victories in November, like Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., who condemned the effort. Congress ultimately counted President-elect Joe Biden's electors, setting the stage for his inauguration later this month.
"I mean, did he have to do that?" the aide asked of Hawley. "That's up for debate."
Before any violence took place at the Capitol, Hawley was under fire from colleagues, whether it'd be the likes of Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H., who told MSNBC last week she believed his effort "borders on sedition or treason," or Sen. Mitt Romney, R-Utah., who said the objections were simply an act to "enhance the political ambitions of some," alluding to possible 2024 presidential aspirations.
Speaking on the Senate floor after the riot, Hawley said violence will "not be tolerated" but an investigation into claims of voter fraud was necessary.
There has not been any evidence presented of widespread voter fraud that would affect elections in any of the swing states Trump lost, and the belief that there was such fraud has taken root among Republican voters with the president and others having promoted them.
Hawley said he specifically objected to Pennsylvania's electors because he believed a 2019 law expanding mail-in voting there violated the state constitution. Yet, as Sens. Bob Casey, D-Pa., and Pat Toomey, R-Pa., said in defending the state's election, such constitutional objections to the law — which was passed by a Republican-controlled legislature — only came about after Trump lost.
"We witnessed today the damage that can result when men in power and responsibility refuse to acknowledge the truth," Toomey said. "We saw bloodshed because a demagogue chose to spread falsehoods, and sow distrust of his own fellow Americans. Let's not abet such deception. Let's reject this motion."
Hawley "is talking about Pennsylvania because he wants to come here & run for President some day," Rep. Conor Lamb, D-Pa., tweeted. "The lies he told inspired today's violence. He is still telling those lies. Pennsylvania will never forget."
Rick Tyler, who was communications director for Sen. Ted Cruz's 2016 campaign (the Texas senator led his own objection to the electoral results), said the criticism coming Hawley's way is "well deserved."
"Members of Congress do have a right to challenge electors but doing so must be carefully weighed against substantial evidence of malfeasance," Tyler said. "In Sen. Hawley's case, no such evidence existed to suggest the electors were not legitimate. It is not good enough to say you are representing the voters who believe the election was rigged when that assertion was based on lies and conspiracies that were thoroughly disproven by election officials, recounts, court cases and absence of credible evidence."
"Sen. Hawley’s job was to represent the truth," he added. "Instead, he chose to go along with the president and others, namely Sen. Cruz, to incite an insurrection."
Amid Hawley's objections, comments he made during the president's impeachment trial last year began to resurface. At the time, Hawley said impeachment amounted to "overturning a democratic election because you don't like the result, because you believe that that election was somehow corrupted, when, in fact, the evidence shows that it was not." He called it "crazy, frankly."
Hawley's ascension in GOP politics has been swift. He was elected to the Senate less than two years into his first term as Missouri attorney general, the first elected office he held. He was not someone who dominated headlines then, though he did draw attention for blaming human trafficking on the sexual revolution of the late 1960s.
The senator holds establishment credentials, having earned degrees from Stanford and Yale, where he attended law school, and having clerked for Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, which is where he met his future wife, Erin Morrow, herself a fellow Roberts clerk.
In the days since his formal objection, the outrage aimed at him has snowballed, though it remains to be seen how this will affect his standing with Republican voters.
"Supporting Josh and trying so hard to get him elected to the Senate was the worst mistake I ever made in my life," former Sen. John Danforth, R-Mo., and a mentor to the senator, told the St. Louis Post-Dispatch on Thursday. "It is very dangerous to America to continue pushing this idea that government doesn't work and that voting was fraudulent."
Soon after that remark, Simon & Schuster, which was set to publish his upcoming book "The Tyranny of Big Tech," announced it was canceling its contract with Hawley, pointing to the "deadly insurrection."
Additionally, an increasing number of congressional Democrats have called for his immediate resignation while Biden said Hawley and Cruz were perpetuating "the big lie."
Hawley has hit back at critics, blasting what he deemed a "woke mob" at the book publisher and saying Biden's remarks were "undignified, immature and intemperate."
His office did not return a request for comment on the blowback to his efforts. But in a statement to Missouri TV outlet KSDK, Hawley said he "will never apologize for giving voice to the millions of Missourians and Americans who have concerns about the integrity of our elections."
Zack Roday, a former senior House Republican aide and spokesman for former House Speaker Paul Ryan's campaign, said some show of contrition could be beneficial for Hawley.
"Admitting he chose the wrong or, at best, flawed course to voice his election concerns would be a sign of character, confidence and ultimately strength," Roday said.
Matt Mackowiak, a Republican strategist, told NBC News he thinks it's "a stretch to call a procedural objection as a senator to be 'incitement.'"
"But he should have ended his objection to the electors after what happened," he added. "He will likely be ineffective in the Senate now, at least for a while. It’s a shame because he's impressive and courageous. But who knows where things are headed right now?"
Major Josh Hawley donor calls for him to be censured by the U.S. Senate
David Humphreys called Hawley an ‘an anti-democracy populist’ who provoked the D.C. riots
A Joplin businessman who helped bankroll Sen. Josh Hawley’s first campaign denounced him on Thursday as a “political opportunist” who used “irresponsible, inflammatory, and dangerous tactics” to incite the rioting that took over the U.S. Capitol Building.
In a statement late Thursday, David Humphreys, president and CEO of Tamko Building Products, added his voice to a growing chorus of Republicans angry at Hawley for leading a challenge to the certification of President-elect Joe Biden’s victory.
Humphreys called on the U.S. Senate to censure Hawley “for provoking yesterday’s riots in our nation’s capital.”
The statement to The Missouri Independent came a few hours after Hawley’s political mentor, former U.S. Sen. Jack Danforth, said in an interview with the St. Louis Post-Dispatch that supporting Hawley was “the worst mistake I ever made in my life.”
It also came on the same day that the publisher Simon & Schuster canceled a contract with Hawley for a book it had expected to release in June.
Prior to 2020, Humphreys was a major donor to Missouri Republicans. Along with his sister, Sarah Atkins, and his mother, Ethelmae Humphreys, his family provided $4.4 million of the $9.2 million Hawley raised for his 2016 campaign for attorney general.
David Humphreys personally donated $2.875 million.
In 2018, when Hawley used his office as a springboard for a Senate bid, the Humphreys provided an estimated $2 million to independent groups supporting Hawley.
Humphreys’ full statement, as provided to The Independent:
“In October 2016 I publicly voiced my opposition to Donald Trump in the NY Times saying ‘At some point, you have to look in the mirror and recognize that you cannot possibly justify support for Trump to your children…’
“I need to say the same about Missouri’s U.S. Sen. Josh Hawley, who has shown his true colors as an anti-democracy populist by supporting Trump’s false claim of a ‘stolen election.’ Hawley’s irresponsible, inflammatory, and dangerous tactics have incited violence and further discord across America. And he has now revealed himself as a political opportunist willing to subvert the Constitution and the ideals of the nation he swore to uphold.
“Hawley should be censured by his Senate colleagues for his actions which have undermined a peaceful transition of power and for provoking yesterday’s riots in our nation’s capital. We owe it to our children and grandchildren to protect our country and its Constitutional underpinnings.”
Hawley’s Senate office did not respond immediately to a request for comment.
Humphrey and his family donated about $16 million to Missouri Republicans for the 2016 election cycle, but he has broken with the party and its leaders in significant moments. In April 2018, he urged then-Gov. Eric Greitens to resign amid investigations of an alleged sexual attack in 2015 and improprieties in campaign financing. Greitens did not resign until late May 2018, when it became clear that the Missouri House would impeach him.
And in 2019, he urged Gov. Mike Parson to veto a restrictive abortion law that outlawed the procedure after six weeks and included no exceptions for pregnancies resulting from rape or incest. Parson signed the bill and Humphreys bankrolled an unsuccessful petition drive to force a referendum on the law.
Hawley was the first U.S. Senator to announce he would join with House members to file written objections to the electoral votes of several states where Trump has claimed, without showing proof, that fraud had cost him the election.
The debate on those objections was just beginning Wednesday when a mob of Trump supporters, fresh from a rally where Trump asked them to march to the Capitol, forced their way into the building. Amid clashes with police, a woman from San Diego was killed by police gunfire and several officers were injured.
After the building was cleared and debate resumed, half the Senators who had planned to vote for the objections changed their minds. Hawley did not, and Sen. Mitt Romney, R-Utah, who sits behind Hawley in the Senate, said this:
“Those who choose to continue to support his dangerous gambit by objecting to the results of a legitimate democratic election will forever be seen as complicit in an unprecedented attack against our democracy.”
Simon & Schuster announced about 5 p.m. that it would not publish “The Tyranny of Big Tech,” which was expected in June.
“We did not come to this decision lightly” the company stated. “As a publisher it will always be our mission to amplify a variety of voices and viewpoints; at the same time we take seriously our larger public responsibility as citizens, and cannot support Senator Hawley after his role in what became a dangerous threat to our democracy and freedom.”
Hawley responded by calling the action a “direct assault on the First Amendment” and accusing the company of breaching its contract. He added that he would sue the publisher.
“This could not be more Orwellian” Hawley said in a statement posted on Twitter. “Simon & Schuster is canceling my contract because I was representing my constituents, leading a debate on the Senate floor on voter integrity, which they have now decided to redefine as sedition.”
Governor Schwarzenegger's Message Following this Week's Attack on the Capitol
This is my message to my fellow Americans and my friends around the world after January 6, 2021.
Trump's parting gift to Biden
| |||||||
|
Rachel Maddow: “They rolled out a guillotine amid an armed protest”
| |||||||
|
RSN: Mort Rosenblum | Lock Them Up. Immediately.
10 January 21
It's Live on the HomePage Now:
Reader Supported News
RSN: Mort Rosenblum | Lock Them Up. Immediately.
Mort Rosenblum, Reader Supported News
Rosenblum writes: "Arrests need to begin today. Everyone who flouted the law in plain sight needs to answer for it."
he first thing a reporter learns when covering a gulag or shithole run by a mad king is how to read signals to the aroused rabble and gestures to the Gestapo. It’s harder in Romanian, Serbo-Croatian or Lingala. But Trump’s pidgin English is so unmistakably clear he might as well have bright red flash cards and an interpreter signing at his shoulder. I watched him on Fox, as usual, making sure no blunt movable objects were nearby to ruin yet another TV set.
As in every speech, he hammered away at a favorite line. Any anarchist commie terrorist who disrespected the statue of an America hero, enslavers and Indian exterminators included, would be jailed for 10 years. He berated the three Supreme Court justices he put on the bench for siding with the people over him. Then, after an avalanche of horseshit about a stolen election, he ordered his howling mob to the Capitol, saying he would likely be there with them. Fat chance. He went back to our White House to watch.
Throughout Trump’s term we’ve seen the Capitol cops operate with higher authority. Their favorite tactic is the “kettle,” herding protesters, reporters and hapless tourists passing by into clusters to be carried off in paddy wagons. Journalists only doing their jobs spent months on end fighting charges that could have put them away for decades. We all saw Trump’s insane foray to hold a Bible upside down, protected by a four-star general in combat fatigues, cops in riot gear flailing batons with high-tech sonic weapons at the ready.
Yesterday, the world watched, stupefied, as louts in battle costume swarmed into the Capitol unhindered, trashing our representatives’ offices, pawing through their files, taking selfies and exchanging high fives before filing out unhindered before ignoring a 6 p.m. curfew. Grinning assholes smirked at TV cameras, flipping us all the finger. Video shows lone cops fleeing in panic or, in an alarming number of cases, standing back in apparent approval.
In the District of Columbia, the National Guard responds to a Pentagon that Trump has packed with his shameless sycophants. As the mob ransacked America’s seat of power, Virginia state police eventually rolled up in soft cars. By the time serious reinforcements arrived, a woman was shot dead – no one gave reporters any details – and three people died of unexplained medical conditions.
Remember those fiery demands for harsh punishment when a handful of Portland protesters tossed the odd projectile at a federal building guarded by heavily armed DHS stormtroopers?
I watched Hong Kong protests erupt in 2019 and followed them closely. At the peak, crowds swarmed into the legislative council as disciplined police phalanxes stood by with shields – and cameras. They allowed protesters to wear themselves out, but every face was registered. When Beijing had enough, jail cells filled.
This was no movement of courageous citizens fighting to retain a modicum of freedom. It was a flat-out terrorism instigated by an elected president who should have been impeached or removed by the 25th Amendment years ago.
Congress did us proud by re-emerging from hiding to finish its ceremonial role of confirming the people’s choice. But still. It was an eerie scene of business-as-usual. Ben Sasse spoke with his usual folksy homilies. Josh Hawley, Ted Cruz and a few other faithless hypocrites continued their treacherous demand for a 10-day review of election results that 60-plus court cases upheld.
Arrests need to begin today. Everyone who flouted the law in plain sight needs to answer for it. On January 21, prosecutors in New York, Georgia, Florida – and Washington D.C. – need to hold Trump, his family and their criminal entourage to account. If not, our claim to “rule of law” government is a pathetic joke. None of our allies is laughing, but each of our adversaries is popping Champagne corks.
Mort Rosenblum has reported from seven continents as Associated Press special correspondent, edited the International Herald Tribune in Paris, and written 14 books on subjects ranging from global geopolitics to chocolate. He now runs MortReport.org.
Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader Supported News.
Trump supporters stormed the U.S. Capitol on Wednesday, forcing their way inside the building and interrupting Congress's certification of electoral votes. (photo: Manuel Balce Ceneta/AP)
What the 25th Amendment Says About Removing a Sitting President
Miles Parks and Mark Katkov, NPR
Excerpt: "After the violent takeover of the U.S. Capitol, calls have continued to grow from Democrats and Republicans in Congress, as well as former U.S. officials, for Vice President Pence to invoke the 25th Amendment to the Constitution and assume the powers of the presidency."
Wednesday's rioting was caused in large part by President Trump's rhetoric, experts say, and even after the Capitol was swarmed, Trump refused to condemn the mob, instead telling them in a video they were "very special."
That's led lawmakers to consider the easiest way to rid a president of his powers.
"The quickest and most effective way — it can be dTWO today — to remove this president from office would be for the vice president to immediately invoke the 25th Amendment," Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said in a statement Thursday.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi also echoed Schumer's call Thursday that the 25th Amendment be invoked.
"If the vice president and Cabinet do not act, the Congress may be prepared to move forward with impeachment," Pelosi told reporters.
Republican Rep. Adam Kinzinger of Illinois tweeted a video urging Pence to act "to ensure the next few weeks are safe for the American people, and that we have a sane captain of the ship."
It's become a frequent topic throughout the Trump presidency, but the 25th Amendment has never actually been used before to take powers away from a president without his consent.
The amendment provides a framework for how that scenario should play out, but legal experts have spent decades wondering about the potential "constitutional crises" that could follow.
What the law says
The language of the amendment says if the vice president and either a majority of the executive Cabinet or a review body appointed by Congress declare in writing that the president is unfit for office, then the vice president immediately becomes the acting president.
But the law also gives the sitting president, Trump in this case, the chance to argue that he is fit for office.
In the case of competing arguments about the president's ability to lead, "Congress shall decide the issue," the amendment says. For the vice president to assume the power of the presidency, two-thirds of both the House of Representatives and Senate must vote in favor of that outcome.
If Congress does not have the sufficient majorities in both parties in favor of rescinding the president's power, then he remains in power.
At the time it was passed, the amendment was not intended to "facilitate the removal of an unpopular or failed President," according to a Congressional Research Service report. And such a move, the report says, could potentially "precipitate a constitutional crisis."
"[It's a] ... sort of nightmare scenario that scholars describe as contested removal, in which a president would object to the idea that he's been determined to be unwell," writer Evan Osnos said in an interview on NPR's Fresh Air in 2017. "It's kind of amazing to step back and think about what that would actually be like in practice, that you would have Congress actively, openly, publicly discussing the question of whether or not the president of the United States was mentally fit to return to the presidency."
How the 25th Amendment came to be
When he left office in 1961 at the age of 70, Dwight Eisenhower was the oldest president in U.S. history. And he had battled health problems. In his first term, Eisenhower suffered both a heart attack and a mild stroke, leaving a nation already jittery from Cold War tensions even more so.
He and his vice president, Richard Nixon, agreed to an arrangement in which Eisenhower would temporarily cede power should he again be incapacitated, but would himself determine when to reassume his duties.
It was an ad hoc agreement that left unaddressed a scenario in which the president is incapable of determining his fitness for office.
When the oldest-serving president was succeeded by John Kennedy, the youngest-elected president, concern over the issue "arguably eased," according to Thomas Neale of the Congressional Research Service.
That is, until Kennedy's assassination.
Article II, Section 1, Clause 6 of the Constitution says the vice president assumes the "powers and duties" of president in the event of the president's "inability," but it doesn't say how to determine the president is unable to serve.
Had Kennedy remained alive, but incapacitated, there might not have been a way for Vice President Lyndon Johnson to serve as acting president.
Hence the 25th Amendment to the Constitution, passed by Congress in 1965 and ratified in 1967 when Nevada became the 38th state to approve it. Sections 3 and 4 of the amendment fill that constitutional gap: how to ensure the nation has a chief executive when the president is incapacitated.
Section 3 addresses the simplest scenario: when a president determines he is incapacitated, and later determines he is able to return to the duties of the office. The president, in writing, informs the speaker of the House and the president pro tempore of the Senate of his incapacity and informs them again in writing when ready to resume. The vice president serves as acting president in the interim.
According to Neale of the Congressional Research Service, Section 3 has been invoked three times:
- President Ronald Reagan arguably did so when he underwent cancer surgery in 1985 and put Vice President George H.W. Bush temporarily in charge (though Reagan maintained the drafters of the amendment didn't intend it to be applied in such a circumstance).
- President George W. Bush formally invoked the amendment twice, in 2002 and 2007, while undergoing routine colonoscopies.
Section 4 addresses the aforementiTWOd much more complex scenario: when a president is incapable of declaring his incapacity.
Below is the full text of section 4 of the amendment:
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.
Thereafter, when the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that no inability exists, he shall resume the powers and duties of his office unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit within four days 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. Thereupon Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty-eight hours for that purpose if not in session. If the Congress, within twenty-TWO days after receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not in session, within twenty-TWO days after Congress is required to assemble, determines by two-thirds vote of both Houses that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge the same as Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers and duties of his office.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
The GOP just tried to kick hundreds of students off the voter rolls
This year, MAGA GOP activists in Georgia attempted to disenfranchise hundreds of students by trying to kick them off the voter rolls. De...
-
22 April 21 Urgent and Immediate Appeal for Donations It is — very — important to get moving on donations, right here right now. Yes we ...
-
25 November 22 Live on the homepage now! Reader Supported News WE CANNOT FAIL ON FUNDING — There is too much to lose by failing, and too m...
-
05 June 23 Live on the homepage now! Reader Supported News ANOTHER FAILED MONTH OF FUNDRAISING ISN’T GOING TO WORK — We haven’t covered ou...
