The 2024 General Election

[Skeletor]

Top Democrats who pushed 25th Amendment during Trump years silent on triggering it for Biden




Several top Democrats that called for the 25th Amendment to be used to remove former President Donald Trump from office during his tenure have remained silent on whether it should be triggered to remove President Biden, which some Republicans have suggested.

Fox News Digital reached out to Democratic Reps. Nancy Pelosi, Pramila Jayapal, Jamie Raskin and Maxine Waters along with Sen. Chuck Schumer who all declined to comment on whether the 25th Amendment should be in play with President Biden as they suggested it should be for former President Trump.

Section 4 of the 25th Amendment authorizes the vice president and a majority of the executive cabinet to make the decision whether the president is fit to continue in office or not.

At various points during the Trump presidency, Democrats called for the 25th Amendment to be triggered against the president for a variety of reasons ranging from the coronavirus, to Trump’s competence, to the Jan. 6, 2021 Capitol Hill riot.

"Congress has a constitutional duty to lay out the process by which a president's incapacity and the president of any party is determined. This bill honors the duty by creating a standing commission of top former executive officials and medical experts selected in a bipartisan, bicameral way. A president's fitness for office must be determined by science and facts. This legislation applies to future presidents, but we are reminded by the necessity of action by the health of the current president."

The legislation was the reintroduction of the same bill from Raskin in 2017.

"Since January, President Trump has thrown our country into chaos at every turn," Raskin said in a 2017 press release.

"For the security of our people and the safety of the Republic, we need to set up the ‘body’ called for in the 25th Amendment. The President can fire his entire Cabinet for asking the same question tens of millions of Americans are asking at their dinner tables, but he cannot fire Congress or the expert body we set up under the Constitution.  At a moment of unprecedented presidential chaos, the Oversight Commission on Presidential Capacity is essential, urgently needed and indispensable."

Following the Jan. 6 riot, Pelosi, Raskin, Jayapal and every other Democrat in the House voted for a resolution calling on Vice President Pence to "declare President Donald J. Trump incapable of executing the duties of his office and to immediately exercise powers as acting President."

That move was backed by Schumer, who said Trump is "dangerous and should not hold office one day longer."

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/top-democrats-who-pushed-25th-amendment-during-trump-years-silent-triggering-biden

[Dos Equis]

Top Democrats who pushed 25th Amendment during Trump years silent on triggering it for Biden




Several top Democrats that called for the 25th Amendment to be used to remove former President Donald Trump from office during his tenure have remained silent on whether it should be triggered to remove President Biden, which some Republicans have suggested.

Fox News Digital reached out to Democratic Reps. Nancy Pelosi, Pramila Jayapal, Jamie Raskin and Maxine Waters along with Sen. Chuck Schumer who all declined to comment on whether the 25th Amendment should be in play with President Biden as they suggested it should be for former President Trump.

Section 4 of the 25th Amendment authorizes the vice president and a majority of the executive cabinet to make the decision whether the president is fit to continue in office or not.

At various points during the Trump presidency, Democrats called for the 25th Amendment to be triggered against the president for a variety of reasons ranging from the coronavirus, to Trump’s competence, to the Jan. 6, 2021 Capitol Hill riot.

"Congress has a constitutional duty to lay out the process by which a president's incapacity and the president of any party is determined. This bill honors the duty by creating a standing commission of top former executive officials and medical experts selected in a bipartisan, bicameral way. A president's fitness for office must be determined by science and facts. This legislation applies to future presidents, but we are reminded by the necessity of action by the health of the current president."

The legislation was the reintroduction of the same bill from Raskin in 2017.

"Since January, President Trump has thrown our country into chaos at every turn," Raskin said in a 2017 press release.

"For the security of our people and the safety of the Republic, we need to set up the ‘body’ called for in the 25th Amendment. The President can fire his entire Cabinet for asking the same question tens of millions of Americans are asking at their dinner tables, but he cannot fire Congress or the expert body we set up under the Constitution.  At a moment of unprecedented presidential chaos, the Oversight Commission on Presidential Capacity is essential, urgently needed and indispensable."

Following the Jan. 6 riot, Pelosi, Raskin, Jayapal and every other Democrat in the House voted for a resolution calling on Vice President Pence to "declare President Donald J. Trump incapable of executing the duties of his office and to immediately exercise powers as acting President."

That move was backed by Schumer, who said Trump is "dangerous and should not hold office one day longer."

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/top-democrats-who-pushed-25th-amendment-during-trump-years-silent-triggering-biden

I expect nothing less from those hypocrites. 

[loco]

[Coach is Back!]

Why am I not surprised you're still here, posting shit and furiously rubbing those two poor semi-functional brains cells together with the unrestrained ferocity of a masturbating monkey on the brink of climax?

Without betraying what my own thoughts are on the topic, I am curious what you thinkwhomever uses you as a mouthpiece thinks about Alexander Hamilton's positions, outlined in The Federalist 69 (GIGGETY!):

"The President of the United States would be liable to be impeached, tried, and upon conviction of treason, bribery, or other high crime or misdemeanors, removed from office; and would afterwards be liable to prosecution and punishment in the ordinary course of law."

Is it your position that a President who violates the law can never be prosecuted? If so, how do you square that position with Hamilton's? who directly compares and contrasts the person of the President to the person of the King of Great-Britain who "is sacred and inviolable: There is no constitutional tribunal to which he is amenable; no punishment to which he can be subjected without involving the crisis of a national revolution."

Do you believe that afterwards refers only to a post-impeachment situation?

Or are you a Nixon man, and your position is that a President can never violate the law, no matter what he does, because "if the President does it, it's legal"?

Yeah, before I decided to post up anything when this bullshit first arose I wanted to mnake damn sure I wasn't speaking from just one quote. But if you want to just take that one quote, lets.

I'm taking it that it's your position that he doesn't have immunity while in office. Am I correct? if thats your position I would have to say you should be glad that SCOTUS made that decision otherwise we would (and should) have the ability to go after any president that preceded Trump ESPECIALLY Obama and Biden. Obama for at the very least targeting Americans in another country that were killed and Fast and Furious. Biden for the open borders and the stealing of classified documents dating back to his time as a senator right up until now with some of those docs being held in CCP funded "think tank" at UPenn that bears Bidens name.

[Dos Equis]

Second Democratic Congressman Calls On Biden To Drop From Race
Another elected Democrat has joined Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas) in calling on President Joe Biden to step aside.

Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-Ariz.), a former chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, told the New York Times that Biden's bad debate is an opportunity for Democrats to move on.

“If he’s the candidate, I’m going to support him, but I think that this is an opportunity to look elsewhere,” Grijalva said.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/2024-election-live-updates_n_6685a8b4e4b0940ade42ef92/liveblog_6685afc9e4b0c309c7a8043c

[Dos Equis]

Boston Globe editorial board calls for Biden to bow out of race following ‘historically bad’ debate
'For the good of the country, his party, and his legacy, Biden must do this. And soon,' The Boston Globe editorial board wrote
By Gabriel Hays Fox News
Published July 3, 2024
https://www.foxnews.com/media/boston-globe-editorial-board-biden-race-following-historically-bad-debate

[Dos Equis]

Biden Must Resign
If the president wants to protect American democracy, he should hand over his office to Kamala Harris.
By Adam Serwer
JULY 3, 2024
https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2024/07/biden-resign-kamala-harris-presidential-candidate/678886/

[Irongrip400]

This will blow over in a week, he won’t resign, but he will lose the election.

[Dos Equis]

This will blow over in a week, he won’t resign, but he will lose the election.

Anything is possible at this point.  I really have no idea what's going to happen. 

The only way they can force him out is with the 25th Amendment, which his cabinet should invoke, but no way do they have the courage to do the right thing. 

And if he stays in, watch the dishonest media circle the wagons again. 

[Dos Equis]

They earned every bit of this chaos for trying to push a clearly incompetent man through the presidency. 

NEW: CNN's Van Jones says there is a "full-scale panic" behind the scenes as Democrats figure out how to replace Biden after the debate.

"People are passing around legal memos. PDFs are flying back and forth on WhatsApp, trying to figure out what are the options. How can you replace Biden?"

"How do you do it in a way that he feels respected?"

"Who should Kamala Harris's Vice President be?"

"The conversations on air and the conversations off air are completely different."

"He may not be able to get across the finish line... There is a big conversation happening right now about how this happens, not whether.”

https://x.com/KanekoaTheGreat/status/1808669930738569521

[Skeletor]

They earned every bit of this chaos for trying to push a clearly incompetent man through the presidency. 

NEW: CNN's Van Jones says there is a "full-scale panic" behind the scenes as Democrats figure out how to replace Biden after the debate.

"People are passing around legal memos. PDFs are flying back and forth on WhatsApp, trying to figure out what are the options. How can you replace Biden?"

"How do you do it in a way that he feels respected?"

"Who should Kamala Harris's Vice President be?"

"The conversations on air and the conversations off air are completely different."

"He may not be able to get across the finish line... There is a big conversation happening right now about how this happens, not whether.”

https://x.com/KanekoaTheGreat/status/1808669930738569521

Typical media dishonesty.

[Humble Narcissist]

Typical media dishonesty.

And they wonder why no one trusts them anymore. 

[avxo]

Yeah, before I decided to post up anything when this bullshit first arose I wanted to mnake damn sure I wasn't speaking from just one quote. But if you want to just take that one quote, lets.

That’s great! I’m happy to have an in-depth conversation on the topic.

I'm taking it that it's your position that he doesn't have immunity while in office. Am I correct?

It is not. While the President should enjoy immunity for acts that fall within the Executive’s proper purview and his capacity as President, I do not believe the immunity should extend so far as to basically allow a President to do something illegal without fear of repercussions.

For example, I don’t think a President should be immune if they accept a bribe or use insider information to trade on the stock market, or direct their security detail to shoot someone, just like you and I wouldn’t be immune in those circumstances.

The Court (and the Constitution!) seem to broadly agree with that position.

if thats your position I would have to say you should be glad that SCOTUS made that decision otherwise we would (and should) have the ability to go after any president that preceded Trump ESPECIALLY Obama and Biden.

Unlike you, I don’t worship Presidents. I would have no problem with Obama’s actions being examined; if anything, it would strengthen our democracy to have the Legislative ranch exercise its own powers to do so, instead of blind deference to the President by giving him (whomever he may be) broad powers to conduct business as only he sees fit

Obama for at the very least targeting Americans in another country that were killed and Fast and Furious. Biden for the open borders and the stealing of classified documents dating back to his time as a senator right up until now with some of those docs being held in CCP funded "think tank" at UPenn that bears Bidens name.

I have no issues with being more strict with classified information and more aggressively prosecuting situations like those we saw with both Trump and Biden (and I’m sure others too!). While I believe there should continue to be prosecutorial discretion on whether to charge someone and agree that charging a sitting  Presidentat the very least  presents a rather unique set of challenges, the current situation—where a regular person ends up in prison for accidentally taking the CIA cafeteria menu home, when a powerful politician can keep thousands of actually classified documents at home, behind a Master Lock padlock with impunity—is untenable.

 

[Dos Equis]

Democrats begin to consider Harris at the top of their ticket
Several party leaders suggest that if Biden steps aside, Harris would have to be his replacement.
By Cleve R. Wootson Jr., Leigh Ann Caldwell and Nicole Markus
Updated July 4, 2024
https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/07/03/harris-replace-biden-democratic-ticket/

[Soul Crusher]

Democrats begin to consider Harris at the top of their ticket
Several party leaders suggest that if Biden steps aside, Harris would have to be his replacement.
By Cleve R. Wootson Jr., Leigh Ann Caldwell and Nicole Markus
Updated July 4, 2024
https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/07/03/harris-replace-biden-democratic-ticket/

If that is the case trump needs to pick Tulsi as VP and let’s her destroy Kamala again.

[chaos]

Can we just boog and start over

[Dos Equis]

If that is the case trump needs to pick Tulsi as VP and let’s her destroy Kamala again.

She would be a good pick, but she confirmed she hasn't been vetted. 

I really wish Trump and DeSantis would put their egos in their back pocket and form a ticket.  It's the one that makes the most sense. 

[Dos Equis]

[Skeletor]

[Dos Equis]

lol

[Skeletor]

lol

They are complicit like most media and talking heads. They pushed for this knowing fully well Biden's situation and now after the debate disaster that could not be hidden anymore they turn. They have no allegiance or principles, just opportunistic grifters.

[Dos Equis]

They are complicit like most media and talking heads. They pushed for this knowing fully well Biden's situation and now after the debate disaster that could not be hidden anymore they turn. They have no allegiance or principles, just opportunistic grifters.

Truth.  And the only reason they are throwing Biden under the bus now is because they don't think he can win, not that he isn't competent to be POTUS.

[illuminati]

They are complicit like most media and talking heads. They pushed for this knowing fully well Biden's situation and now after the debate disaster that could not be hidden anymore they turn. They have no allegiance or principles, just opportunistic grifters.

X2 👊🏻

[SOMEPARTS]

This is the NWO paper of record. If it says that, he is going bye bye.

[Soul Crusher]

Frantic Joe Biden forces ABC to rush out crucial interview in FRIDAY primetime slot, after Democrats give him FOUR DAYS to prove himself - or quit
Daily Mail ^ | 7/04/24 | Geoff Earle,
Posted on 7/4/2024, 10:19:30 PM by Libloather

The White House is frantically moving to get President Joe Biden in front of cameras and crowds on an expedited schedule this July 4th weekend after growing calls from within his party to step down after his debate disaster.

Biden's handlers had already put in place a taped, sit-down interview with ABC's George Stephanopoulos to try to fend off calls from lawmakers and donors to demonstrate that he is still up to the task of campaigning.

But after a Wednesday meeting with the nation's governors that failed to quell mounting calls for his ouster from the Democratic ticket, ABC announced hours later that the entire interview - which had been slated to air in pieces over Saturday and Sunday mornings - would now air in one shot, on Friday night.

The prime time 8 pm broadcast will give Americans their first extensive look at the president in a Q&A format - albeit not live - since Biden trailed off, rattled off odd phrases, and appeared to lose his train of thought repeatedly during Thursday's debate with Donald Trump.

'The down-ballot freak-out from elected Democrats has not ebbed, and the negative media coverage and information flow about Biden's debate debacle has only intensified,' former Mitt Romney senior advisor Kevin Madden told DailyMail.com.

'As a result, the White House is motivated more by necessity than design to schedule a major interview. There's an urgency to get the President out there so he can address the blowback directly.'

But the move follows days of lost time when senior members of his own party raised doubts about his candidacy and three elected Democrats have called on him to step back.

'Friday is still a tardy response, given that this controversy will have been spiraling for over a week, but waiting until Sunday would...

(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...