How A President Leaves Office - The Only Possibilities

[MineralMan]

1. The President Resigns - That possibility is always open. Few have made that choice. Nixon did.
2. The President Gets Impeached and Removed - The House impeaches; the Senate removes the President. Also rare.
3. The President Dies - This has happened several times in history.
4. The President Becomes Incapacitated - The 25th Amendment covers this, along with the process of replacement.
5. The President Gets Raptured - Same as dying. Hasn't ever happened. Won't ever happen.
6. The President's Term in Office Ends - After two terms, there is no option. After one, he could not run or lose. This is the most common way a President leaves office.

Those are the only ways a President leaves office. There are no others. Here are some of the ways that some people on DU have suggested that the President be removed. All are impossible. All are a waste of discussion time and space.

1. The Election Is Nullified - That can't happen. The Constitution has no provision for nullifying an election. We have to follow the Constitution.
2. A New Election Is Held - See above. There is no provision for having a new election for President. We have presidential elections every four years. There are no other options.
3. A New President Is Appointed - By whom? There is no person or body with the power to do that.
4. Hold a Constitutional Convention or Amend the Constitution - By the time such a thing was done, the term of office would have ended. We have had only one Constitutional Convention. We could have another, but it would take years. Amendments also take years to complete and go into effect.
5. Have the Military Remove the President - Such a thing would end our Constitutional government and replace it with a military dictatorship. I don't think that's a very good idea at all.
6. Convict the President of Treason - See #2 in the first list. The only body that can try and convict a President is Congress.

That's it. We have various ways to replace our President, but only those ways. If we discuss ways that cannot happen, we waste our time. I suggest that anyone considering any method other than the ones in the first list should read the Constitution for understanding and rethink their idea. There is no point in discussing impossible plans on DU.

[hrmjustin]

1. A new election would require a constitutional amendment.

Not going to happen.

[MineralMan]

2. Exactly. I covered that one, too.

[NoGoodNamesLeft]

28. It's not impossible for a Consitutional Amendment, just highly unlikely

It would require 2/3 of the house and 2/3 of the senate to agree to make it happen. If any kind of amendment is made it would not be until 2018.

[brooklynite]

54. Whenever a Constitutional change in the Election process has occurred...

...it has exempted the current office-holder.

[MineralMan]

62. Exactly. That's also in the Constitution.

No Bills of Attainder.

[rgbecker]

75. Not sure Bill of Attainder provision applies to amendments.

In several amendments they mention that they wouldn't take effect until after some time or person in office passes....why would they feel it necessary to include such wording?

26th amendment (18 year olds can vote) passed in a little over 3 months. In effect immediately, apparently.

1971: Turbulent times, country divided, hard hats fighting hippies in the streets, Kent State just a year before...etc.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-sixth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

[MineralMan]

77. You could be right. I'm not sure on that one.

However, it would be unlikely to write an amendment that removed a current President. I don't think that would ever happen.

[NYC Liberal]

167. "it would be unlikely to write an amendment that removed a current President"

Such an amendment would never happen primarily because ratifying an amendment requires two-thirds of both Houses of Congress to propose it, plus three-fourths of the states to ratify it, whereas impeachment requires only a majority of the House and two-thirds of the Senate.

If you've got the votes to propose and ratify a Constitutional amendment to get a new election then you've far exceeded the votes needed to simply remove the current president through the already established way.

[simguy225]

148. Then it has to be ratified by the states

[FSogol]

3. Good post, some folks around here think the Constitution has a "do over" provision.

[MineralMan]

6. Some people appear to have never read the Constitution.

It's short, really. It's online. Anyone can read it.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

13. I am often surprised at how much people, including DUers, *don't* know

about the Constitution and our legal and governmental systems in general. All kinds of goofy notions turn up on a regular basis, and I start wondering where folks were during their middle school civics classes. Yes, it's boring stuff at that age, but it's not so hard to go online and look stuff up before going off about recall elections for the presidency and let's get rid of the electoral college before 2020 and let's install Hillary as president because she won the popular vote, and on and on...

[MineralMan]

21. Yes, and DU is home to people who should know better.

Last edited Wed Feb 15, 2017, 03:36 PM - Edit history (1)

That's the reason for this post, really. We need to stop wasting our time and energy on silliness.

[Amaryllis]

68. Thank you! Yes!

[LanternWaste]

100. I too pretend that any disagreement with my own premise results from ignorance

I too pretend that any disagreement with my own premise results from ignorance on the part of others. It allows to feel more clever about ourselves. It's short, really. In our hearts.

[Hekate]

141. Bully for you, as my granny used to say. Imputing ignorance to people posting unworkable ideas....

...seems a better tactic than imputing malice or trolling to them, imo. At least in the case of ignorance you have a chance of educating them.

It's not a "premise" to have a thorough understanding of the Constitution of the US and the laws which govern our politics. It's the facts.

If you have some alternative facts that would allow us to have a "do over" (or similar) of this misbegotten horrendous election, explain away. Just bear in mind that alternative facts have already worn thin for Kellyanne.

[simguy225]

150. Ignorance is lack of knowledge

and is easily remedied. Ignorance doesn't equal stupidity. But, when people keep bringing up do over elections and such talk, even after repeatedly being told that the constitution doesn't allow for it, then you start moving toward stupidity.

[get the red out]

4. True

I have wondered why people on twitter were calling for a new election since it wasn't a possibility.

[marybourg]

5. In all fairness, just because something hasn't

happened in 225 years, doesn't mean it can't. Human history is replete with "firsts".

[MineralMan]

8. So, which one do you think could happen.

For pete's sake. We have a system of government. We either follow that or we have no system of government.

What "something" do you have in mind, please?

[marybourg]

26. It's not that I have anything particular in mind,

and while I agree with you factually - and have posted so several times - things have deteriorated so far, so fast that it's not beyond the realm of possibility that if the so-called president becomes a "clear and present danger" to the republic, a military coup could remove him.

[Progressive dog]

131. If the military of the USA attempts a coup

many Trump haters would oppose them. We are a government of laws--not of military dictators.

[regnaD kciN]

143. Unless, of course, we cease to be a nation of laws first

If, for example, Trump uses the pretext of, say, a terrorist atrack to declare a "temporary but indefinite" state of emergency suspending the Constitution and any guarantees of civil liberties, and the military were to refuse to obey, and removes him from office, I think lots of us would see it as a lesser evil. Even so, it would probably mean some sort of jury-rigged "government of national unity" until new elections could be held.

Barring such a dictatorial power-grab, our best hope is to obstruct to the best of our abilities until 2018, then take back at least one house of Congress and make Benedict Donald's life miserable -- including launching high-profile investigations into his administration, which we can then do with subpoena power.

[Progressive dog]

146. There is no provision in the Constitution

allowing for it's suspension. So, if he tries that, no one has to obey him and hopefully few will. There is no lesser evil that contemplates the destruction of our government of laws.

[Hekate]

142. We fix this by civilian means. A military coup d'etat is the end of the republic.

[pbmus]

116. We are really close to having no government...

As he signs away the vestiges of democracy , we argue about what the rule of law is about removing a tyrant..?,

Your continuous argument about what we can do under our current laws...does not include what we can do with new laws...

The tyrant signs away our rights, make laws that limit his signing...

[druidity33]

164. What is the purpose of the Logan Act?

No one has ever been prosecuted under it... yet it exists. The fact that our country has never nullified an election does not mean it is impossible. It's true there is no constitutional remedy, but it's within the purview of the USSC. Large countries (and recently) have revoted due to Russian influence on recent elections. I don't think you should tell people how to focus their energies.

[demigoddess]

139. congress might okay it if they thought the republicans would get a second chance

at winning the presidency. Otherwise, I would recommend denying 45 any cabinet members that can be denied. Deny him anything and everything possible. deny and delay. fight him tooth and nail.

[Petrushka]

145. History? Replete with "firsts"???

. The Equal Rights Amendment was introduced for the FIRST time in 1923; and, after 94 years, it has yet to be ratified.

Trying---mightily!---to imagine such a thing as a "do over election amendment" that would move any faster than the ERA, I can only tell myself, "Get real!"

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

7. You forgot to mention alien abduction,

which I suppose is more or less in the same category as being raptured. It's possible that some contingent of aliens might want to abduct SCROTUS for the purpose of probing, but since he really isn't a typical specimen of our species they'd probably reject him after a few preliminary probes, conclude he was too atypical and not worth the bother, and drop him off back at Roswell.

[MineralMan]

9. Well, in the absence of the President, The VP

assumes that role. If the aliens return him, he could return to office. Personally, I'd hope they'd keep him for daily probing. But that's just me, really.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

15. It's me, too.

[simguy225]

155. Yuge probing. The best probing.

[anneboleyn]

48. Lmfao. Thank you for giving me my first genuine "belly laugh" in days. This was hilarious!

As you point out, no aliens would want this jackass. So...that is probably out for now...I suspect that gawad won't take him in any "rapture" situation either.

[exboyfil]

10. Good points

Lots of flights of fancy. We face two possible paths.

1. Trump continues as is and his behavior becomes a stumbling block for the conservative agenda. It is also possible that he just may go into the bunker and concentrate on just a few things (or nothing). If he continues with his foreign policy/military involvement though, we will probably end of filling a lot of body bags. Our international position will be set back to before the second World War.

2. Pence assumes the Presidency and is brutally efficient for the conservative agenda. He will govern something like George W. Bush. We will probably still have a war though.

I think in hindsight, unless we can knock off Pence through impeachment or resgination and get someone like Romney (which is the best we will ever do in the next four years), we are better proceeding forward with Trump - just do enough to always keep him off balance.
I don't think Pence has the stink of Trump on him. He is no Agnew taking bundles of cash.

[still_one]

11. The country made its bed and now we will be paying for the consequences of that for decades to come

[workinclasszero]

52. Sadly I agree

We won't get out of this easy.

30 years or so of unrelenting, unchallenged, fascist propaganda has changed this country in many terrible ways.

[Cosmocat]

122. Yep

nm

[Cosmocat]

121. Yep

Nm

[Raster]

12. ...but... but... what about the Mulligan Provision?

mulligan

A Mulligan, in a game, happens when a player gets a second chance to perform a certain move or action; usually due to lack of skill or bitter luck. A "Do-Over". Like getting an "Extra Play" in pinball due to sinking the ball before obtaining an arbitrary amount of points.

If your opening hand in Magic: The Gathering sucks bad; just call "Mulligan", reshuffle, and draw new cards.

[font size=3]If at your first try at electing at POTUS that actually knows what he or she is doing, and Russia interferes, just call "Mulligan," re-vote and have a new largest Inauguration in history.

[MineralMan]

20. Which article is that in the Constitution, I wonder?

[LastLiberal in PalmSprings]

93. I think it's been nullified by the Peter Principle

A man (or woman) rises to the highest level of their incompetence. Trump has definitely hit the ceiling of his incompetence. He may have been competent as a businessman (and there's still some question about that), but he's way over his head as president.

He'll never quit--just double down on his mistakes--and as the GOP said, "Why would we investigate a Republican?"

So we get to put up with him for four (and possibly eight) years.

[Orrex]

14. I'm betting on alien abduction

Which I suppose is more or less equivalent to option 5 and about as likely.

[Johnny2X2X]

16. Nuclear War is more important the our Constitution

Sorry, but if the military and intelligence communities see that Trump is actively giving all of our secrets to Putin they would be doing their patriotic duty to physically remove him from office. It's not in the Constitution, but it could be necessary. You don't have much of a government if DC is turned into a 25 diameter wide flaming hole in the ground.

When you have an intelligence community working so hard to get Congress to remove him, you know they think this is a threat to our existence that is potentially greater than the need to follow the Constitution.

Arrest him while making public everything, then hand it over the the remaining officials and Congress to restore our Democracy. There's no telling what dangerous info Trump has already given to Putin.

[MineralMan]

19. Nonsense. We have impeachment as a Constitutional process.

The military can't arrest the President. He is the Commander-in-Chief of the military. That's a foolish suggestion.

Impeachment and removal is one of the options. If necessary, that is how it is done.

[NoGoodNamesLeft]

31. The intelligence community is leaking info to the public to force Republicans to act

That's my opinion at least.

Public outrage for the inaction of Republican controlled congress is the only thing that will fix this fuster-cluck of Trump.

[MineralMan]

33. That may well be true.

It will take the Republicans to impeach and remove. At least some Republicans will have to be on board, anyhow.

[Blanks]

120. My money is on resignation...

Nixon knew he couldn't withstand an impeachment because he didn't have the support.

That's where I see this going. The house republicans will push him because he's gonna bring the party down, and he will just quit.

That's my prediction. He looks like hell already.

[anneboleyn]

59. What if it is determined that Trump committed felonies? Would this fall under the 25th amendment

If his actions are determined to be felonies (I haven't thought through exactly what this would look like -- just speculation on my part) how would he be removed from office?

Obviously if he is impeached we will have Pence. Pence is horrid but he would be a single-term disaster -- he has zero charisma, and he's a dunce when he's allowed to speak for more than a few seconds. Pressers would be unbelievably bad with Pence since he is so inarticulate. Obviously a lot of repub damage could/would be done in this time, but I very seriously doubt that Pence would be elected in 2020.

[MineralMan]

63. No. The Congress could impeach and remove him for that.

It's all in the Constitution. Only the Congress can remove a President from office.

[anneboleyn]

90. So they would have to vote to impeach following an investigation if Trump is found guilty

Although I have a feeling that if it goes that far the pressure on him to resign would be massive.

[MineralMan]

92. Uh, Trump couldn't be found guilty in state court, because no trial would

take place. Truly, he would never be charged in state court anyhow, since any laws he broke would probably be federal laws. The Congress can impeach and remove on their own, without any particular charges by any other body.

As you say, I believe he would resign, as Nixon did, if impeachment were really a probability. On the other hand, Bill Clinton made them go through the whole process. They lost. He won. It just goes to show you never can tell.

[HassleCat]

17. I think they may kill him.

Seriously. It could be their best option. They would avoid the disgrace of impeachment, and gain extra sympathy points that always accompany a president dying in office. He's 70 years old, so they could make it appear to be a heart attack, etc. The best thing would be to add a touch of martyrdom, perhaps a heart attack brought on by the stress of fighting a war against some small, defenseless Muslim enclave. It would be the perfect exit strategy, and the intelligence community would be very willing to help.

[MineralMan]

18. I covered that in #3 in the first list.

If the President dies, he is replaced by the VP. The manner of death is irrelevant.

[HassleCat]

22. I saw that, but I had to add a little spy vs. spy intrigue.

And I fully expect there are people in our government talking among themselves about just such a thing. 'In fact, the subject probably comes up no matter who is president.

[MineralMan]

23. I remember losing a President to an assassination.

I do not wish in any way for such a thing again. No matter how bad a President is, we have other, completely legal means of removing that person from office.

Frankly, my choice would be for Trump to resign. Perhaps if we make it uncomfortable enough for him to remain in office, he will do just that. I suggest that we do so, as far as we are able.

[murielm99]

113. I remember that, too.

I was in high school, but it was very traumatic. It was not that long after the Cuban Missile Crisis. And, it was not simply JFK's assassination. There was Lee Harvey Oswald's strange, muddled background, his murder, and all the nonsense of the Warren Commission that followed. What a time! Too many unanswered questions. Never again, please.

[exboyfil]

156. I agree - It would make him a martyr

God no. It would destroy the country.

[Hekate]

161. The Martyrdom of the Mad King is the very last thing I want to see

[BlueMTexpat]

24. And the truly sobering thing

is that, even if 45 resigns or is removed by one of the legal remedies currently available, we are left with Pence.

Pence is a true zealot and every bit as awful as Trump. But in many ways, he might not be given the free ride that Trump has had so far. After all, Trump's principal appeal to Trumpets didn't involve Pence at all, but rather the fact that he had never been a politician before and the mistaken belief that he was a successful dealmaker.

And, if not Trump or Pence, we are left with another parade of horribles - in this order:

- Speaker of the House = Paul Ryan
- President pro tem of the Senate = Orrin Hatch
- Secretary of State = Rex Tillerson
- Secretary of the Treasury = Steven Mnuchin
- Secretary of Defense = James Mattis
- Attorney General = Jeff Sessions
Etc., etc., etc. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_line_of_succession

It could potentially even go so far as Betsy DeVos.

We are well and thoroughly f*cked for at least four years. Remember to thank not only Trump voters but any who just couldn't bring themselves to vote for Hillary because she wasn't Bernie.

[Raster]

25. Once we regain the House in 2018, and impeach BOTH rump* and dence*...

...Nancy Pelosi becomes POTUS.

[onenote]

88. You skipped a step: 2/3 Senate vote to convict

Where are those votes coming from?

[MineralMan]

27. Yes, all that's true. We had an opportunity to prevent that result.

We did not take it, though. While there may have been manipulation of the election, had enough people turned out in enough states to vote for Hillary Clinton, she would now be our President.

Personally, I believe we blew that opportunity in 2016. We had the chance, but let it slip away. Now, we are faced with the consequences of our failure to elect Hillary Clinton to be President. It's shameful, in my opinion, that we let that happen. But, the time for blame is over for that election. We all watched it happen and we know what happened.

We're now stuck with what happened and have to find a way to deal with that. Personally, I'd prefer that we weren't in that situation. But, since we are, then we need to explore our options. Impeachment is a real possibility. Making Trump so uncomfortable in his office that he resigns is another possibility to consider.

Taking away his Republican Congress in 2018 is another goal we could work towards.

My point is that the election is over and now we're stuck with the situation, and wishful thinking about impossible scenarios makes no sense at all. I wish we'd stop doing that and start focusing on what we actually CAN do.

[BigBearJohn]

35. Good luck in herding cats. /nt

[BlueMTexpat]

170. These!!!

We're now stuck with what happened and have to find a way to deal with that. Personally, I'd prefer that we weren't in that situation. But, since we are, then we need to explore our options. Impeachment is a real possibility. Making Trump so uncomfortable in his office that he resigns is another possibility to consider.

Taking away his Republican Congress in 2018 is another goal we could work towards.

Not just "could" or "should" - we MUST!

[MacKasey]

29. What about

Pense resigns, Hillary is appointed vice-president, Trump resigns/impeached, Hillary is President


Added:
I meant as part of a deal so Pense and Trump do not go to prison, one can dream

[MineralMan]

34. Who do you think would appoint Hillary as VP?

You're making no sense at all. The President would appoint the successor to Pence. Again, please read the Constitution for understanding.

[Jim Lane]

111. Also, the President's nominee to be the new VP has to be confirmed by Congress.

Pence is Raptured, Trump decides that his ideal VP would be someone who attended one of his weddings, so he nominates Hillary -- she still doesn't become VP without getting a majority vote in each house of Congress.

This scenario assumes the Rapture. Maybe enough Congressional Republicans are missing that there are now Democratic majorities. But my guess is that, even if there is a Rapture, not many of the Republicans in Congress will qualify.

[MineralMan]

112. I would never assume the Rapture.

I don't do supernatural events and such.

[WillowTree]

49. Right........Because Trump would appoint Hillary to be his VP in this lifetime.

[BlueMTexpat]

169. What a lovely dream!

But the likelihood of it coming true - when GOPers HATE Hillary with a passion and when the succession is set by law - is nil.

But thanks for thinking of it.

[Turbineguy]

30. Thanks.

[hurple]

32. He could also leave office

Through the door marked "exit"

Or, through a window.

[leftstreet]

36. Does suicide fall under 'dies?'

[MineralMan]

40. The manner of death is irrelevant.

If the President dies, he is no longer President and the VP becomes President.

I'm not comfortable speculating about such things, frankly. It is one of the ways someone stops being President. That's all.

[leftstreet]

42. It was a joke. You have no sense of humor? n/t

[MineralMan]

51. Not regarding the death of Presidents, no.

Other than that, my sense of humor is just fine.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

37. there is no magical unicorn to save us. we had the opportunity to save ourselves

but we decided it wasn't worth it. hence, my fucking rage.

[MineralMan]

41. Yes, indeed. We are hoist on our own petard with this.

We should have elected Hillary Clinton, but we failed to do so. Now, we face what we are facing.

Rage? Well, rage is very unhealthy. I don't do rage. I am, however, deeply, deeply disappointed with how the voting went. Every time I look at the third party vote in three states, my disappointment grows.

We blew it. We blew it badly. Now, we have to try to recover somehow.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

45. disagree about rage being unhealthy. there are things worth being enraged about.

[MineralMan]

47. Rage would be unhealthy for me.

I don't engage in it.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

50. fair.

[butdiduvote]

57. I'm with you

I'll be enraged all I want. I will also express my views that there SHOULD be a way to nullify a stolen election all I want. I don't need anyone to lecture me on a lack of a constitutional mechanism for doing so. I'm not that stupid.

[Hekate]

160. I've had my own share of rage, at BushCheney. This time I'm just gobsmacked, but still determined

I'm with MinMan on his OP. We need to unite in Reality World, not Reality TV, in order to formulate a Realistic plan for getting rid of Red Don.

Continual fantasizing online leads nowhere. Worse, after awhile it just spams this Board, where we could be using our time more productively. Both MinMan and I have been here enough years to know and remember that DU has been and can be a source of real information that members can utilize. It's a two-way street, though -- someone has to be willing to learn.

MinMan is by nature more patient than I. Personally, I have had it with the flood of new members searching for unicorns and refusing to believe they don't exist. It's gotten to be a waste of time. There, now you can reread the OP and appreciate that he is nicer than I am.

[Amaryllis]

79. We did not blow it. look up INterstate Crosscheck and the number of voters illegally removed from

voter registration databases, along with other voter suppression tactics. 80,000 votes over three states would have given Hillary the election. Only lost Michigan by 10,000 votes and Crosscheck eliminated that many in Detroit alone.

[MineralMan]

82. Oh, dear.

All that was needed in Michigan was a larger turnout of actual registered voters, really. And had those voters who voted for third party candidate voted for Hillary, she would have won that state.

Excuses. We make excuses for losing elections. There were plenty of registered voters who didn't bother to vote to make that Crosscheck thing useless. But, they didn't show up. We didn't help them show up. Excuses are useless.

We blew it. We shouldn't have lost. But we didn't make enough effort in the right places. It's our fault. We should own that, and work to correct it by 2018.

I've been around elections and election campaigns since 1960. I know what percentage of eligible voters turn out and vote. We can do much, much better, if we have the will to do so.

I don't make excuses for losing elections. Ever. I work on GOTV efforts prior to elections. And guess what? Where I live, Democrats win. Every where I have lived, Democrats have won.

Think about it. Just get out the people who don't go to the polls. That's all you have to do.

[ismnotwasm]

102. Righteous directed rage may be unhealthy personally for some

But it is often the catalyst for positive change. I rage as a woman told all my life that a woman's rage is "hormones" whereas a mans rage is called "bravery"

I am going to keep on bring pissed as hell at ALL the elements that brought us this mess. I will direct that rage into action.

[BigBearJohn]

38. Or he could choke on some cheetos. Oh the irony.

(Joke)

[Richard D]

39. So . . .

. . . let me assume for a minute that when the full investigation of this comes out, the FBI releases information that shows that the entire election was hacked by, and thrown by a foreign government, giving the presidency and a lot more to a faction that was in collusion with them and treasonous in acting against the interests of the United States, to further their own agendas.

Let's assume, for the sake of assumption, that in the material released by the FBI it is shown that not only was the election was hacked at the presidential level, but was also hacked at the level of congressional elections, giving a majority to a party as a result of the hacks.

This is not covered in the Constitution, and hence becomes a severe Constitutional Crisis, with no manner at all in the Constitution for how it should be handled, nor any precedent in US law.

The entire succession of who will replace the president is then irrelevant as all are at the very least being charged with treachery most foul.

If such a thing would happen, it would certainly be interesting to see how it could be handled.

[MineralMan]

44. If that were the case, the constitutional remedy begins with the 2018 election.

So, it is covered in the Constitution. The people are the final check and balance in our system of government. Every two years, the people choose all of the members of the House and 1/3 of the Senate. Every four years, they choose the President. In a single six-year period, we could replace the entire government, state and federal. We have that power. I suggest we use it.

The Constitution provides the means needed for the people to completely overhaul the government through elections. That is also true in the 50 states.

We are the final check and balance on the government. What we face right now is an immediate challenge. In a couple of years, we can handle the long-term challenge, if we wish.

We actually do have the power to make major changes happen. It takes a few years, though. In the meantime, we have this immediate situation we're trying to deal with.

[Generic Brad]

43. Or we could storm the castle

Pitchforks and torches are becoming a distinct possibility

[MineralMan]

46. Yeah, but only metaphorically.

We have the right to "peaceably assemble," and to "petition the government." We do not have the right to change the government through violence. We can vote in an entirely new government within any six year period, though.

We can protest, and we are. We can demand, and we are demanding. But, we cannot actually use violence to make change. That would be rejected by a vast majority of the population.

Sorry.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

53. and also rejected by the secret service. which would be the immediate problem.

much before public opinion became the problem.

[leftstreet]

56. Oh for heaven's sake

Several million people standing outside the WH wouldn't NEED to be violent

You must be young !!

[MineralMan]

64. No, not young at all. I've lived 71 years.

If you bring those metaphorical pitchforks and torches to the White House, you will be denied entry, I assure you.

[diva77]

55. maybe Marks v. Stinson is why trump was in such a hurry to install gorsuch??

In order to install Hillary, it would take something like elevating Marks v. Stinson to apply to presidential election

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/russian-interference-could-give-courts-legal-authority_us_584be136e4b0151082221b9c
snip...at least one federal court decision suggests there may be some federal case law on the question of whether it is possible to invalidate the outcome of an election after the fact when there is fraud, and replace a candidate benefited by fraud with his opponent.

The 1993 state senate contest pitted Republican Bruce Marks against Democrat William G. Stinson. Stinson was named the winner, but was later accused of participating in a scheme with elections officials to commit election fraud. Namely, Stinson was accused of conspiring to cast illegally obtained absentee ballots in his favor.

In February 1994, after Stinson had already taken office, the federal judge ordered he “be removed from his State Senate office and that [his opponent, Bruce Marks] be certified the winner within 72 hours.”

Two of the elected officials who testified in the Pennsylvania case said under oath that they were aware of the fraud, had intentionally failed to enforce laws, and hurried to certify Stinson the winner in order to bury the story. To some, the narrative draws parallels to the Washington Post’s revelation that Republican Mitch McConnell was aware of the CIA’s conclusion that Russians had intervened and opted to do nothing...snip

Whatever became of that 4 member team of US Senators who were supposed to investigate the possibility of Russian interference prior to the Electoral College vote?

[Eliot Rosewater]

58. #4 - incapacitated, happened a long time before the election

[MineralMan]

61. There is a process which must be followed.

Please read the Constitution to learn how that process works.

[Eliot Rosewater]

144. I was only commenting on his mental state today, last month, a year ago,

30 years ago, etc.

He is and has been mentally incapacitated his entire life.

But that is one of the reasons why the GOP love him so much.

[Takket]

60. Lol @ #5

[MineralMan]

65. Well, some people believe such things, so I included that.

[shrike]

66. Thank you for posting this. n/t

[hamsterjill]

67. I think 45 will leave via resignation.

I just have this gut feeling. Honestly, I don't care HOW he leaves as long as he leaves. And as soon as he's gone, we can start working on Pence. As soon as Pence is gone, etc., etc.

Given the constitutional restrictions, the best we can hope for in the next four years is to nullify, obstruct and hold. If 45 is forced to resign or leaves in any way other than death, the 45 administration will have lost at least some of its power.

It's going to be a miserable time for this country. I will work hard for the mid-terms and hope for a little relief at that point, but I don't expect much to change until 2020.

[tblue37]

166. Since 2020 is a census year, it is crucial that we take elections at ALL levels,

to fix this gerrymandering debacle!

[hamsterjill]

168. Great point!

n/t

[Amaryllis]

69. RE *4: Presidnet becomes incapacitated- also includes if he is cerrtified impaired, however...

lots of hoops to jump through:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/25th-amendment-donald-trump-how-remove-us-president-unfit-constitution-impeachment-vice-mike-pense-a7577376.html
25th Amendment: What is it and could it be used to remove Donald Trump if he is deemed unfit to serve as President?

[MineralMan]

71. Yes. That's the same process.

It exists. It's not an easy process to pull off, though. I doubt it would work right now, frankly.

[Amaryllis]

81. Won't work unless a lot more republicans get on board. Good luck with that.

[MineralMan]

83. Well, see, we all need to be working on that.

Do you have Republican Senators and Representatives in your state? If so, you need to be putting pressure on them.

[Liberal In Red State]

70. Agreed. There is nothing that can be done but too be a road block for the GOP on ever issue

for the next 4 years. The own the government. Time for us to make them pay!

[MineralMan]

74. Actually, we could take over the House and Senate in 2018.

We only need a net gain of 24 in the House and just 4 in the Senate. Why don't we start there? We'll need to start planning right now, but we could do that, if we had the will to do that.

I suggest we make a start...what do you think?

[WillowTree]

105. That still wouldn't get a conviction in the Senate, though.

[MineralMan]

107. That's quite true.

We can't get a 2/3 majority there in 2018.

I'll settle for a small majority in both houses, though. That would be an excellent start.

[exboyfil]

158. Either House or Senate will at least

allow investigations and some level of checks and balances. Things will have to go way down for any chance at either.

The Democrats had the House and Senate during Watergate. They also saw gains after Watergate in the 1974 elections.

I don't think Nixon gets forced out without the Democrats having control.

Just remember the Articles of Impeachment for Clinton. He told one lie under oath and the House voted to impeach, and 45 U.S. Senators voted guilty.

[Jim Lane]

118. More precisely, start in 2017

There are already a few special elections in store to fill House seats left vacant as Representatives left to join the Cabinet.

Plus, you never know who'll decide to spend more time with his family (after certain incriminating documents surface).

[MineralMan]

119. Well, that's true, too.

I'm thinking more in terms of having the entire House up for a vote. That's a real opportunity for change.

[TygrBright]

134. Ain't gonna happen in the Senate. Sorry. Kills me to admit, but true.

We have way, way more incumbents who are vulnerable running than they do. Best-case scenario in 2018 is we limit our losses in the Senate to maybe 3 or 4 down, position ourselves to recover in 2020 and 2022.

sadly,
Bright

[Hula Popper]

72. Please correct me if I'm wrong

aren't treason, profiteering , murder and war crimes punishable by death?

Hell, we can take rump's cabinet and throw in W's also...strip their wealth and
their organs.
Fuck republicans!

[mobeau69]

73. 1. The President Resigns - That possibility is always open. Few have made that choice. Nixon did.

Nixon was and is the only president to resign from office.

[MineralMan]

76. You are correct.

Perhaps Trump will be the second. If we make things uncomfortable enough, he might just do that. He's not happy in his work, I think.

[mobeau69]

80. I'd take it but I'm really kinda hoping for a nervous breakdown in

prime time.

[NCjack]

78. #45 eats a lot of fats and simple carbs. I think that plus the

stress of twitter shit storms and loud protests everywhere he goes outside of the WH will do him in. So, be sure to participate in calling out his lies and mistakes. Never give him any praise.

[No Vested Interest]

84. Gerald Ford - was not in the line of succession when appointed Vice President, and subsequently

President upon the resignation of President Richard Nixon.

He was the House minority leader, elected only by the people of his Michigan district to represent them in Congress.

This has no direct bearing on speculation of how and who could replace Trump, but is worth noting as an aberration of the typical route to the Presidency.

[Scarsdale]

85. Republicans

Would NEVER remove one of their own, not for insanity and as we saw Alzheimers. Reagan was kept in office despite being incapacitated by Alzheimers. tRump can be, and likely IS, stark raving mad but the gop will keep him in place.

[MineralMan]

87. Well, traditionally that has been true.

However, tradition may well not hold with Trump. Still, I think he would resign before any impeachment proceeding took place. I believe that situation may well arise in the next months, though.

[vlyons]

86. My preferred method is #1

That's how Nixon went out, and before him Spiro Agnew. I believe that Nixon was told that the committee investigating Watergate would vote for the House to start impeachment proceedings. Nixon resigned rather than go through the humiliation of impeachment. I think maybe his wife Pat was glad to get out too.

That's how I want to see Trump go. Rather than have his "brand" dragged through the mud and slime of impeachment for treason, a simple resignation would be so much easier. He might still be prosecuted for treason, but not likely. He could retire to one of his retirement residences and live the life of Reilly.

[MineralMan]

91. I think that's a good possibility with Trump, really.

We'll see. If this continues to deteriorate, you'll start hearing impeachment talk from House Republicans.

[Jim Lane]

126. Small correction re Watergate history

You write:

I believe that Nixon was told that the committee investigating Watergate would vote for the House to start impeachment proceedings.

No, the House Judiciary Committee did vote to approve three articles of impeachment. Support came from every Democrat on the Committee plus some of the Republicans, but some Republicans dissented.

That happened in late July, 1974. Nixon's allies on Capitol Hill told him that the full House would certainly vote to impeach and that the vote in the Senate would be close to the required 67. Nixon continued to hope to tough it out.

A few days later, on August 5, Nixon, in compliance with a unanimous Supreme Court decision, released what became known as the "Smoking Gun Tape". Based on its contents, all the Judiciary Committee members who had voted against impeachment announced that they would support impeachment when the full House voted. Republicans in the Senate gave Nixon the estimate that there were now at least 85 votes to convict. It was only then that he agreed to resign.

None of this affects either your point or MM's listing of alternatives, of course.

[SleeplessinSoCal]

89. Drowned in leaks isn't included.

It would be a first. It could happen.

[VWolf]

97. Didn't that already happen

when he went to Russia?

[SleeplessinSoCal]

133. Nope. He's up to his knees in leaks.

But they'll keep leasing until he's eventually drowned.

[SleeplessinSoCal]

136. deluge on the way.

https://mobile.twitter.com/20committee/status/831871040762630146?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

[ismnotwasm]

94. Thank you

I have very little time or patience for completely incorrect information

[MineralMan]

96. My pleasure.

The thread has stimulated some conversation, and that's always my goal.

[DFW]

95. A few "amendments" of my own, if I may

1. The President Resigns - That possibility is always open. Few have made that choice. Nixon did.
And Nixon was the ONLY one. So far, anyway.

2. The President Gets Impeached and Removed - The House impeaches; the Senate removes the President. Also rare.
Impeachment actually only happened twice: Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton. Conviction by two thirds of the Senate (and the subsequent removal from office) is even rarer, as in "it has never happened."

3. The President Dies - This has happened several times in history.
Eerily, starting with the election of William Henry Harrison in 1840, the president that was elected EVERY TWENTY YEARS after that died in office (Harrison-Lincoln-Garfield-McKinley-Harding-FDR-JFK). Reagan (1980) broke that chain, but 120 years is quite a scary run. Remembering Mel Carnahan and Paul Wellstone, I'm sure Trump's puppetmasters won't be allowing him to fly any small planes until they are good and ready for the consequences (or, more likely, if they are the ones who loaded the plane in the first place).

4. The President Becomes Incapacitated - The 25th Amendment covers this, along with the process of replacement.
But if the president thinks he is OK, and he is actually mentally unfit to execute his duties, WHO determines if he is incapacitated or not? I say Trump has already shown he has no mental or emotional capacity to carry out the duties of the Presidency of the United States. Good enough? No? OK, then WHOSE word is necessary?

[onenote]

98. as to your last point, the 25th amendment addresses it in section 4

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-one days after receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not in session, within twenty-one 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.

[DFW]

101. Ture enough.

I can certainly see Pence, Ryan and McTurtle getting together on that point. If the Russian thing metastasizes much further, probably sooner rather than later. Trump's quack "physician" will probably be called upon to discover some silent "tumor" whose treatment ("take 20 Tweets in the morning, and call me in the afternoon&quot will require that Trump declare his mission to be accomplished, and leave the country in Pence's dirty hands.

[MineralMan]

99. That last one is very unlikely, of course.

As you say, who decides. Again, it's the Congress, really. They might as well impeach and remove. I think that amendment meant to deal with temporary incapacity more than mental incapacity. Trump is mentally incapable of anything resembling reasonable behavior, but the same applies to a number of members of Congress as well, so...

[DFW]

108. I would even venture to say:

Far too many members of Congress

[lpbk2713]

103. Maybe this should be pinned to the top of the GD page.

Because I know this topic will come up again many times in the future as long
as the asshole in the Oval Orifice. I shudder to think it could be four years.
Hosts and Admins: If nothing else it could serve as a subliminal message that
this dung heap needs to go.

[Gothmog]

104. There is no legal/constitutional way to undo the election of trump

These best that we can do is move forward to try to retake the House in 2016 and turn states blue

[forjusticethunders]

128. Technically untrue but

It'd have to be a situation where the GOP is ready to lock Trump and Pence up, and the Dems offer the following deal to keep them out of jail (or alive if the CIA feels the need to do CIA things), all entirely constitutional.

Pence resigns as Vice President, creating a vacancy.
Pursuant to the 25th Amendnent, Trump nominates Hillary Clinton as Vice President.
Hillary Clinton is confirmed as VP.
Trump resigns, making Hillary Clinton POTUS.
Pursuant to the 25th Amendment, Hillary nominates Tim Kaine as Vice President.

Now obviously this an extreme low probably scenario but we live in strange times.

EDIT: Someone beat me to it.

[TrumpMania]

106. Impeachment Date

Shouldn't take that long until he gives a reason for impeachment. Can't wait for it!

Let's hope Pence is going to make a better job.

_______________________________________
http://theimpeachmentbet.com/
Look at this xD

[MineralMan]

109. Pence? He's a total ass. But, he's not nuts.

I don't want Pence, either, but there it is. We missed our chance to have a Democratic President in 2016.

[TygrBright]

125. You think Millenialist Xtianity is something other than "Dangerous bugfuck nuttery?" n/t

[Yavin4]

110. You forgot one

A president can be voted out after their first term.

[MineralMan]

115. No, that's the last one. The President's Term Ends.

Presidents get one term, and then have to stand for election. That's what that one means.

[Yavin4]

140. Yeah, you did get that one.

Sorry. I missed it.

[Lifelong Protester]

114. I say he resigns.

He can't handle the situation where just because he thinks it, it happens. And he thinks fascist-like things.

[MineralMan]

117. I suspect that's the most likely one for Trump.

It's already not fun for him to be President. I hope we can make it even less fun sooner than later. Eventually, he'll quit.

[Lifelong Protester]

165. This is NOT what he signed up for.

It's not fun, it's relentless. I'm almost as old as you, and lived through Watergate and the Kennedy assassination. Even though Watergate lasted 900 + days, the Kennedy assassination still reverberates. I don't want to go through that again.

[Bayard]

123. The President Becomes Incapacitated

I vote for that one. Total mental breakdown.

[TygrBright]

124. Thank you. n/t

[progressoid]

127. Stop peeing in our Wheaties MM!

We've got some righteous indignation and we need to vent or we'll blow!!!!


Also, K/R.

[TygrBright]

129. Also important to consider: Long, LONG line of succession before we get to anyone sane/competent.

I think "Secretary of Veterans' Affairs" is about fourteenth or fifteenth.

So, could we give up the wishful-thinking speculation, and get down to strategizing on how to maximize turnover in 2020, and minimize damage between now and then?

hopefully,
Bright

[MineralMan]

130. Don't forget 2018.

Truly.

[TygrBright]

135. Not forgetting it, but see my response above, re: Senate.

I will allow as how a House takeover is looking a tiny bit cheerier now, but even so, with the degree of gerrymandering we've got, it's dicey. And there's still the Veeper issue to get past.

You can bet that even if Pence gets caught with his hand in the cookie jar, a la Spiro Agnew, current GOP leadership will ensure a poison pill successor appointment. Back then, we had a 'moderate' GOP faction that tipped the balance in the direction of 'amiable nonentity.'

wearily,
Bright

[Jim Lane]

132. Here's another possible scenario (Idle Curiosity Department)

Suppose a candidate wins election despite rumors that she wasn't actually a natural-born citizen. (I make the new President a woman to make it clear I'm not talking about Obama.) After she's inaugurated, conclusive evidence of document fraud comes to light. The President must finally admit the truth. She goes on TV and defiantly proclaims that, although she lied repeatedly and directed the forging of documents, the natural-born citizenship requirement is archaic and should be ignored. She points out, correctly, that her parents brought her to the U.S. when she was a month old and she's lived here ever since, so what the hell difference does it make.

A highly partisan Senate has enough of her diehard adherents to block conviction in an impeachment proceeding.

The "birther" lawsuits against Obama largely failed for lack of standing. Suppose, however, that a suit is brought by the candidate who came in second, plus several Senators and Representatives who allege that they were deceived into approving the electoral votes for the liar, plus most of her own electors, plus even the Vice President who alleges that he's being denied his rightful place in the Oval Office. That group collectively ought to have standing to bring a case asking a federal court to remove the ineligible President from office. What result?

My guess is that the court agrees they have standing but dismisses the case under the Political Question Doctrine. The court would probably agree with your point that the only path to removing her is through the Constitution. Still, there's at least a colorable argument that impeachment and the 25th Amendment are to deal with someone who properly became President, and this person was never actually a valid President in the first place.

[Hekate]

137. Thanks, MM. I'm getting real tired of the fantasizing that goes on. The part that disturbs me most

...is the desire for a new strongman (ours) to replace Strongman Trump-- or a military coup, or both. Makes me want to beat them about the head and shoulders with a World History textbook, or even just a comprehensive History of the 20th Century textbook.

[Warren DeMontague]

153. I think the "election do-over' stuff is from folks who think they can somehow still get Hillary.

That's not happening. They would do better to start working for the midterms and looking at how we can expand our bench for 2020, particularly with younger and more geographically diverse leadership, people like Kamala Harris or Gavin Newsom.

As MM points out, rightly, there's just no way we're going to "nullify" the election or some shit.

I would have put impeachment down as an exceedingly remote possibility, myself, but given the events of the past 3 weeks and how quickly the wheels have come off the Trump White House bus I wonder if we might not actually be headed in that direction. Of course that gives us Pence, who has probably been kept/kept himself insulated from the worst of the Trump crap for exactly that reason.

[Kimchijeon]

138. 1 or 2 is fine by me

asap

[madinmaryland]

147. One question. If another country has an arrest warrant for tRump and

he actually goes to the country and he actually left AF1, could they take him into custody? I'm thinking Noriega (who we actually ousted and arrested).

Yeah, its far fetched, but that is all I could come up with. Of course it could just send the entire world into war, assuming he hasn't done it already.

[many a good man]

149. What if Trump resigns and Pence is impeached

before he appoints a VP? Will it go to the Speaker? What if the Speaker changes before the next election? Does the new Speaker become president?

A case could be made the entire Cabinet is corrupted and should be replaced by the new president.

[Warren DeMontague]

151. You left out #7 - Earth is hit with a giant asteroid or Godzilla kills us all

[Tatiana]

152. At best we will have President Ryan. But I vote for a Constitutional Amendment.

To allow for a maximum of 3 Presidential terms.

Then have Obama run again.

[R B Garr]

154. What if the President is totally insane and a danger

to himself and others?? Trump is about as close as it gets!

That wouldn't belong under incapacitated because he's too far gone to think there's anything wrong with him. This is unprecedented to have someone this dangerous of a head case that is becoming more out of touch with reality every day.

[KT2000]

157. A cash buyout

would get rid of him but it would have to be bigger than his cut on the Exxon/Rosneft deal. It would be worth it IMHO.

[Mr. Ected]

159. What if the President was charged with a "high crime" in federal court

And was found guilty of that crime?

It would be unthinkable, even for a Republican Congress, to fail then to impeach the President under such circumstances, right?

[ecstatic]

162. The Constitution is incomplete, IMO. We are in an unprecedented situation,

which potentially requires unprecedented solutions.

[uncle ray]

163. let's revisit this conversation once missiles start flying.

the point may come when we are forced to choose a slightly unconstitutional solution to the problem over someone else burning the constitution entirely, in order to get someone competent in charge. i'm suggesting nothing, and i shudder at the thought that it may ever happen.