politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
The key thing is "...on Impeachment for, and Conviction of..." Which isn't going to happen if things stay as they are.
The 14th Amendment doesn't even require impeachment or any sort of conviction. It says that if you previously held office and then engaged in insurrection, you instantly have a disability that keeps you from holding any office, and Congress is only able to vote to remove that disability.
Essentially, it works backwards from the rest of the constitution and due process and all that shit. It kept Confederates out of US government, despite how they were not impeached or even criminally convicted of insurrection. Exactly as intended.
But you saw how effectively that was enforced when Chief Justice Roberts swore Trump in last year. Conservatives in power just ignore any laws that are inconvenient to them.
I don't know. This is pretty brazen, and the midterms aren't looking good for the Republicans. If enough GOP congressfolk think they'd be better off facing the midterms under the stalwart leadership of President Vance, I could see them moving en masse behind an impeachment push. The ball has to start rolling somewhere though, and I don't know which representative would be likely to introduce articles and palatable to enough Republicans that they could join under the color of bipartisanship.
All that presumes a congress that doesn't suck though, and when in doubt, congress sucks. Being the first mover is dangerous, especially with Trump still at the helm. I'm not saying it's likely, but it could happen.
Any Republican worth anything would do it "as a patriot." Bipartisanship is fine, but "patriotism" is their whole thing. When a president does something this bold it should be easy to benefit by being someone who actually stands up for what they speak about so often. Obviously this is in a sane world though, and it also requires that they care about real patriotism, not nationalism.
This is especially true when the guy you need to stand up to has a 32% approval rating. It's not hard to look good when you're kicking the guy no one likes, and it honestly might be the move to flip centrists away from the "woke" progressives that are winning primaries.
Not that I want that. I'd rather have the progressives win and start sending fuckers to the Hague. But I'd be shocked if there wasn't some conservative think-tank mapping out this possibility.