This Is… Disturbing

 

How do we know American democracy works? Because it survived this:

Jesse Kelly breaks it down:

https://twitter.com/JesseKellyDC/status/1096053542664765441

 

 

Published in General
Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 237 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Manny Coolidge
    Manny
    @Manny

    Fred Cole (View Comment):

    Manny (View Comment):

    EJHill (View Comment):

    Fred Cole: Isn’t that how the 25th Amendment is supposed to work?

    That’s not the question @fredcole. The question is “Is that how the FBI is supposed to work?”

    Under Comey, McCabe (and probably under Mueller, too) the FBI took upon themselves powers not reserved to them. Prosecutorial discretion, initiating powers reserved to the VP and the Cabinet, etc. The Director of the FBI is not in charge, the Attorney General is. But when the most important thing in your world view is anything that gets to Trump is more important than the chain of command and fidelity to the Constitution, then I guess that’s question you’re more likely to come up with.

    You would think a Libertarian would be particularly sensitive to this but apparently his NeverTrumpism is blinding.

    Sorry. I’m unclear what am I supposed to be sensitive to. You’re invited to explain.

    The rule of law being violated.  People taking it upon themselves to exact justice.  If this had gone through it would have been a political coup.  If it had been violent, it would have been an assassination.  

    • #31
  2. Manny Coolidge
    Manny
    @Manny

    Tom Meyer, Common Citizen (View Comment):

    Raxxalan (View Comment):

    Fred Cole (View Comment):

    I don’t get what the problem is.

    Isn’t that how the 25th Amendment is supposed to work?

    Not really. The 25th amendment would require a majority of the cabinet to decide the president is incapable of conducting his duties. It certainly isn’t about a group of career bureaucrats deciding they don’t like the way their boss, a self righteous [COC redacted], was treated and deciding that they should attempt to remove the duly elected president of the United States.

    I’m a with Fred on this.

    If the acting director of the FBI — or anyone else in the administration — thought the president was off his rocker, it would make total sense for him and his staff to try to do that kind of headcount before reaching out to the cabinet about invoking the 25th.

    Now, whether or not you think McCabe’s & Co’s judgement that the president’s mental competency was warranted or just is another matter entirely.

    Trump may be unconventional and impulsive, but what evidence do you have that he is “off his rocker”?  I’ve said people of all political dispositions take issues to illogical ends.  This is NeverTrumpism going to its illogical end.  This is NeverTrumpism justifying itself in circular logic.

    • #32
  3. Misthiocracy secretly Member
    Misthiocracy secretly
    @Misthiocracy

    So soon people forget how much power J. Edgar Hoover wielded, now they want a return to that era.

    • #33
  4. Manny Coolidge
    Manny
    @Manny

    Misthiocracy secretly (View Comment):

    So soon people forget how much power J. Edgar Hoover wielded, now they want a return to that era.

    And the Libertarians are justifying it!!!!  Get that!

    • #34
  5. Fred Cole Inactive
    Fred Cole
    @FredCole

    Manny (View Comment):

    Trump may be unconventional and impulsive, but what evidence do you have that he is “off his rocker”? 

    No.  Of course not.  He’s a very stable genius.

    And we know that because Donald Trump himself told us.  You know, just like any very stable genius would.

     

    • #35
  6. Jager Coolidge
    Jager
    @Jager

    Fred Cole (View Comment):

    Manny (View Comment):

    Trump may be unconventional and impulsive, but what evidence do you have that he is “off his rocker”?

    No. Of course not. He’s a very stable genius.

    And we know that because Donald Trump himself told us. You know, just like any very stable genius would.

    That is great false dichotomy. He has to be either “off his rocker” and incapable of being President or a “very stable genius”

    How about a weird guy who has his mental facilities and is thus capable of doing his job. There is a lot of grey area, where most of the population of the Country lives, between “off his rocker” and “stable genius”

    • #36
  7. Bob W Member
    Bob W
    @WBob

    The biggest reason they didn’t do it is probably because it would have required a supermajority in both houses to go along with it, when Trump protested it which he surely would have. So the supermajority requirement is what prevents the 25 th from being abused. 

    • #37
  8. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Gumby Mark (R-Meth Lab of Demo… (View Comment):

    The purpose of the maneuver by McCabe and his cabal was twofold:

    First, to either force out or, failing that, politically hamper the President they thought should not have been elected.

    Second, to ensure their pre-election machinations to prevent the election of Trump would never come to light. They felt confident Trump would lose, and the incoming Clinton Administration and cooperative media ensure democracy would die in darkness. Once Trump won, they were at incredible personal risk of exposure. Something had to be done. This was something.

     

    This is Dan Bongino’s view. 

    • #38
  9. EJHill Podcaster
    EJHill
    @EJHill

    Fred Cole : Sorry. I’m unclear what am I supposed to be sensitive to. You’re invited to explain. 

    The idea that you’re not disturbed by any of this means it is beyond explaining to you. 

    • #39
  10. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    Fred Cole (View Comment):

    I don’t get what the problem is.

    Isn’t that how the 25th Amendment is supposed to work?

    Really?  What was the justification?

    Did they question his what — sanity?  Why?  (They didn’t question 0bama’s.)  Because they didn’t like his dating choices ten years ago?  They just didn’t like the man?  Not good enough in anyone’s eyes.

    Because he was corrupted by Russia?  That was their own frame-up, their own lie.  They knew that wasn’t true.  Because they had successfully instilled a scurrilous and slanderous USG-driven and CIA-overseen and FBI-laundered propaganda smear campaign to the Public through complicity of The Press against the new president and it might be time soon to act?

    There you go.

    • #40
  11. Fred Cole Inactive
    Fred Cole
    @FredCole

    EJHill (View Comment):

    Fred Cole : Sorry. I’m unclear what am I supposed to be sensitive to. You’re invited to explain.

    The idea that you’re not disturbed by any of this means it is beyond explaining to you.

    That’s a cop out. 

     

    • #41
  12. Henry Racette Member
    Henry Racette
    @HenryRacette

    Bob W (View Comment):

    The biggest reason they didn’t do it is probably because it would have required a supermajority in both houses to go along with it, when Trump protested it which he surely would have. So the supermajority requirement is what prevents the 25 th from being abused.

    That is why the effort would ultimately have failed. But I don’t think the Cabinet would have supported such a blatantly political overreach in any case. 

    • #42
  13. Seawriter Contributor
    Seawriter
    @Seawriter

    Fred Cole (View Comment):

    EJHill (View Comment):

    Fred Cole : Sorry. I’m unclear what am I supposed to be sensitive to. You’re invited to explain.

    The idea that you’re not disturbed by any of this means it is beyond explaining to you.

    That’s a cop out.

    Not really. You should wish it were a cop out, but in fact, no it is not.

    • #43
  14. EJHill Podcaster
    EJHill
    @EJHill

    Fred Cole: That’s a cop out. 

    No, Fred. It’s just you. Really. Maybe you and Bill Kristol. 

    • #44
  15. Tom Meyer, Common Citizen Member
    Tom Meyer, Common Citizen
    @tommeyer

    Manny (View Comment):

    Trump may be unconventional and impulsive, but what evidence do you have that he is “off his rocker”?

    Read my comment, @manny. I didn’t say the president was off his rocker: I said that if McCabe thought the president was off his rocker, then it would be appropriate for him to consider approaching the cabinet about it.

    I then, explicitly called McCabe’s judgment into question:

    Tom Meyer, Common Citizen (View Comment):

    Now, whether or not you think McCabe’s & Co’s judgement that the president’s mental competency was warranted or just is another matter entirely.

    • #45
  16. Jager Coolidge
    Jager
    @Jager

    Fred Cole (View Comment):

    EJHill (View Comment):

    Fred Cole : Sorry. I’m unclear what am I supposed to be sensitive to. You’re invited to explain.

    The idea that you’re not disturbed by any of this means it is beyond explaining to you.

    That’s a cop out.

     

    Un-elected bureaucrats did not like the firing of their boss , a guy who served at the will of the President. So they took efforts to try to undo the results of a democratic election.

    Shrugging off these efforts to gain and/or change power in the Country, by government employees, seems like an odd position for any Conservative or Libertarian to defend. 

    • #46
  17. EJHill Podcaster
    EJHill
    @EJHill

    Tom Meyer: I said that if McCabe thought the president was off his rocker, then it would be appropriate for him to consider approaching the cabinet about it.

    No, it still wouldn’t be appropriate. The Director of the FBI is not a cabinet officer. His boss is the Attorney General. If he wants to take it up the chain of command, fine. But he has no right to approach any other member of the cabinet about anything, let alone invoking the 25th Amendment.

    That’s where all the problems began, with the Director usurping powers beyond his scope of power. The FBI is not there to exercise “prosecutorial discretion,” that is up to the prosecutors at the DOJ. It’s not up to him to decide if he can get an indictment. That’s not his job, either.

     

    • #47
  18. Gumby Mark (R-Meth Lab of Demo… Coolidge
    Gumby Mark (R-Meth Lab of Demo…
    @GumbyMark

    This from Michael Brendan Dougherty (definitely not a Trump fan) at NRO:

    I have often wondered if I was wrong to use the phrase “Deep State” before the 2016 election, given the way that the phrase has been abused by some of the president’s supporters, and then mocked by his opponents who shrug off their newfound brinksmanship and disrespect for institutions.

    Well, with this news, I’ve stopped regretting it. I could never have fathomed how self-regarding G-men can be. To believe that the president’s action of relieving one subordinate officer in the executive is evidence in itself of incapacity is just breathtaking. McCabe and his friends really do think that offending them is a declaration of insanity or malice.

    • #48
  19. WI Con Member
    WI Con
    @WICon

    I would argue that citizens on the Right, have been, in general, extremely patient with this situation (being very charitable with that term – more like a soft coup) with the administrative state (the Deep State). 

    Lois Lerner and the other IRS abusers escaped justice. I sincerely hope that there are some ‘perp walks’ coming as I don’t think that patience will last much longer. I really think there will be violence if there isn’t some sense of justice, reform and closure.

    As for ‘fitness for office’ – let’s see Ruth Bader Ginsburg read and generate questions, frame arguments from these briefs she’s supposedly reading(and breath into a mirror). Same for a good deal of the octogenarians in office and on the bench. 

    • #49
  20. Tom Meyer, Common Citizen Member
    Tom Meyer, Common Citizen
    @tommeyer

    EJHill (View Comment):

    No, it still wouldn’t be appropriate. The Director of the FBI is not a cabinet officer. His boss is the Attorney General. If he wants to take it up the chain of command, fine. But he has no right to approach any other member of the cabinet about anything

    You’re probably right about that and I’m happy to concede to that particular point.

    For the record, I’m not convinced that everyone here would agree that contacting the AG was appropriate.

    • #50
  21. Percival Thatcher
    Percival
    @Percival

    @fredcole, the police are supposed to investigate crimes looking for perpetrators, not investigate citizens looking for crimes. The latter is what police states do. I don’t care if the target is Trump, or Obama, or you, Fred. It is wrong. Cops who can’t see that it is wrong have no business being cops.

    • #51
  22. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    WI Con (View Comment):

    I would argue that citizens on the Right, have been, in general, extremely patient with this situation (being very charitable with that term – more like a soft coup) with the administrative state (the Deep State).

    Lois Lerner and the other IRS abusers escaped justice. I sincerely hope that there are some ‘perp walks’ coming as I don’t think that patience will last much longer. I really think there will be violence if there isn’t some sense of justice, reform and closure.

    As for ‘fitness for office’ – let’s see Ruth Bader Ginsburg read and generate questions, frame arguments from these briefs she’s supposedly reading(and breath into a mirror). Same for a good deal of the octogenarians in office and on the bench.

    Well done.

    • #52
  23. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    WI Con (View Comment):
    I really think there will be violence if there isn’t some sense of justice, reform and closure.

    I think you’re saying citizens on the Right might do violence, but I think it’s the other way around.  The violence will be the direct result of the loss of confidence in the rule of law, and will be perpetrated by those on the Left who have been marginally riotous but restrained by common sense and the last vestiges of social stigmatization.  Once there is a perception that most law is ineffectual and that the government in general and law enforcement in particular don’t care, the leash will fall off and violence by Leftists will increase against the WMO and society in general.  (White Male Oppressors)

    • #53
  24. Tom Meyer, Common Citizen Member
    Tom Meyer, Common Citizen
    @tommeyer

    Gumby Mark (R-Meth Lab of Demo… (View Comment):

    This from Michael Brendan Dougherty (definitely not a Trump fan) at NRO:

    Well, with this news, I’ve stopped regretting it. I could never have fathomed how self-regarding G-men can be. To believe that the president’s action of relieving one subordinate officer in the executive is evidence in itself of incapacity is just breathtaking. McCabe and his friends really do think that offending them is a declaration of insanity or malice.

    Stipulating again that I do not find McCabe or Comey’s I’m-Just-an-Honest-Disinterested-Lawman routine convincing — and don’t think the 25th amendment was or is justified — I think MBD is really downplaying Trump’s behavior during that episode.

    • #54
  25. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    “Once there is a perception that most law is ineffectual and that the government in general and law enforcement in particular don’t care, the leash will fall off and violence by Leftists will increase against the WMO and society in general. (White Male Oppressors)”

    To extend the thought in my comment above, I tend to think that, just like abortion has coarsened the public soul to death and dismemberment and to human life in general, so will the continuing, frequent, and increasing ignoring of major crimes by government officials coarsen the public soul to crime and violence and to all law in general.

    • #55
  26. Stad Coolidge
    Stad
    @Stad

    Fred Cole (View Comment):

    I don’t get what the problem is.

    Isn’t that how the 25th Amendment is supposed to work?

    The problem is it’s an Executive Branch agency discussing the possibility of “lobbying” the Veep and Cabinet to remove the President.  If anything, it reeks of treason . . .

    • #56
  27. Lazy_Millennial Inactive
    Lazy_Millennial
    @LazyMillennial

    EJHill (View Comment):

    Tom Meyer: I said that if McCabe thought the president was off his rocker, then it would be appropriate for him to consider approaching the cabinet about it.

    No, it still wouldn’t be appropriate. The Director of the FBI is not a cabinet officer. His boss is the Attorney General. If he wants to take it up the chain of command, fine. But he has no right to approach any other member of the cabinet about anything, let alone invoking the 25th Amendment.

    That’s where all the problems began, with the Director usurping powers beyond his scope of power. The FBI is not there to exercise “prosecutorial discretion,” that is up to the prosecutors at the DOJ. It’s not up to him to decide if he can get an indictment. That’s not his job, either.

    While the FBI usurping powers is definitely a problem, I have no problem with the director of the FBI lobbying other cabinet officials about anything, even the 25th Amendment. In rare circumstances, this would be necessary- as an example, if it was obvious the AG was blackmailing the President, or vice-versa. The other 999 times out of 1000, this would be an important feedback mechanism for the President and AG, as the lobbied cabinet members would tell them, “hey, the FBI director is running around behind your back”, and then the FBI director would be fired. Like free speech, it’s a power that’s mostly useful for identifying idiots. 

    • #57
  28. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Stad (View Comment):

    Fred Cole (View Comment):

    I don’t get what the problem is.

    Isn’t that how the 25th Amendment is supposed to work?

    The problem is it’s an Executive Branch agency discussing the possibility of “lobbying” the Veep and Cabinet to remove the President. If anything, it reeks of treason . . .

    Yep

    • #58
  29. Misthiocracy secretly Member
    Misthiocracy secretly
    @Misthiocracy

    Stad (View Comment):

    Fred Cole (View Comment):

    I don’t get what the problem is.

    Isn’t that how the 25th Amendment is supposed to work?

    The problem is it’s an Executive Branch agency discussing the possibility of “lobbying” the Veep and Cabinet to remove the President. If anything, it reeks of treason . . .

    Not according to how treason is defined in the US constitution.

    • #59
  30. DonG Coolidge
    DonG
    @DonG

    Fred Cole (View Comment):

    You would think a Libertarian would be particularly sensitive to this but apparently his NeverTrumpism is blinding.

    Sorry. I’m unclear what am I supposed to be sensitive to. You’re invited to explain. 

    There are no Libertarians that are NeverTrump.

    • #60
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.