Republicans Call For Biden’s Removal By 25th Amendment After Hur Report

[DKW 86 7,426]

https://www.forbes.com/sites/anafaguy/2024/02/08/republicans-call-for-bidens-removal-by-25th-amendment-after-hur-report-what-it-is-and-why-that-wont-happen/?sh=1e51c2974ca7

It will not happen. Just look at the prereqs on the 25th. It is basically meant to never be enforced. You cant get 2/3 of either house to agree on anything other than a pay raise.

On Thursday, Special Counsel Robert Hur released the Justice Department's report that found the president “WILLFULLY” retained classified materials while a private citizen. In the report, Hur was critical of Biden’s memory and cited numerous examples of Biden forgetting certain facts. For example, the former president could not recall what years he was vice president, according to the report. That memory issue, along with other findings, led the special counsel not to charge Biden criminally, in part because he believed Biden’s memory problems would have made it difficult to convince a jury he intentionally engaged in wrongdoing.

KEY BACKGROUND

The calls for invoking the 25th Amendment are among mounting criticism from Republicans, including former President Donald Trump, about Biden’s mental well-being given the report’s findings. But the calls are unlikely to be more than partisan chatter as invoking the 25th Amendment would require the support of the vice president and of Biden’s Democratic cabinet. The group would have to agree he is “unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office,” according to Section 4 of the 25th Amendment. From there it’s an even steeper uphill battle for Biden to be removed from office. Two-thirds majorities of both chambers would then have to vote and approve of stripping the president of his powers.

TANGENT

Similar calls were made for the 25th Amendment to be invoked when Trump was in office, but those calls came from within the former president’s administration. In the days after the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol, there were reports that members of the Trump administration were considering invoking the 25th Amendment to remove Trump from office.

Edited February 11 by DKW 86

[AUDub 11,153]

Republicans call for Biden’s removal after he says anything at all.  What else is new. 

Edited February 10 by AUDub

[aubiefifty 16,807]

yawns

[I_M4_AU 7,857]

Republicans pounce.

[DKW 86 7,426]

12 hours ago, aubiefifty said:

yawns

 

21 hours ago, AUDub said:

Republicans call for Biden’s removal after he says anything at all.  What else is new. 

I was gently reminding EVERYONE that AGAIN, just like the "Border Bill" is just a lot of political masturbation from BOTH PARTIES. When the Dems wanted to use the 25th Amendment against trump, they would have had to get:

1) Pence and trump's cabinet to agree that he needed to be removed (NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN)

2) and have then gotten 2/3s of both houses to agree to remove him as well. (NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN)

Of these two items, The DEMS and The Reps were/are just masturbating into the wind. THIS WAS NEVER GOING TO COME INTO BEING EITHER TIME, with trump or Biden. 

Just like the "Border Bill" it is just a delusional fantasy on both parties trying to throw Red Meat to their crazies. ZERO Chance either was ever going to happen. ZERO.

Just more time-wasting by both of these piles of excrement and their followers.

Edited February 11 by DKW 86

[creed 1,640]

It's not event going to take the 25th amendment. I've been noticing a slight, but slow, change in the media concerning Biden. The media is starting to expose issues with Biden and not protecting him. This, on top of the fact that Biden will get hammered in any debate, will seal the deal with the 20-40 age group, and Biden will get beat badly this time around even by the other guy who stole my documents.

Of course this is my opinion, so take it for what it's worth. 😉

Edited February 10 by creed

[auburnatl1 4,965]

Biden is the one democrat trump  might have a prayer to beat and they want to try to impeach him. Because trying to impeach and/or eating their own is what they do. It’s actually all they know how to do. 
 

[SaltyTiger 7,816]

1 hour ago, aubiefifty said:

yawns

Me to. How’s the weather in Anniston? I am in NOLA for Mardi Gras clouds but 75 today. Last summer drought caused crawfish shortage. To expensive when you find them.

[aubiefifty 16,807]

1 hour ago, SaltyTiger said:

Me to. How’s the weather in Anniston? I am in NOLA for Mardi Gras clouds but 75 today. Last summer drought caused crawfish shortage. To expensive when you find them.

66 and cloudy at the moment.

[AU9377 4,967]

House Republicans fall into 3 groups.  The first is a small group of honorable men and women who feel out of place in their own party.  The second is a small group of yes men and women that simply do what the third group tells them to do and otherwise stays below the fray.  The third is made up of people that use words like freedom and phrases like "support the 2nd amendment" and "make America great again" that would rather dissolve the entire government than to work with people they consider to be America hating socialists.  Most of them couldn't find the constitution in a public library, but they yell and scream like no other members of Congress.

This third group will do and say anything to advance themselves.  They take their marching orders from Fox and OAN, along with a healthy dose of internet garbage and Facebook.  Above all else, they advance whatever their cult leader is focused on and they defend him as though they are sister wives in an underground Mormon tribe.

[aubaseball 2,625]

2 hours ago, AU9377 said:

House Republicans fall into 3 groups.  The first is a small group of honorable men and women who feel out of place in their own party.  The second is a small group of yes men and women that simply do what the third group tells them to do and otherwise stays below the fray.  The third is made up of people that use words like freedom and phrases like "support the 2nd amendment" and "make America great again" that would rather dissolve the entire government than to work with people they consider to be America hating socialists.  Most of them couldn't find the constitution in a public library, but they yell and scream like no other members of Congress.

This third group will do and say anything to advance themselves.  They take their marching orders from Fox and OAN, along with a healthy dose of internet garbage and Facebook.  Above all else, they advance whatever their cult leader is focused on and they defend him as though they are sister wives in an underground Mormon tribe.

The left/progressives/dem’s love to spew all this stuff but never reflect on what their side tries to do.   Chaos at border, sanctuary cities, no bail, soft on theft, let children decide whether they should start hormone therapy and on and on.   
If you can’t see the hypocrisy in all this, you are the problem.   And I’m speaking from the point of view, that both sides are equally to blame.   

[AU9377 4,967]

1 hour ago, aubaseball said:

The left/progressives/dem’s love to spew all this stuff but never reflect on what their side tries to do.   Chaos at border, sanctuary cities, no bail, soft on theft, let children decide whether they should start hormone therapy and on and on.   
If you can’t see the hypocrisy in all this, you are the problem.   And I’m speaking from the point of view, that both sides are equally to blame.   

There are crazies in both parties.  That said, the things you list are basically talking points that get exaggerated by right wing media for the purpose of polarizing the electorate.  For example, you mention "no bail".... Not requiring bail for certain offenses is actually one of the easiest, most sensible way to handle local jail over crowding and removing the appearance of a two tiered criminal justice system.  The only real group that benefits from most bail requirements are the bondsmen.  That isn't to say that those that commit violent crime should be released immediately.  Those are two distinctly different topics.  What happens with the topic is that the right makes it an all or nothing argument.  It isn't.  Adults should be able to discuss a topic and come to a solution.  Polarization prevents that.

[aubaseball 2,625]

27 minutes ago, AU9377 said:

There are crazies in both parties.  That said, the things you list are basically talking points that get exaggerated by right wing media for the purpose of polarizing the electorate.  For example, you mention "no bail".... Not requiring bail for certain offenses is actually one of the easiest, most sensible way to handle local jail over crowding and removing the appearance of a two tiered criminal justice system.  The only real group that benefits from most bail requirements are the bondsmen.  That isn't to say that those that commit violent crime should be released immediately.  Those are two distinctly different topics.  What happens with the topic is that the right makes it an all or nothing argument.  It isn't.  Adults should be able to discuss a topic and come to a solution.  Polarization prevents that.

See, you did just the thing I’m talking about.   It call concerns that some people have, “just talking points by Fox”.    When people are actually concerned about the border, crime and kids.   What may be nothing to you, might be something to someone else.   But it’s people like you that causally dismiss it as “talking points “.   The border isn’t a talking point.    Crime isn’t a talking point, I don’t care what crime it is.    

[DKW 86 7,426]

2 hours ago, AU9377 said:

There are crazies in both parties.  That said, the things you list are basically talking points that get exaggerated by right wing media for the purpose of polarizing the electorate.  For example, you mention "no bail".... Not requiring bail for certain offenses is actually one of the easiest, most sensible way to handle local jail over crowding and removing the appearance of a two tiered criminal justice system.  The only real group that benefits from most bail requirements are the bondsmen.  That isn't to say that those that commit violent crime should be released immediately.  Those are two distinctly different topics.  What happens with the topic is that the right makes it an all or nothing argument.  It isn't.  Adults should be able to discuss a topic and come to a solution.  Polarization prevents that.

https://katv.com/news/nation-world/study-points-to-connection-between-cashless-bail-and-rise-in-crime-recitivism-repeat-offenders-violent-crimes-violent-crimes-involving-repeat-offenders-prompt-questions-about-sentencing-bail-reform-criminal-justice-system-jails-prisons-marshall-project

But others see a connection between the new policy and a rise in crime, as noted in a new study by the Yolo County California District Attorney’s office. It found that the rate of recidivism was far higher for those who paid no bail versus those who did pay.

"In this study, individuals released on zero bail were subsequently rearrested for a total of 163% more crimes than individuals released on bail," it read.

[auburnatl1 4,965]

I may be giving gop leadership too much credit for…. thinking. But the one non scorch and burn reason to try to remove Biden is that it’d bring Kamala to the plate. Who’d be awkward to replace at the convention and is one of the few people in North America less popular than Trump or Biden.

Edited February 11 by auburnatl1

[AU9377 4,967]

2 hours ago, DKW 86 said:

https://katv.com/news/nation-world/study-points-to-connection-between-cashless-bail-and-rise-in-crime-recitivism-repeat-offenders-violent-crimes-violent-crimes-involving-repeat-offenders-prompt-questions-about-sentencing-bail-reform-criminal-justice-system-jails-prisons-marshall-project

But others see a connection between the new policy and a rise in crime, as noted in a new study by the Yolo County California District Attorney’s office. It found that the rate of recidivism was far higher for those who paid no bail versus those who did pay.

"In this study, individuals released on zero bail were subsequently rearrested for a total of 163% more crimes than individuals released on bail," it read.

The difficulty in comparing the two groups is that the groups have a multitude of other factors that impact recidivism.  We also have to consider the number of people held until trial that are exonerated and due solely to their economic hardship remained in custody for periods of 1 to 3 years.

[AU9377 4,967]

4 hours ago, aubaseball said:

See, you did just the thing I’m talking about.   It call concerns that some people have, “just talking points by Fox”.    When people are actually concerned about the border, crime and kids.   What may be nothing to you, might be something to someone else.   But it’s people like you that causally dismiss it as “talking points “.   The border isn’t a talking point.    Crime isn’t a talking point, I don’t care what crime it is.    

The thing that makes an issue a talking point is the refusal to work toward a solution and instead using the issue to exploit a partisan divide for the purpose of perceived political gain.  You have to first accept that people you disagree with have the same basic wants and desires as you. It doesn't matter if someone is wealthy, poor, liberal or conservative, black, white, Asian or a combination of all of the above, everyone wants to live in a safe community where their children can get an education and they have an opportunity to better themselves.  Everyone wants health care for the sick and at some point a second chance if and when they make bad decisions.

Without those things and an overall quality of life that is, at the very least, on par with our friends and allies around the world, what is the American dream that military contractors become billionaires 1,000 times over making weapons to protect?

[DKW 86 7,426]

10 hours ago, AU9377 said:

The difficulty in comparing the two groups is that the groups have a multitude of other factors that impact recidivism.  We also have to consider the number of people held until trial that are exonerated and due solely to their economic hardship remained in custody for periods of 1 to 3 years.

That still doesnt change the stat one iota. That others are improperly held doesn't change the fact that cashless bail is returning an absurdly high rate of active criminals back to do more crimes to more victims.

[homersapien 11,388]

15 hours ago, aubaseball said:

See, you did just the thing I’m talking about.   It call concerns that some people have, “just talking points by Fox”.    When people are actually concerned about the border, crime and kids.   What may be nothing to you, might be something to someone else.   But it’s people like you that causally dismiss it as “talking points “.   The border isn’t a talking point.    Crime isn’t a talking point, I don’t care what crime it is.    

You suffer from simplistic and superficial thinking. ("Talking points thinking")

Before you speak so definitively and generally, please do a little research and educate yourself to the actual facts at issue.  It's not as simple as you think.

For example, on bail reform:

https://endmoneybond.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/stateofinjustice_r4.pdf

https://endmoneybond.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/stateofinjustice_r4.pdf

https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/facts-bail-reform-and-crime-rates-new-york-state

And so on.....  Just search "Bail reform" for an extensive listingof articles and/or analysis on the subject. 

 

Edited February 11 by homersapien

[homersapien 11,388]

42 minutes ago, DKW 86 said:

That still doesnt change the stat one iota. That others are improperly held doesn't change the fact that cashless bail is returning an absurdly high rate of active criminals back to do more crimes to more victims.

First an "Emergency Bail Release" tactic - in the midst of a pandemic - is not a serious policy change by definition.  

Secondly, same response as I gave aubaseball.  (See above.)

Come back when you are ready to argue that rational bail policies - instead of the historical status quo - are a bad idea.

Edited February 11 by homersapien

[DKW 86 7,426]

3 hours ago, homersapien said:

First an "Emergency Bail Release" tactic - in the midst of a pandemic - is not a serious policy change by definition.  

Secondly, same response as I gave aubaseball.  (See above.)

Come back when you are ready to argue that rational bail policies - instead of the historical status quo - are a bad idea.

1) Cashless bail had NOTHING to do with the pandemic. Chesa Boudin ran on it YEARS before the pandemic.  

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/san-francisco-eliminates-cash-bail-all-criminal-cases-2020-01-23/

2) Chesa Boudin and "irrational bail policies" were ousted in a recall election. The democratic Americans fully rejected the failed cashless bail policy.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/san-francisco-eliminates-cash-bail-all-criminal-cases-2020-01-23/

Bro, put down the crack pipe of partisan narratives and embrace cold stark reality.

Edited February 11 by DKW 86

[homersapien 11,388]

16 minutes ago, DKW 86 said:

1) Cashless bail had NOTHING to do with the pandemic. Chesa Boudin ran on itYEARS before the pandemic.  

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/san-francisco-eliminates-cash-bail-all-criminal-cases-2020-01-23/

2) Chesa Boudin and "irrational bail policies" were ousted in a recall election. The democratic Americans fully rejected the failed cashless bail policy.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/san-francisco-eliminates-cash-bail-all-criminal-cases-2020-01-23/

Bro, put down the crack pipe of partisan narratives and embrace cold stark reality.

Just reading from the article you posted, fool. 

(That's why it was in quotes, dummy!)

If you had followed up the primary reference in that hopelessly inadequate newspaper article, this was the "study" it was written about:

https://yoloda.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/Emergency-Bail-Analysis.pdf

 

Edited February 11 by homersapien

[aubaseball 2,625]

3 hours ago, homersapien said:

You suffer from simplistic and superficial thinking. ("Talking points thinking")

Before you speak so definitively and generally, please do a little research and educate yourself to the actual facts at issue.  It's not as simple as you think.

For example, on bail reform:

https://endmoneybond.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/stateofinjustice_r4.pdf

https://endmoneybond.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/stateofinjustice_r4.pdf

https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/facts-bail-reform-and-crime-rates-new-york-state

And so on.....  Just search "Bail reform" for an extensive listingof articles and/or analysis on the subject. 

 

Studies/research are great for academic study but fail to take into account that people choose to be criminals.   It’s a choice to steal and what’s currently going on is organized criminal behavior through social media platforms and cellphone capabilities.  
I’m not even going to get into what is happening at the border and the money being spent by the government to house these people.   

I don’t need to read a study when someone is caught breaking the law and turned loose with no restrictions.   It’s just common sense to hold someone that breaks the law accountable somehow, whether that’s jail time or a bond.   Maybe that’s something that you don’t care about in holding someone accountable, but I’m on the other side of that issue.   

[homersapien 11,388]

20 minutes ago, aubaseball said:

Studies/research are great for academic study but fail to take into account that people choose to be criminals.   It’s a choice to steal and what’s currently going on is organized criminal behavior through social media platforms and cellphone capabilities.  
I’m not even going to get into what is happening at the border and the money being spent by the government to house these people.   

I don’t need to read a study when someone is caught breaking the law and turned loose with no restrictions.   It’s just common sense to hold someone that breaks the law accountable somehow, whether that’s jail time or a bond.   Maybe that’s something that you don’t care about in holding someone accountable, but I’m on the other side of that issue.   

It's fine to hold people accountable, but that doesn't include a default policy by the justice system for putting people into hopeless personal situations from which they literally cannot emerge. And this before they have been found guilty of anything, except for perhaps poverty.

And you don't "need to read a study" because you have no empathy to people who are susceptible to such "Catch 22" treatment by institutional judicial systems. You are content to simply let the cycle run.

Finally, "academic" studies are the initial catalysts for creating a more humanistic society.  It's sociological science.

 

 

Edited February 11 by homersapien

[DKW 86 7,426]

9 hours ago, homersapien said:

It's fine to hold people accountable, but that doesn't include a default policy by the justice system for putting people into hopeless personal situations from which they literally cannot emerge. And this before they have been found guilty of anything, except for perhaps poverty.

And you don't "need to read a study" because you have no empathy to people who are susceptible to such "Catch 22" treatment by institutional judicial systems. You are content to simply let the cycle run.

Finally, "academic" studies are the initial catalysts for creating a more humanistic society.  It's sociological science.

I see no that facts and studies mean nothing to you versus the partisan narrative. When people profess that they support cashless bail years before the pandemic and then get elected, and said policy fails so badly that they are recalled and ousted in just two years of implementing said policy, then maybe the result of that policy is "intuitively obvious to the most casual observer" but somehow not yourself...