Removing Trump from Office Attempt 2.0?

Region:
Theme:

In December 2019, Pelosi-led House Dems showed contempt for the rule of law.

Two articles of impeachment to oust Trump from office were spurious.

Accusing him of abuse of power, they falsely claimed he sought foreign interference from Ukraine in the US 2020 presidential election.

At the time, Ukrainian President Zelensky debunked the accusation, publicly saying there was no Trump blackmail threat, no quid pro quo, no conspiracy, nothing discussed about withholding US aid for political reasons.

A second phony charge claimed obstruction of Congress, falsely saying he “directed (an) unprecedented, categorical, and indiscriminate defiance of subpoenas issued by the House of Representatives pursuant to its sole Power of Impeachment (sic).”

No evidence proved it. Trump’s unwillingness to participate in the sham process did not obstruct Congress.

At the time, Law Professor Jonathan Turley said: “You could impeach every living president” by standards Dems used to impeach Trump.

The unacceptable action set a disturbing standard that may be used against future US presidents by either wing of the one-party state against the other.

A House member for nearly three decades Pelosi supports domestic and geopolitical issues across the board that just societies abhor.

The Center for Responsive Politics estimated her household wealth at over $114 million — ranking her 6th among super-wealthy House members.

On domestic issues alone, she supported neoliberal harshness on ordinary Americans throughout Obama’s tenure and after Trump took office.

She backs increasingly unaffordable marketplace medicine — by far the world’s most expensive, making it unaffordable for millions of Americans.

Throughout her time in office, she’s been beholden to powerful monied interests at the expense of public health and welfare.

Since taking office in January 2017, she wanted Trump ousted for defeating media darling Hillary.

On Thursday, she threatened to try ousting Trump again on spurious grounds, saying:

Trump “is…in an altered state right now (sic). The disassociation from reality would be funny if it weren’t so deadly (sic).”

“We’re going to be talking about the 25th Amendment.”

It states that when US presidents are “unable to discharge the powers and duties of (their) office…such powers and duties shall be discharged by the vice president as acting president.”

The president pro tempore of the Senate and House speaker are next in line.

Pelosi is involved in preparing House legislation to create a commission that will decide if Trump is too ill to perform his duties.

Pulling this off is no simple task, Trump sure to challenge it — in which case a two-thirds congressional majority would be required for a transition of power to new leadership.

Republicans would likely reject the idea, a coup attempt by other means, a hugely dangerous precedent if succeeds.

Trump slammed Pelosi, tweeting:

“Crazy Nancy is the one who should be under observation. They don’t call her Crazy for nothing!”

When GW Bush was president and hugely unpopular in his second term, she said impeaching him was “off the table,” adding:

“I took (impeachment) off the table a long time ago. You can’t talk about impeachment unless you have the facts, and you can’t have the facts unless you have cooperation from the” White House.

Having none didn’t deter her earlier attempt to remove Trump by impeachment.

It surely won’t if she tries removing Trump from office for dubious health reasons.

As earlier explained, many past US presidents were ill in office, some seriously.

None were replaced for this reason. None voluntarily or involuntarily stepped down for ill health.

California’s 8th congressional district voters would best be served by voting for House representation to serve their interests over Pelosi’s consistent record otherwise.

GOP Rep. Mark Green tweeted:

“I wouldn’t put it past @SpeakerPelosi to stage a coup” attempt.

“She has already weaponized impeachment. What’s to keep her from weaponizing the 25th amendment? We need a new Speaker!”

Throughout her time in office — especially as House speaker — she’s been a loyal guardian of wealth and power interests exclusively over what matters most to most people.

*

Note to readers: please click the share buttons below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Award-winning author Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at [email protected]. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG)

His new book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”

http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html

Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com.

Featured image is from Massoud Nayeri


Comment on Global Research Articles on our Facebook page

Become a Member of Global Research


Articles by: Stephen Lendman

About the author:

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at [email protected] His new book as editor and contributor is titled "Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III." http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com. Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network. It airs three times weekly: live on Sundays at 1PM Central time plus two prerecorded archived programs.

Disclaimer: The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article. The Centre of Research on Globalization grants permission to cross-post Global Research articles on community internet sites as long the source and copyright are acknowledged together with a hyperlink to the original Global Research article. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: [email protected]

www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from the copyright owner.

For media inquiries: [email protected]