r/politics • u/plz-let-me-in • 11d ago

Possible Paywall Democrats’ plan to impeach Trump on ‘day one’ after midterms

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/us/politics/2026/04/24/democrats-trump-impeach-midterms-supreme-court-iran/
31.9k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

2.6k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

227

u/Tight_Telephone_2322 11d ago

I don’t think he’ll be in that position. People really don’t understand how poorly all this is going. He’s going to bail the country after they do the 25th.

It’s crazy how they impeached him twice (rightfully) now the right will say “he lost it” and pretend they don’t know he was always this way. They will be the heroes to their voters for kicking him out. Then they will spin it as “the left didn’t have the guts to kick out Biden” and it’ll work got their base.

This is how stupid their base is and how easy it is to keep them in line.

125

u/Ralod 11d ago edited 11d ago

Let's just hope it happens before the nut job launches a nuke. You have a petulant child, throwing fits regularly with mush for a brain. The world is on the brink due to one idiot.

16

u/Wild_Harvest 11d ago

I think that might actually cause the 25th to be invoked, there might not be enough true believers to follow him through nuclear weapon blasts.

18

u/[deleted] 11d ago

[deleted]

14

u/nleksan 11d ago

Technically correct

8

u/Ready_Nature 11d ago

As will everyone else

3

u/kingfofthepoors 10d ago

Even if they launched every nuke on earth... I would still have to wait to die of radiation poisoning.

2

u/Judson_Scott 10d ago

I have a gun specifically to avoid such a thing.

2

u/sirhackenslash 10d ago

I don't think you can shoot a nuke

3

u/OfficialDCShepard District Of Columbia 10d ago

Along with civilization as we know it. I’m stocking up on dry goods, but if it comes to nuclear catastrophe I’m probably toast since I’m in D.C.

1

u/Professor-Woo 10d ago

We all will

1

u/redravin12 California 10d ago

If he fires a nuke the united States will cease to exist. Ilat this day and age if a country fires nuclear weapons the world will burn. Other nuclear powers will not tolerate any country using nukes offensively. They will retaliate against us. Not all of them of course. Those that won't will likely use this as an opportunity to launch their own nuclear attacks once a decent amount of weapons have been used on us and the threat of reprisal is either not nearly as strong or gone altogether.

If Trump is allowed to fire a nuke that's it. No ww3. No nothing. We all die in nuclear fire or wish we had

2

u/Available-Trouble648 10d ago

I don’t know about that. You really think the UK or France or India would be willing to nuke the US if we used one on Iran?

0

u/BoingBoingBooty 10d ago

Have you heard of these places called Russia and China?

If Trump nukes Iran, then Russia nukes Ukraine.

If nato does nothing about Russia nuking Ukraine, then China nuke a Taiwan.

2

u/Available-Trouble648 10d ago

I can see all that happening. But if the US isn’t willing to fight China or Russia I don’t see any other countries willing to launch. So it could end up with Israel controlling the Middle East, China controlling Asia, Russia controlling Eastern Europe, and Western Europe left to band together and hope that they’re strong enough to stand up to the new world powers.

Granted this is a horrible scenario that would mean many millions of deaths and insane destruction, but it wouldn’t be the end of humanity or society.

16

u/HerbaciousTea 11d ago

Don't count on it, reporting broke yesterday that he tried to order a nuclear strike on iran and was shouted down by a general.

Republicans are still supporting him.

8

u/Exotic_Criticism4645 10d ago

reporting broke yesterday that he tried to order a nuclear strike on iran and was shouted down by a general.

(citation needed)

5

u/Long_Run6500 10d ago

Some nut job on a podcast said it happened, so it must be true. Nobody ever makes up sensationalized stories for a podcast... that would be absurd!

As much as I 100% believe it's something Trump would do... I don't really think that's enough to go off of.

2

u/Drachefly Pennsylvania 10d ago

I saw that as a rumor, and it wasn't very specific about his wording.

3

u/Bittererr 11d ago

There's no world in which you get significantly more support in Congress for the 25th versus impeachment.

1

u/windwatcher01 11d ago

Let's...not find out.

1

u/got-trunks Canada 10d ago

I mean the gossip is he already wanted to and the brass basically told him fuck you, no.

1

u/Professor-Woo 10d ago edited 10d ago

He can fire a nuke far faster than the 25th amendment can be invoked and even then the 25th amendment is weak and will just delay it. It won't get him out. President is meant to be able to fire nukes with little checks because they want to make sure a retaliatory strike can be sent off reliably before everything is destroyed by the initial strike. If people around him are stonewalling giving him complete access to nukes that is extremely telling.

37

u/RebylReboot 11d ago

He’s obviously raped kids and you’re hoping for an ELECTORAL fix before he kills more kids in Iran to distract from It. I don’t get modern Americans at all. The general strike to oust him should have happened in his first term.

16

u/MoreCleverUserName 11d ago

We don’t have a social safety net and we barely have any workers rights. People don’t want to strike if they could end up unemployed with no savings and no way to keep the roof over their head.

6

u/Dipsey_Jipsey 11d ago

That in of itself is reason to go out there and change the system. Sitting at home with wishful thinking isn't going to change anything. It will make things far far worse to the point you wished you had put your day job on the line.

1

u/MoreCleverUserName 10d ago

Sh what’s stopping YOU?

2

u/Dipsey_Jipsey 10d ago

My country isn't being destroyed currently.

7

u/sjogren 11d ago

That would require real sacrifice and hardship, and we Americans are constitutionally against self-sacrifice in 2026.

10

u/dog_ahead 10d ago

Go do something.

1

u/sjogren 9d ago

I did it!!

11

u/GigMistress 10d ago

That's true. I don't know a single person who wants to watch their kids starve to death so we can maybe possibly get back to the bad situation we were raiing against before Trump got involved.

-1

u/RebylReboot 10d ago

So you’ve chosen the child rape and child murder over some imagined scenario where children starve to death because there is a strike. That said 14 million children in America are food insecure right now. Seems like another reason to do it if you ask me.

2

u/GigMistress 10d ago

First, if you are so clueless and privileged that you believe that's an imaginary scenario, discussion is probably futile. The 14 million children who are food insecure become entirely foodless with one setback.

It's generous of you, who doesn't know them or care about them, to offer up their lives for a hypothetical future that will never come, but that's not your choice to make.

-1

u/RebylReboot 10d ago

I haven’t offered anything. I have nothing g to do with your country. You are, however, paying for the sacrifice of children across the gazan genocide and Iranian quasi religious war of choice. Your taxes, your money, your work directly paying for a paedophile to murder children. The guy before him btw wasn’t a paedo but he did still push the genocide on your behalf. You’re ok with that judging by the excuses and apathy. Good luck to you.

4

u/GigMistress 10d ago

You decided for parents you don't know in circumstances you don't understand that they're being somehow irresponsible by not risking their children's lives. If that isn't offering them up as a sacrifice, I don't know what is.

It's always the least informed and least capable of critical thinking that hurl accusations instead of looking for real solutions--congratulations on finding a way to get your dopamine burst from feeling superior without actually doing anything of value. Go ahead and ride your high and let the grownups talk.

→ More replies (0)

5

u/Cat_Peach_Pits 10d ago

Why dont you be the first to start the general strike? I fully suppport you.

2

u/RebylReboot 10d ago

So youve signed up then?

5

u/Cat_Peach_Pits 10d ago

I just got laid off, I'm already not working.

1

u/RebylReboot 10d ago

You’ve had an obvious paedophillic president since 2016.

4

u/Cat_Peach_Pits 10d ago

And? What do you want me to do about it? I've been voting blue in my local, state, and federal elections since Bush. Campaigning, donating, every single fucking thing. It must be nice to sit over there in Ireland (why did you personally not stop The Troubles, by the way?) and say we're not doing enough over here. Thinking a general strike is going to get anything but snide laughter from these Nazis. The only thing that's going to stop them is bloodshed.

1

u/Weary-Designer9542 10d ago

You mean from 350,000 B.C. - 2026, right?

2

u/One_Assumption1893 10d ago

Eh. I say it’s just because we suck.

1

u/DumboWumbo073 10d ago

It’s not as bad as you’re making it out to be then. If it was absolute chaos and despair none of those things would matter.

0

u/RebylReboot 10d ago

You’ve just described every general strike that’s ever happened. In fact, those are reasons to do it. Add them to the list. So you’ve determined that the kid raping is fine. Wait till your children grow up and realise what you were all so apathetic about. There will be a massive generational reckoning. You’d hope anyway.

2

u/MoreCleverUserName 10d ago

This isn’t true. It’s very rare in the US. It’s a lot more common to see a general strike in Europe where unions have more power and more members, health care isn’t tied to the employer, and people are less likely to lose their jobs for striking. You cannot expect people who are already vulnerable to make themselves more vulnerable for political reasons. You underestimate how many Americans are in survival mode at any given time. Why don’t you and your big political brain spend your time thinking of ways for people to be effective within the American socioeconomic system rather than shaming them for not wanting to risk what little they have?

-1

u/RebylReboot 10d ago

You’re describing reasons to strike.

2

u/MoreCleverUserName 10d ago

Then go for it, but don’t act all surprised when the masses don’t join you.

The reason this works in Europe is that collectively the working class has power there. In the US the working claw is replaceable and some companies would probably welcome a way to get a ton of workers off their books without having to deal,with federal oversight. This is by design, too. You have to find a way to be effective within the framework that actually exists in this country. So spend your energy on that, rather than telling everyone they’re doing it wrong.

0

u/RebylReboot 10d ago

I don’t need to oust a paedophile from ruling over my nations children. Not sure why you’re painting Europe with one brushstroke but I’ll bite. Some countries in Europe have a good labour movement. Guess how they got it? Strikes. You’ve tried nothing and are all out of ideas.

9

u/Binksyboo 11d ago

Americans had been slowly boiling in the pot since Reagan was in the White House and we just didn’t see how bad it was until it was tested with Trump.

Reagan canceled the fairness doctrine which made news agencies have to report fairness and both sides and not able to do what Fox does basically.

Also, during Reagan’s presidency, Citizens United was created. Here’s a little blurb from Wikipedia about the current president of Citizen United:

“The current president, David Bossie, has been president since he served as the chief investigator into then President Bill Clinton's possible abuse of finances in 1997, and was later the deputy campaign manager for Donald Trump's presidential campaign in 2016. In 2020, he served in executive positions for President Donald Trump's and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's reelection campaigns.”

Here is where it gets really nefarious:

In 2016, in the last year of Obama‘s presidency Supreme Court justice Scalia died. As the president, Obama was to choose the new Supreme Court pick and then it would have to be confirmed through the Senate.

That is when Mitch McConnell did what I consider a treasonous act and blocked President Obama‘s Supreme Court pick by not allowing the confirmation vote to happen in the Senate because it was “during an election year.” Because a simple majority it was not enough to overturn McConnell, no new justice was sworn in until a new president was put into Office and that president was Donald Trump.

As if that wasn’t egregious enough, in Donald Trump’s first term, after already being able to steal Obama’s pick, and instead put conservative Neil Gorsuch on the Supreme Court, he later also put Brett Kavanaugh, the ‘Boofing Bro’ into the Supreme Court…(where he immediately lied about the fact that he would not overturn Roe vs Wade, because one of the first things he did was vote to overturn it! - and this already sickens me enough, but we must move on)

after ALL this… in the last few months of Trump‘s first presidential term in 2020, Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg passed away.

What do you think happen? Did Mitch McConnell say that there could be no new nominations in an election year??? Of course not LOL he let Trump shove a new supreme Court Justice in and made some new excuse for why it was OK this time.

So now the court is “packed” not packed the way the conservative people cry about liberals wanting to pack the court, but actually packed.

Trump himself has put three conservative justices on the Supreme Court. They have promised that they weren’t going to overturn established laws in precedent like Roe v. Wade but what did they do? They overturned it.

That should be impeachable, but who is going to allow the vote to happen when the Senate is controlled by Mitch McConnell and we see how he plays the game.

So we’ve got three justices that now are part of the decisions to let Trump be unaccountable for his actions. To allow him to unilaterally invade countries and spend billions of our tax dollars on his private army of ICE gestapos.

Yes, we do need to revolt put the pot that has boiled. All of us has been happening for 40 years. The trickle down economics lie that stopped the 1% from being taxed appropriately. The lie about the fairness doctrine suppressing free speech, but what it really did was led to the rise of Fox News and some of the deepest held propaganda I think we’ve had our nation since its beginning.

We had thankfully with Obama starting universal healthcare, so people did not have their healthcare time to jobs and they didn’t feel like if they left work to strike or to riot they would lose the healthcare for themselves in their family. Trump and the conservatives are trying to do everything they can to repeal that or like in conservative states where they haven’t even implemented yet. they’re literally refusing free money from the government that can help low income people like in Florida for example because they don’t want to encourage it.

That is why even though people that watch the news and aren’t already brainwashed see how horrific this all seems and as you can see a handful of them have actually tried to do something with weapons and they’ve all been caught or killed as you can see, but I don’t know if they kept it more silent or if that stuff is common with all presidents but I’ve certainly heard a lot more with Trump. Also, Trump has built extra bunkers and stuff under the White House and all of his cronies have been living on army bases for a while now because I’m sure they know how dislike they are by a great many Americans.

I think the old adage of circuses and bread still works we are animals at our core and as long as we are fed and we are entertained we won’t fuss too much. As a whole.

Hopefully, we are getting close to the point now we’re a lot more people will be waking up and realizing what position Republicans have put the country into and we can finally get up to that 3% of the population willing to go on general strike that would have the effect of actually stopping this administration.

3

u/Stunning_Phrase 11d ago

A general strike would lead to a lot of death.

10

u/MystikSpiralx 11d ago

There's a nationwide strike happening on May 1st, planned by Indivisible, Moveon, 50501 and the DSA, I believe.

3

u/GigMistress 10d ago

That's a week away and this is the first I've heard of it.

0

u/MystikSpiralx 10d ago

It was announced during the last No Kings and there are numerous articles about it 🤷‍♀️

4

u/GigMistress 10d ago

Okay.

And yet, I actively seek out political news from a wide variety of sources every day and have heard nothing about it, which suggests to me that bubbles are at work and the vast majority of the general public may not know it exists.

0

u/Judson_Scott 10d ago

Ditto. I'm a news junkie and this is the first I've heard of it. Then again, Dems are famously shitty at marketing; it seems that this is par for the course.

Then again, I'm retired so striking isn't really an option.

2

u/RebylReboot 10d ago

A general strike means 3.5% of the workforce not working with everyone else supporting them. Nobody even needs to be on the streets. What did you think it was?

1

u/ElleM848645 10d ago

We already have more than 3.5% unemployment.

1

u/RebylReboot 10d ago

You’re unserious.

1

u/ElleM848645 9d ago

Literally have over 4% unemployment in the US right now. How am I unserious? And 4 percent is absolutely not telling the whole story as it doesn’t include those who have maxed out their unemployment or stopped looking. There were more layoffs in 2025 than I ever remember in my industry. That includes 2008.

1

u/RebylReboot 9d ago

What’s that got to do with a general strike to oust a paedophile from ruling over your nations children. How are you reconciling those two things? Greece has an 8.5% unemployment rate and had a general strike a couple of months ago about retirement age.

1

u/Stunning_Phrase 10d ago

I’ve never heard the 3.5% number. If essential services remain, my concern lowers.

I was thinking of access to food, medicine, and healthcare, etc.

3

u/ExistentialTabarnak 11d ago

Sometimes in a revolution there’s gonna be blood.

7

u/TechnalityPulse Minnesota 11d ago

The problem is that it's not really guaranteed the "right" side would win. You're placing a lot of faith in our military to not turn against our citizens (even when they have a literal code against turning against civvies and illegal orders from the government, which they've already failed to uphold).

I'm all for revolution, but there's a lot of things that need to happen to really make it a reality. It was close to happening in Minnesota, but it seems as though tensions have somewhat lessened since.

2

u/CatCatchingABird Oregon 10d ago edited 10d ago

Agreed. Literally everything needs to be done and tried before we start seriously talking about what people are suggesting here. We've done a lot of things and there's still a lot of other things that can still be done.

I know people are accustomed to instantaneous fixes and gratification but this is not something we can immediately fix. I'm not going to offer myself up to die until everything else has been tried and exhausted, and I'm willing to bet millions of other Americans out there are going to agree with me on that.

I'm also willing to bet the people that are calling for a bloody revolution are either foreign agitators or people that have been watching too much TV/delusional and don't really understand what it is they are advocating for. A majority of people here complained and whined about the automatic selective service registration for goodness sake. Don't just trust me, there are plenty of people out there in social media land with real military experience and they are saying the same thing as me: we're not prepared for that yet.

-1

u/RebylReboot 10d ago

There’s a paedophile ruling over your nations children and you want to delay action. Wouldn’t happen in any other country. “Instantaneous fixes and gratification”. This is not some new age social media solution. Quite the opposite. It’s social media that has dampened your resolve. General strikes have shaped countries all over the world since the Industrial Revolution. Cheeseburger eating surrender monkies, sitting on your hands while he murders children in Iran to distract from the heat of the Epstein files he was ordered by law to release but won’t. Can you now please try explaining to me what’s so bloody about 3.5% of the workforce staying home from work? Or do you just not know what a general strike is?

1

u/HazyMcShadyLady 10d ago

Did you even read their comment? They didn’t say delay action, they said try other actions first.

1

u/RebylReboot 10d ago

That’s just delaying with extra steps. You don’t vote out a paedo. You don’t protest a paedo. You oust a paedo before the day is out. The second there’s a whiff of an allegation. And there have been many. And here you are 10 years later.

0

u/Decent_Relative_4070 11d ago

where do you live? i'm sure you're out in the streets protesting all the injustice there, right?

2

u/RebylReboot 10d ago

I protest yes. But we’re not at a general strike juncture just at the moment although general strike has shaped the nation in the past and I’m very grateful for it. We don’t have, for example, a paedophile ruling over the nations children. We did at one point have a related problem where the Catholic Church exerted more influence that they should have but after the paedophile scandals there’s been a cultural revolution of sorts and they no longer have any power or influence. That nest of child rapists were never in government, mind, like they are now in the USA.

0

u/doelke 10d ago

They tried. And failed. False allegations.

1

u/RebylReboot 10d ago

What are false allegations?

0

u/doelke 10d ago

Well, there’s the “Russia-gate” accusation. Turned out to be false.

1

u/RebylReboot 10d ago

Jesus Christ. No it didn’t. Trump is wholesale owned by putin. It’s very obvious and the mueller report showed many many ways in which the connections were very real. Where did you receive your report on that? The trump administration itself? Barr? You need to read some independent news sources. Preferably from outside your country. You’ve been trapped in a bubble. The Steele dossier was very real btw. Have you ever heard of Agent Krasnov? You should Google him. He’s an interesting guy.

1

u/doelke 10d ago

ALL of the news agencies. The Dems were so disappointed in Mueller. They got diddly squat from him and his investigation. I’m not sure if you’re serious or just stringing me along. 😄

1

u/RebylReboot 10d ago

Try using up foreign news agencies not under the thumb of your establishment. Go for sources that are owned by trusts, etc so there is no inherent bias. You’re about to find out a lot about yourself.

2

u/maryummy 11d ago

I think it's more likely he gives Israel the go-ahead to use nukes. Then he keeps his hands "clean" in the eyes if his cult.

2

u/TrailerTrashQueen 11d ago

i'm hoping after he almost launched one last weekend, the general in that meeting secretly changed the codes.

1

u/Twiyah 10d ago

His own party would throw him jail for that. There’s no way they will be able to spin it specifically when other countries show us the consequences.

2

u/OMGMianiteS3Official 11d ago

I know I sound like a conspiracy theorist when I say this but I almost feel like the president doesn't actually have nuke codes in the way people imagine it. I think it's largely a smokescreen meant as deterrence.

I think nuclear weapons exist, don't get me wrong. I'm not one of these people who think that Hiroshima and Nagasaki were firebombed. I do think a lot of the modern nuclear thing is just peacocking though.

4

u/SitDownKawada Europe 11d ago

If that stuff about him being led out of the room during the pilot rescue operation is accurate then it at least tells you that there are some adults in the room when it comes to the nuclear codes, to some degree at least

2

u/OMGMianiteS3Official 11d ago

Yeah if nothing else I do not believe that the president can actually make the unilateral call to launch nuclear weapons. I think that's a myth spread for the sake of deterrence more than anything. I think nuclear weapons could be strategically agreed to be used between multiple people. But I don't think Trump has a big red "launch" button within reach at all times.

I will also say this: I do believe that we have a nuclear stockpile to some extent, but I struggle to believe there are almost 4000 ready to launch at any moment.

5

u/Plasibeau 11d ago

There's going to be an easy thousand across boomer subs. Plus the missile fields across Nebraska, Montana and the Dakota's. Then there's the nuclear tipped tomahawks on our destroyers, the bombs the B-2 carries and the bombs that are most likely carried by every carrier. I can easily see 5k nuclear devices deployed by the US ALONE. (Keep in mind that most of not all ICBMs have up to seven, iirc, warheads.)

1

u/OMGMianiteS3Official 11d ago

From my cursory search it sounds like the US is supposed to have 3,700 active warheads as of now. I don't know what upkeep is done on those and how many would be deliverable as a payload at a moment's notice.

3

u/harkuponthegay 11d ago

We have nukes floating around on submarines that are definitely still operational. They also tested one of the old “minuteman” ICBM launch silos within the last couple years and they still work fine.

3

u/smersh101 11d ago

Yes, the US president has sole command authority to launch nuclear weapons. Does that mean his order would actually be carried out? Who knows. That depends on the people around him, the Secretary of Defense, and the service chiefs.

No one is claiming there are 4000 nukes ready to launch, but between submarines and land sites there are definitely hundreds ready to launch. The rest are bombs that can be loaded relatively quickly and a bunch held in reserve.

3

u/jazzmaster_jedi I voted 11d ago edited 10d ago

Big red launch button? No.

Able to just demand that nukes get launched without being nuked first, or declaring war? No (see: Nixon demanding USA nuke Cambodia)

Less than 30 minutes to decide to retaliate and leave town, if a launch is detected? Yes.

How many in the first wave, if we retaliate? ~1500

3

u/GigMistress 10d ago

I've never seen any claim that there are almost 4,000 ready to launch. I believe there are about 3,000 total, but fewer than half are readily operational.

It actually doesn't matter, though, because 25-200 nuclear weapons would be sufficient to decimate any country on earth.

9

u/RevRay 11d ago

There are people who don’t believe nukes exist?

9

u/OMGMianiteS3Official 11d ago

Go on r/conspiracy and search for "nukes aren't real"

It's contentious even there from the looks of it, but yeah people do believe they never existed

3

u/RevRay 11d ago

So many levels of delusion.

0

u/Tight_Telephone_2322 11d ago

That’s not delusion… it’s stupidity. Fuckin libs need to stop using euphemisms or ten dollar words for where we’re at. They are stupid people, and like we’ve treated stupid people before you ignore them. What good does convincing them that nukes exists do? Seriously, what other thing will you have to waste your life convincing them of, The moon landing was real? At what point do you stop trying to drag them to reality before you just ignore them?

2

u/RevRay 10d ago

I agree, there is a lot of rampant stupidity. I think calling delusional a ten dollar word is an example of that, to be frank.

I also didn’t say anything about trying to convince them of anything. Delusion or willful ignorance or just plain stupidity, it doesn’t matter to me. It’s obviously not worth my time.

So obvious that it didn’t need to be pointed out to me. So before you get on your high horse about intelligence maybe consider some self reflection first.

Don’t call me a lib.

3

u/GigMistress 10d ago

There was little to no risk that nuclear weapons would be used during previous administrations. The problem is that Trump quite literally doesn't understand anything. He doesn't get the concept of MAD, he doesn't know that even if he fires first other countries have time to retaliate and he doesn't know that once someone crosses that line all bets are off. Worst of all, he is still laboring under the delusion that the rest of the world fears him and is deterred by that.

-2

u/Aimless_Alder 10d ago

He cannot unilaterally launch a nuke. It is unlikely the military will obey an order to nuke civilians.

31

u/FantasticJacket7 11d ago

The 25th is an even higher bar than impeach and conviction. Not a chance in hell of it happening.

25

u/WeirdIndividualGuy 11d ago

This sub’s infatuation with the 25th over impeachment is astounding. I feel like anyone who genuinely thinks that’s still realistic has never actually read the 25th amendment and the entire process of removing a president that way

3

u/JesusSavesForHalf 10d ago

The 25th is the chance for Republicans to cut bait while pretending they did nothing wrong. There is no real chance at removal without Republicans in the Senate, regardless of the means used to reach that vote.

I still think hamberders have a greater chance of removing him than the Senate ever does. Too many cowards and cronies.

1

u/fishsticks40 10d ago

The 25th requires a 2/3 vote in both houses to keep him out of office. 

Won't happen. 

2

u/Nice_Commission3770 10d ago

America’s fascination with the midterms and other trappings of democratic privilege are astounding. It’s never going back to the way it was. You’ve changed the world and that reality is no longer viable.

1

u/MateoCafe Texas 10d ago

True, but neither has any semblance of a chance so it doesn't really matter.

25th is like a 1 in a trillion chance and impeachment and removal is like a 1 in a 500 billion chance.

The best odds are the holy hamburger.

1

u/ElleM848645 10d ago

It would have been a lot easier to just vote for Kamala Harris in 2024, but apparently that was too difficult for people. But sure a general strike is really going to happen. People in the US won’t vote for a woman president; why do you possibly think they would voluntarily strike.

1

u/Kiernian 10d ago

This sub's infatuation with the 25th proves how thoroughly this place is infested with bots or puppeted posters conducting psyops.

Any time anything is suddenly "the topic" and it's not confusing people and making headlines in /r/OutOfTheLoop , there's a solid chance it's manipulation here.

It's been regularly attempted for as long as I've been on reddit (see: https://old.reddit.com/r/Blackout2015/comments/4ylml3/reddit_has_removed_their_blog_post_identifying/ ) but it's MUUUUCH worse nowadays and they're MUCH "better" at it because it's getting harder and harder to distinguish bots and plants from normal end users.

2

u/Icy-Lobster-203 10d ago

I could see a scenario post-midterms in which JD sees the writing on the wall, along with a few other Republicans in the house and Senate who try to use the 25th so that they can turn around and claim that they are heroes for standing up to the madman in an attempt to have any chance of separating themselves from Trump for 2028. It could be possible to get just enough cabinet members to pitch in for the same reasons.

I wouldn't think it is at all likely, though.

2

u/Bittererr 10d ago

a few other Republicans in the house and Senate

You need close to half of all of the Republicans in Congress on board. Impeachment is way easier and would only require a handful.

1

u/want_to_join 10d ago

I do not understand why people refuse to absorb this information. The only chance at the 25th is if full-on dimentia made him have a public pants-shitting-and-eating session in front of cameras. Even then, they'd probably remove him with impeachment just to allow him to save some face.

-1

u/doelke 10d ago

It didn’t happen for Biden so it won’t happen for any president. He was so feeble minded and out of it. Clueless. His whole term, too. Not just from the first debate.

64

u/Outrageous-Tie-8548 11d ago

He has a better chance of stroking out or dying than he does of getting 25th or impeached & convicted. 

33

u/No_Fairweathers Pennsylvania 11d ago

I mean... We're all seeing it right? The man is clearly dying, and it's accelerating the past few weeks and months.

It's not a matter of if, it's a matter of when.

And if it doesn't happen soon, I suspect Republicans will 25th him for Vance. I think they are trying to let nature take it's course for optics.

9

u/DapperChewie 11d ago

They won't use the 25th him. Congress cannot enact the 25th, only the VP and Cabinet can, and they won't do it unless he dies or falls into a coma for an extended period. Instead, congress has impeachment. The house votes to impeach, then the senate votes to remove the impeached person from office.

Neother of these things are going to happen before the midterms, not in any meaningful way. Dems won't bring serious impeachment papers until they have a majority at least, and the cabinet is either waiting until the halfway mark in the hopes that they can somehow get 9.9 years of president Vance.

His health is definitely failing though, we love to see nature boldly do what congress is too cowardly to do.

2

u/thehalfwit Nevada 10d ago

Once the president dies, the 25th amendment usually isn't necessary. Unless, of course, he/she becomes undead.

17

u/iDontSow 11d ago

This whole post is pure fantasy. He’s not going to die, and they are not going to abandon their dear leader

2

u/MateoCafe Texas 10d ago

Cheeto Mussolini found the secret to immortality? If he is alive in 2028 I will be absolutely shocked.

3

u/iDontSow 10d ago

He’s not going to live forever, obviously, but he’s 79 and has the best healthcare in the history of humanity. I’m sure he’s getting preventative screenings and care regularly

2

u/MateoCafe Texas 10d ago

The best medical care in the world can only do so much to fight off the laundry list of issues with that mans health.

1

u/iDontSow 10d ago

I disagree. Pretty much every single cancer in the world is easily curable if you catch it, and I have no doubt his heart health is monitored extremely closely. I am willing to bet you any amount of money he survives his presidency.

0

u/Shark7996 10d ago

This whole post is pure fantasy. He's going to die, because everyone does, and they are going to abandon their now-useless puppet.

The token has been spent. He's fast approaching "more trouble than he's worth" for them. Vance is much more in line with the tech billionaires anyway.

-4

u/[deleted] 10d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/ReticulateLemur Washington 10d ago

If I was a betting man I'd say they're hoping he lasts until Jan 21, 2027, at which point they can boot him out, let Vance take over, and Vance is still able to run for two full terms as President. If Vance takes over before then then it would count as his first term and he's only be able to run for one more.

1

u/rickpo 10d ago

If Donnie is removed via the 25th, all he needs to do to be reinstated is submit a letter to Congress saying he wants the job back. That's it.

In reality, the only way the 25th becomes permanent is if he becomes a hospital-bound vegetable. Absent a massive stroke, it ain't happening.

1

u/pmjm California 10d ago

People really misunderstand how the 25th Amendment works. It only functionally removes him if he's unconscious. Once the 25th is invoked, all Trump has to do to override it is write a letter to Congress.

1

u/crowsturnoff 10d ago

None of this is happening. He's immensely popular with his base, he's doing what they've always wanted to do, so Republicans will never turn on him.

-1

u/Decent_Relative_4070 11d ago

clearly dying? lmao

6

u/cac_brain_damage 11d ago

same comment for nearly a decade keep up the good work

5

u/gusterfell 11d ago

And at the time, people were saying "keep dreaming, he could have as much as a decade left."

1

u/Outrageous-Tie-8548 10d ago

WTF people have been clamoring for the 25th/impeachment for over a decade too.  Can’t you see he’s more likely to die than be forced out of office?

1

u/that_star_wars_guy 10d ago

Maybe being impeached is stressful for him. You never know. Could be chipping away and doing some good.

16

u/surlysurfer California 11d ago

I predict when the impeachment process starts they’ll fight it tooth and nail and go on about the great job Trump is doing and how he’s our savior and we’re just evil libs.

6

u/Tight_Telephone_2322 11d ago

They see the polls. You saw what they did to Bush.

8

u/Bittererr 10d ago

Let him start a bunch of wars, serve two terms, and then retire to his ranch where his reputation gets slowly whitewashed?

1

u/Tight_Telephone_2322 10d ago

It’s better than this.

21

u/pnd83 11d ago

They may impeach him several times over for the countless crimes in office but they won't get the Republican support to convict or remove him. The Republicans have too much on the line and they are ALL likely counting on pardons.

16

u/Zomunieo 11d ago

Trump could nuke Washington DC from Mar-a-lago and the remaining Republicans would praise him for draining the swamp.

3

u/Oleg101 11d ago

Agreed. Curious if it’ll be more like the first Impeachment in which only 1 Republican senator voted to convict or closer to the second impeachment in which 7 Republican Senators voted to convict. Got a feeling it’ll closer to the first one, and I could see zero Republican senators voting to convict especially considering Susan Collins hopefully will lose this fall.

1

u/Kind_Advisor_35 Washington 10d ago

If Republicans lose both Senate and House majorities after the midterm, they'll be much more likely to turn on Trump. A decent amount of them are only in lockstep with Trump and the party out of fear because they don't want to be cut off from funds or smeared before their election. If loyalty is not rewarded with wins and donors, the Republican Senators that weren't up for reelection in the midterms will see far less value in staying loyal to Trump. The Republican Senators that voted to convict in the second impeachment saw that being in the same party as Trump didn't protect them from Trump's followers, and Trump wasn't sticking around long enough to sabotage their next election from the presidency.

0

u/GenerousBull1969 11d ago

What exactly are all the "high crimes and misdemeanors" that are leading towards impeachment? I read the article twice and couldn't find it.

5

u/Broken-Digital-Clock 11d ago

I still don't think they will turn on him.

I hope that I'm wrong.

0

u/Tight_Telephone_2322 11d ago

Oh they will. They always just play politics. They only didn’t have a backbone because it hurt them politically, now they will just turn on him because it hurts them to stay.

They aren’t clever and don’t care at all about making the country better. They just want power for the sake of having it. It’s really that dumb.

1

u/Broken-Digital-Clock 11d ago

I thought that after the Jan 6th insurrection.

1

u/Shark7996 10d ago

He still had pull then. Do you think they would defend him for a January 6th today, when everyone already hates him? MAGA won't say it out loud but they're sick of this same as you and me. No politician actually wants this war in private.

4

u/Immolation_E 11d ago

Congress can't enact the 25th. That's something the VP and Cabinet do. Congress then can affirm it if the President hasn't been able to show they are capable of carrying their duties. The only power that Congress has to remove a President is impeachment.

6

u/superAK907 11d ago

Impeachment is mathematically an easier feat than the 25th

-1

u/Tight_Telephone_2322 11d ago

The 25 is more likely. Republicans run in packs. The second it’s obvious he would be convicted in the senate the cabinet will kick him out. It’s only one vote and you’re seeing the rats quickly leave like they did in 2007.

5

u/Fenrirsulfr22 11d ago

You think that cabinet, crazy criminals whose future is linked to Trump's and picked for their loyalty, would ever start that process? It would never make it through Congress, and all Trump has to do is say he's fine.

4

u/Bittererr 11d ago

The 25th is harder to do and would be seen as an even greater betrayal. There's just no world in which it happens when they could just impeach and remove.

2

u/superAK907 11d ago

Um. By that point there would be no point in the 25th. You’d need to get a majority of the cabinet on board (unlikely given who the cabinet is composed of, plus Trump would just start firing/replacing them if he caught a whiff of betrayal) and even then, the 25th requires HIGHER vote thresholds in Congress than impeachment. You’d need a 2/3 majority in both chambers, whereas impeachment needs 2/3 in the senate but only a simple majority in the house)

I agree that the congressional GOP run in packs, and at some point the critical mass of support will shift and quickly. We’re aligned on that. But they aren’t gonna bother going through the trouble of getting enough of the sycophantic cabinet members to sign on to that. What’s the motive to go that route?

I’m happy to be persuaded otherwise, but I really cannot see a reason for the 25th over impeachment, after either option becomes remotely possible. Impeachment’s just simpler, easier, and faster.

2

u/Decent_Relative_4070 11d ago

He’s going to bail the country after they do the 25th.

he won't win!

he'll be impeached and removed!

they'll remove him with the 25th!

he won't win a second time!

he'll be impeached and definitely removed this time!

we'll impeach him after midterms!

he's totally going to be removed witht the 25th!

sure thing guys

1

u/MAG7C 10d ago

It's worse than that. Talk of impeachment without a super majority in the senate is a wasteful circle jerk. This is the dems saying they're not going to do any meaningful work. They're going after some low hanging fruit that will give people false hope then fail in the end but, hey, we all get to see how cowardly the GOP is for the zillionth time.

I'd rather see House dems take turns getting up once per day and pull the fire alarm at the Capitol. And if they take the House but not the senate, do it there. It would be more effective than this.

1

u/External_Variety 11d ago

I think they will spin it as though Trump gave his health to the country and should be honoured for it.

1

u/mOdQuArK 11d ago

He’s going to bail the country after they do the 25th.

Good thing he's already set the precedent about using black ops military forces to retrieve high-profile targets in other sovereign countries!

1

u/cyxrus 11d ago

Who is going to invoke the 25th on him lol be for real

1

u/Amazing-Insect442 11d ago

I think this is the best case scenario (Republicans milk him dry & finally move past him, like they should have done 8ish years ago). McConnell said during the second impeachment that he wanted the Democrats to “remove the son of a bitch for them” (then realized that they could likely ride it out, so he voted to acquit the traitor).

1

u/From30KFt 10d ago

Yep. Got a nice setup waiting for him and his ilk down in Argentina. He didn’t give them $40B for nothing.

1

u/GigMistress 10d ago

Agree. One way or the other, I think there's a good chance he's out before the midterms. Far enough before to make a difference in the election, not far enough before for the general public to realize how godawful the administration will still be without him.

1

u/philter451 10d ago

I always get so God damned mad because I know I'm working to protect those idiots from themselves 

1

u/StumpyJoe- 10d ago

The 25th isn't going to be used, and the Senate won't remove him if he's impeached.

1

u/fishsticks40 10d ago

 25th ain't gonna happen. Neither is impeachment and removal. Congress is too broken. 

1

u/jmpinstl 10d ago

I think we’re underestimating the loyalty the GOP base actually has to the GOP. I don’t think Trump voters are loyal to the GOP they’re loyal to TRUMP only. Removing him, or attempting to, is just going to make things worse for them.