McCabe: DoJ Held Meetings to Discuss Removing Trump Under the 25th Amendment After Comey's Firing

[American]

see, i agree that Rush and Sean don't need help. they know the 6 things to say that will forever keep Republicans in line and they say them often. they are masters of their craft.

So who snaps your politics inline?

 

[Thoreau72]

So if we are to assume (and you know the "ass-u-me" saying) that this report is correct, then it would appear true that some members of the "cabal" who opposed Trump's election were even more pro-active in trying to undermine his Presidency than we thought.

You seem to think this is a "good thing," when if taken along with the other evidence of "resistance" like the constant "leaking" by "former and current" officials, the stonewalling of the new Administration's policy efforts, and the "Insurance Policy" weaponizing "Russian interference" into an ongoing "collusion investigation" by these same "usual suspects," merely shows that Trump was correct about such conspiracies all along.

Do you mean to say that some members of our illustrious DOJ conspired? I thought they were above that....

 

[Obscurity]

Please post your medical credentials. Or accept the fact that you are just a liberal hack.

Deflection duly noted. Since when do you ****ing people believe science and medical experts?

Wouldn't matter if they said he had major cognitive issues, you guys won't believe them.

 

[Obscurity]

None of which has anything at all to do with the 25th Amendment.

Wrong. They could use that to demonstrate he can't fulfil his duties.

 

[Obscurity]

"Not Fit For Office" means someone with no experience other than "Community Organizer". Trump is way more prepared than Barry ever became. You make not like his approach, but his results are speaking loudly in re: his ability to do the job.

I don't care about Obama.

 

[zimmer]

They were discussing a completely legal process though.

Would it have been illegal if they had discussed whether congress should impeach the president?

You are stating this as if it's a fact that merely discussing a legal process is illegal. It's not. You the mere discussion of trying to influence a cabinet official to use a completely legal process is illegal? Please explain exactly the part that is illegal and the law that it breaks.

Hating the duly elected President is zero basis for invoking the 25th, and seeking a pathway to it.

McCabe is a retard, and thankfully so, for he admitted to a seditious Scheme.

He and the others, at the top of the DoJ and FBI revealed they were corrupt to the core. They must have freaked when McCabe admitted to their coup attempt discussions. Lynch, The Ohrs, Strzok, Page, McCabe... the whole lot of them.

1. They were political operatives, scheming against Trump.

2. They should never have been anywhere near the reigns of power.

3. There should be a full anal exam into their treasonous behavior.

 

[Harshaw]

Wrong. They could use that to demonstrate he can't fulfil his duties.

No. This is nonsense.

Obstruction of justice or corruption are impeachable. But it has NOTHING to do with the 25th Amendment.

You don't care a thing about the rule of law. You just want him out, no matter how it's done, no matter what you have to twist to do it. That is anti-democratic.

 

[zimmer]

Wrong. They could use that to demonstrate he can't fulfil his duties.

ROTFLOL... yeah, that’s really plausible. There are mechanisms for that:

1. Articles of Impeachment.

2. Elections.

Your comment smacks of the Police State tactics used in the USSR, DDR, and other ****hole states.

The Leftists had a perfect opportunity to come out and be on the side of The Constitution, of order, of law... and what we have are people who eagerly defend the worst kind of seditious behavior.

You folks screamed and scream about Watergate. That was virtually nothing compared to this.

The depths the Left has sunk is reminiscent of the worst Leftist politics have to offer.

I wonder, if you believe it is righteous to remove a duly elected President because you hate his guts, and every fiber of his being... through Police State tactics...

...The Leader of the Free World...

... if you believe you can remove a duly elected President... who else are you going to remove, and by what means?

Yours is a very dangerous and slippery slope.

It is tyranny.

It’s one reason we have a 2nd Amendment. To ward off tyrants... which Leftists in the highest offices of power... the Federal, Police and DoJ... have proven themselves to be.

 

[Obscurity]

No. This is nonsense.

Obstruction of justice or corruption are impeachable. But it has NOTHING to do with the 25th Amendment.

You don't care a thing about the rule of law. You just want him out, no matter how it's done, no matter what you have to twist to do it. That is anti-democratic.

What's anti democratic is using unrestrained power to declare a soe to build a wall the people don't want.

 

[tres borrachos]

Trump has lost money since in office. Your false narrative is divorced from reality.

I'm anxious for a link on this. Please show us Trump's full financial situation prior to January 2017 and his full financial situation today.

 

[Harshaw]

What's anti democratic is using unrestrained power to declare a soe to build a wall the people don't want.

I never claimed to support that.

You, however, do wish to use anti-democratic means to undo an election. This appears to trouble you not.

 

[zimmer]

What's anti democratic is using unrestrained power to declare a soe to build a wall the people don't want.

That right is written into the Constitution.

Congress gave the President that power.

You did not complain when Obama shoved the unconstitutional DACA down our throats.

Why do you defend tyranny? I’m curious.

 

[Anthony60]

I definitely take it as a good sign. The president has been suspected from day one of colluding to swing the election and he acted like a tyrant by firing people who looked into it. That was an excellent case for the 25th on its own. Clearly the cabinet at the time did not agree.

We'll see going forward if the Mueller report (and Trump's reaction to it) provides a more compelling reason, or if some other screw up leads to impeachment instead.

Actually, there has been zero suspicion by any credible people. Just Trump haters trying to destroy his Presidency. It will be known as a failed coupe by radical Trump haters.

 

[roughdraft274]

Hating the duly elected President is zero basis for invoking the 25th, and seeking a pathway to it.

McCabe is a retard, and thankfully so, for he admitted to a seditious Scheme.

He and the others, at the top of the DoJ and FBI revealed they were corrupt to the core. They must have freaked when McCabe admitted to their coup attempt discussions. Lynch, The Ohrs, Strzok, Page, McCabe... the whole lot of them.

1. They were political operatives, scheming against Trump.

2. They should never have been anywhere near the reigns of power.

3. There should be a full anal exam into their treasonous behavior.

You have bequeathed unto me the incredibly unfortunate choice as to whether I should have a discussion with an individual who holds facts and reason and logic in the very lowest of regards. But I think I can make the correct decision here.

Have a great day!

 

[zimmer]

_

You have bequeathed unto me the incredibly unfortunate choice as to whether I should have a discussion with an individual who holds facts and reason and logic in the very lowest of regards. But I think I can make the correct decision here.

Have a great day!

What you’ve done, and desperately tried to camouflage is called... “cutting and running”.

Sun-Tzu says... when you face a vastly stronger opponent, especially on open ground, the best choice is not to engage.

Your choice to scurry-off was a wise one, but you shouldn’t have telegraphed your retreat.

 

[roughdraft274]

_

What you’ve done, and desperately tried to camouflage is called... “cutting and running”.

Sun-Tzu says... when you face a vastly stronger opponent, especially on open ground, the best choice is not to engage.

Your choice to scurry-off was a wise one, but you shouldn’t have telegraphed your retreat.

I'll be just dandy if you continue to think that. Like I said, have a great day!

 

[Fishking]

I'm anxious for a link on this. Please show us Trump's full financial situation prior to January 2017 and his full financial situation today.

Trump has lost $1 billion in personal wealth since running for president

 

[smallvoice]

I don't care about Obama.

You should. He's why we are where we are now.

 

[smallvoice]

Deflection duly noted. Since when do you ****ing people believe science and medical experts?

Wouldn't matter if they said he had major cognitive issues, you guys won't believe them.

Deflection duly noted. When you watched Obama namby-pamby around the world, you had no problem with being the laughingstock of the world. Wha't changed?

 

[Obscurity]

Deflection duly noted. When you watched Obama namby-pamby around the world, you had no problem with being the laughingstock of the world. Wha't changed?

IDK why you keep bringing up a potus I didn't vote for.

 

[tres borrachos]

Trump has lost $1 billion in personal wealth since running for president

thank you. My bad, because I actually remember seeing that article.

Forbes attributed the decline of Trump's fortune to three main factors: e-commerce eating into the value of Trump's real estate holdings, the intrusion of heightened security at Trump's resorts, and Trump's own over-reporting of the size of his penthouse.

"Much as he's trying — and he's definitely trying — Donald Trump is not getting richer off the presidency," according to Forbes.

So he brought this on himself. He should have thought of that.

 

[smallvoice]

IDK why you keep bringing up a potus I didn't vote for.

Neither did I, but you are railing about this one, who is just as bad as the last one, yet not a peep about the first one.

 

[Harshaw]

The president has been suspected from day one of colluding to swing the election and he acted like a tyrant by firing people who looked into it. That was an excellent case for the 25th on its own.

No, it's not.

It could possibly be a case for impeachment, if true.

But it in no way, no way at all, makes a case for the 25th Amendment. The 25th Amendment is not about misconduct in office, at all, in any way, shape, or form.

 

[uptower]

No, it's not.

It could possibly be a case for impeachment, if true.

But it in no way, no way at all, makes a case for the 25th Amendment. The 25th Amendment is not about misconduct in office, at all, in any way, shape, or form.

Good point - the misconduct alone would be cause for impeachment if true. But perhaps McCabe and others felt that it stemmed from a lack of mental fitness?

 

[uptower]

Actually, there has been zero suspicion by any credible people. Just Trump haters trying to destroy his Presidency. It will be known as a failed coupe by radical Trump haters.

Surely at the very least a failed station wagon?