Hypothetically this is not how ANY of this works, Michael.
Hypothetically speaking, does a Cabinet member or senior staffer who believes the president is mentally incapacitated bear any legal responsibility if that person does not come forward with that information?
— Michael Ian Black (@michaelianblack) January 4, 2018
We get it, Michael really hates Trump. Wait, that’s not fair; watching his behavior we’re pretty sure he doesn’t like anyone who disagrees with him politically but we digress. Does he really think an elected official or a staffer has the knowledge to make a judgment call on the mental wellness of the president? And let’s say they could even magically make some sort of diagnosis, would they be liable for not coming forward to whom exactly?
See, if he would just take some time to understand basic CIVICS he wouldn’t ask such silly questions and get so badly embarrassed.
You civics lesson for today: the 25th Amendment allows the vice president & a majority of the Cabinet to recommend the removal of the POTUS in cases where he is “unable to discharge the powers & duties of his office,” and allows the House and Senate to confirm the recommendation
— G (@TCC_Grouchy) January 5, 2018
Right, so it follows: if they VP and majority of Cabinet believe POTUS is unable… do they bear some legal consequences for NOT acting?
— Michael Ian Black (@michaelianblack) January 5, 2018
Dude.
OK, I'll spell it out…..There is NO requirement upon them to even report such other than upholding the oaths of their office. So no, no legal consequence is defined in the 25th. However, Congress could take up the oath issue, technically speaking.
— G (@TCC_Grouchy) January 5, 2018
Not sure spelling it out works for Mr. Black.
Slippery slope there Michael.
— Conservatopia #StopTheHoax (@WTPatty) January 5, 2018
Indeed.
I’m a psychologist and, as a serious response to this idea, proving incapacity in a seemingly high functioning adult is tremendously challenging. I’m skeptical that invoking the 25th amendment would go anywhere.
— DrJP (@DrJPGarrison) January 5, 2018
It would just be their opinion, so absolutely not
— Rusty Shackleford (@BustyRackleford) January 4, 2018
https://twitter.com/judgment_al/status/949104794970439681
Not to mention there is a little thing called the Constitution which spells out these sorts of ‘hypothetical’ situations. But don’t point this out to Michael or he will block and run.
Full transparency, this editor did engage Mr. Black on this topic and even offered to buy him a book, ‘How America Works for Dummies.’ He did not take this as a good wish or an act in kind and blocked said editor.
Psh. Some people are so sensitive.
Related:
Literally SHAKING: Chelsea Handler triggers over Trump tweet on Voter ID, makes 2 batsh*t claims
Join the conversation as a VIP Member