Why Dems Won’t Use 25th Amendment on Biden

Why Dems Won’t Use 25th Amendment on Biden

U.S. President Joe Biden

United States: Victoria Toensing, former deputy assistant attorney general, to Newsmax on Monday states that the invocation of the 25th Amendment by the Democrats to oust Joe Biden as their presidential contender in November is implausible.

The 25th Amendment, delineating presidential incapacitation and succession, was ratified in 1967 after the assassination of John F. Kennedy.

It stipulated that should the president perish, abdicate, or be deemed by the president’s Cabinet as incapacitated in fulfilling the duties of the office, the vice president—in this scenario, Kamala Harris—shall assume the mantle of leadership, according to reports.

This amendment has garnered frequent mentions subsequent to Biden’s subpar performance in the June 27 debate against erstwhile President Donald Trump, amplifying concerns regarding his long-speculated cognitive decline.

During the discourse, Biden, at 81, the most senior president in American annals, exhibited signs of weariness, a rigid gait, sluggish articulation, and a lack of facial animation.

Notwithstanding the Republicans capitalizing on Biden’s debate display for political leverage, the candidate has refrained from capitulating. Toensing conveyed to “American Agenda” that the 25th Amendment would not precipitate Biden’s abdication.

“It’s not going to be. It’s just not going to be,” Toensing declared. “However, I laud the Republicans for employing it as a political maneuver. I think it’s astute. They typically eschew such tactics. However, for Harris to initiate this, she would need to secure the majority of the Cabinet’s agreement that Biden is inept. Do you envisage Harris undertaking that? She wouldn’t jeopardize her position. And the majority of the Cabinet, seriously? Democrats don’t operate in that manner.”

Reportedly, she elaborated, “Subsequently, they must inform Congress of Biden’s incompetence. Then Biden can counterclaim his competence, necessitating another Cabinet vote with the majority affirming his incompetence. And then, here’s the crux: it proceeds to both Congressional Houses for a two-thirds majority vote. Is that plausible? No.”