3
Paul1149 3 points ago +3 / -0

No argument here.

2
Paul1149 2 points ago +2 / -0

Succession Clause for the Presidency | Constitution Annotated | Congress.gov | Library of Congress https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artII-S1-C6-1/ALDE_00013693/ Article II, Section 1, Clause 6:

  • In Case of the Removal of the President from Office, or of his Death, Resignation, or Inability to discharge the Powers and Duties of the said Office, the Same shall devolve on the Vice President, and the Congress may by law provide for the Case of Removal, Death, Resignation or Inability, both of the President and Vice President, declaring what Officer shall then act as President, and such Officer shall act accordingly, until the Disability be removed, or a President shall be elected.

The ratification of the Twenty-Fifth Amendment1 in 1967 superseded Article I, Section 1, Clause 6. Article I, Section 1, Clause 6 provides for the Powers and Duties of the President to devolve upon the Vice President if the President is no longer able to discharge them due to his removal from office, death, resignation, or inability.2 Although it was unclear in the republic’s early years whether the Vice President became President or merely acted as President until a new presidential election was held, ratification of the Twenty-Fifth Amendment established incontrovertibly that the Vice President becomes President upon the President’s removal from office, death, resignation, or inability to perform the powers and duties of the office.3 In addition, Article I, Section 1, Clause 6 authorizes Congress to establish the line of succession to the presidency if both the President and Vice President are unable to discharge the Powers and Duties of the Presidency.4... MORE...

2
Paul1149 2 points ago +2 / -0

He did. That was a cc:, but I realized it made him look like he wrote this, whereas I did, so I've removed his name.

2
Paul1149 2 points ago +2 / -0

Time to report leftist doxers. Let them feel the heat for a change.

3
Paul1149 3 points ago +3 / -0

Essentially, Greene is saying that we did not win a large enough majority to justify risking a more divisive patriot as Speaker, that we have to be more cautious and occupy safer ground.

1
Paul1149 1 point ago +1 / -0

Woods is wrong. Votes didn't give the Democrats the elections. Fraud did. Until we face that fact, we will never win.

1
Paul1149 1 point ago +3 / -2

I don't always agree with Gorka, but he's right here.

1
Paul1149 1 point ago +1 / -0

In both cases things will have to reach a critical mass in order to move the needle. Josh Hawley has just come out for new Senate leadership.

2
Paul1149 2 points ago +2 / -0

Wait until the public finds out the mountain of corruption biden is sitting on.

1
Paul1149 1 point ago +1 / -0

I'm deleting this until I see confirmation.

2
Paul1149 2 points ago +2 / -0

At this point I can only see it helping her at the polls. But I pray for her safety.

1
Paul1149 1 point ago +1 / -0

They ALWAYS accuse us of what they actually do.

2
Paul1149 2 points ago +2 / -0

Bear in mind that Biden's approval in WV is a mere 22% +/-. So this is grandstanding. It should have come at the beginning of Biden's term.

1
Paul1149 1 point ago +1 / -0

About a century ago, Rockefeller took over all the medical colleges, and then the FDA, and of course he already owned the Congress. Accordingly, big Corp owns the whole process today. That's what we're up against. Blessed are you when you are persecuted...

view more: Next ›