The Dictatorship
Jamie Raskin’s push for 25th Amendment to end Trump presidency is a mistake
ByAndy Craig
Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., together with 50 Democratic co-sponsors, has reintroduced his bill to create a “Commission on Presidential Capacity” under Section 4 of the 25th Amendment. It is being framed as a response to the crisis of a president who threatened to annihilate an entire civilization, who shares renderings of himself as Jesus Christ while feuding with the pope and who posts snuff videos on social media — to name the highlights from just the past couple of weeks.
In other words, the most powerful man in the world appears to be manifestly insane. It’s not great. But this proposal is misguided on the details, and more importantly, a distraction from what Congress can and should do: impeach Donald Trump and remove him from office.
This is not a new idea from Raskin. He first proposed essentially the same bill in 2017, and again in 2020 during Trump’s bout with Covid. I wrote about it at the time for the Cato Institute, and my objections have not changed. If anything, the current situation makes the flaws in this approach more glaring.
The most powerful man in the world appears to be manifestly insane. It’s not great.
Section 4 of the 25th Amendment allows for the involuntary transfer of presidential power to the vice president. It was designed for genuine incapacity: a president who is comatose, or has been shot, or has gone missing in a plane crash. It was drafted in the shadow of the Kennedy assassination and ratified at the height of the Cold War, when the overriding concern was nuclear command and control. The nightmare scenario was having nobody authorized to act if the president was suddenly unable. The text grants this power to the vice president together with “a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments[ie
Raskin’s bill would create that “other body” to displace the Cabinet. This new entity would be a 17-member commission of physicians, psychiatrists and retired government officials chosen by congressional leaders of both parties. The commissioners would, if directed by Congress, conduct a medical examination (or try to; the president can’t be forced to cooperate) and then report back. The agreement of the vice president would still be needed to initiate a transfer of power.
Set aside the immediate unlikeliness of this passing a Republican-controlled Congress, overriding a presidential veto and then getting JD Vance to use it. Messaging bills can still serve a purpose. The deeper problem is conceptual. What is happening with Trump is not a medical question. Or rather, it is not merely a medical question, and framing it as one lets both him and Congress off the hook.
Trump may be deranged, but he is not incapacitated in the way the framers of the 25th Amendment envisioned. He is likely committing high crimes and misdemeanors, but he is not literally “unable” to issue orders and wield his powers, however ludicrously and improperly. The fact that he is also experiencing evident mental and physical decline while he goes on a constitutional crime spree does not change the required remedy. If he were sharp as a tack, perfectly healthy and several decades younger, he would still need to be removed.
The bill’s inclusion of psychiatrists is particularly troubling. Diagnosing a political leader with a mental health condition, and then using that diagnosis as the basis for removing him from office, is extremely problematic.
The medical ethics are dubious, to put it mildly. This is a political decision of the highest order, a matter for our nation’s constitutional officers. It is not a diagnostic exercise for deciding how best to treat a patient. Consultation with medical experts might inform the decision-making, but doctors do not belong in the driver’s seat.
There are practical problems as well. The 25th Amendment was designed for speed, when a new commander-in-chief is needed within minutes, not days.
Trump may be deranged, but he is not incapacitated in the way the framers of the 25th Amendment envisioned.
Cabinet members are already serving, in the loop, reachable at a moment’s notice. A commission including retired officials scattered across the country, most of whom are elderly themselves, is not an improvement. And for the purpose envisioned here — removing a president whose behavior is dangerous but who remains ambulatory and vocally resistant — it is worse than useless. Even if the commission declared Trump incapable, he could simply send a letter to Congress saying he disagrees. You would then need two-thirds of both chambers to side against him under the 25th Amendment, a higher hurdle than impeachment.
The authors of the 25th Amendment deliberately wanted to avoid creating a tempting workaround to impeachment. So they made it more difficult, requiring an even greater degree of consensus. It’s also less permanent: The vice president merely becomes acting president. Officially, the president is still the president and the vice president is still the vice president. The powers are transferred but not the title. He would still be hanging around as a sort of president in limbo, able to repeatedly challenge the alleged incapacity for the remainder of his term.
Congress has the power to remove the president from office. The House can impeach with a simple majority, and any individual representative can force a vote on it as a privileged resolution. The case is overwhelming and has been for some time. Take your pick of the many possible charges; we’re in no danger of running out.
Yes, conviction in the Senate requires a two-thirds vote, perhaps unobtainable. But that is not a reason to demur.
The political strategy argument against impeachment doesn’t withstand scrutiny. Both previous Trump impeachments were supported by majority public opinion. After Trump’s first impeachment in 2019, he lost the election in 2020. With Jan. 6 and the second impeachment fresh in mind, Democrats beat expectations in 2022, and those Republicans most closely associated with Trump’s election denialism fared even worse. His narrow victory in 2024 happened when Democrats were not exactly at peak performance, speaking of medically questionable presidents. And now, in all the chaos and absurdity, his approval ratings are lower than ever.
More to the point, impeachment is not only about removal. It is a statement of principle. It forces a public debate, puts the spotlight where it belongs and creates a historical record. Even if the Senate fails to convict, or even if it fails in the House, the act of pursuing impeachment has value. It says this did not all go unrebuked with passive acquiescence.
The 25th Amendment talk, by contrast, does none of that. It medicalizes what is fundamentally a political, legal and moral crisis. It frames the problem as “he might be unwell” rather than “he is breaking the law and abusing his powers.” One is an excuse; the other is culpability.
This is all, at best, a well-meaning detour. Less charitably, it is a way for congressional leadership to say they are doing something while dodging the real fight.
rumImpeachment is not only about removal. It is a statement of principle. It forces a public debate, puts the spotlight where it belongs and creates a historical record.
Raskin himself seems to understand this, to be fair. He has averred that he is not advocating for one solution over another, merely explaining the options. As a law professor, his interest in lesser-known parts of the Constitution is genuine. And, of course, he’s no stranger to impeachment; he was the House’s lead manager making the case to the Senate after the attack on the Capitol. He is not taking the problem lightly or trying to minimize the danger.
Nevertheless, every day spent talking about a Rube Goldberg machine for medically diagnosing Trump is a day not spent building the case for the only real solution.
We don’t need medical doctors and retired officeholders to tell us what we can see with our own eyes. We don’t need to nail down exactly which checklists he satisfies in the DSM-5. We need our elected representatives to do their duty. Trump’s disturbed personal psychology is real but immaterial. The problem is he is a walking, talking, nonstop offense against our constitutional system of government. Impeachment is the tool Congress has to address that, and its oath-sworn obligation demands it use it.
Andy Craig
Andy Craig is a senior editor at The UnPopulist.
The Senate Judiciary Committee postponed a vote on acting Attorney General Todd Blanche’s nomination, a spokesperson said late Wednesday, as two retiring Republicans on the panel dug in over President Donald Trump’s personal “anti-weaponization” deal with the government he runs.
Sen. Chuck Grassley’s decision to delay the committee vote that had been set for Thursday marks a setback for one of Trump’s highest-profile Cabinet nominees, at the hands of Texas Sen. John Cornyn and Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina, a pair of Republicans set to leave the chamber next year.
“Chairman Grassley works to set President Trump’s nominees up for success in committee, not failure. Senators Cornyn and Tillis want written assurances from the Department of Justice regarding the Trump-IRS settlement,” the committee spokesperson said.
Blanche’s nomination to permanently head the Department of Justice needs the support of either Cornyn or Tillis to make it out of the committee to a vote by the full Senate, assuming all Democrats remain opposed.
“Why don’t you call over the Department of Justice and tell them they have one hour and 50 minutes to get me what I asked for,” Cornyn told reporters Wednesday afternoon amid the hardening standoff over his demand that Blanche and the DOJ put in writing a commitment never to pursue the president’s prized “anti-weaponization” fund, and to clarify the terms of Trump’s personal deal with the Internal Revenue Service.
Tillis told MS NOW that the conversations were complicated by the need for the Justice Department to get “several parties” to agree on the language of the statement Cornyn and Tillis are seeking.
“What I’ve advised the chair, and I would assume Senator Cornyn said something similar, is that we’re not prepared to vote yes yet,” he added.
“The Department has been in regular communication with Committee members for weeks, and we look forward to continuing to work productively with Senators to address any concerns,” a Justice Department spokesperson said in response to the decision to postpone the committee vote.
Cornyn was set to meet with Blanche on Wednesday morning, but the meeting was called off after Blanche failed to meet the senator’s demand for written proposals to modify the controversial settlement agreement he brokered between Trump and the IRS. The Republican senator is set to leave Congress when his term ends in January after a bruising May primary loss to Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, Trump’s chosen candidate.
“Maybe John Cornyn’s upset with me because I didn’t endorse him,” Trump told reporters Wednesday afternoon in the Oval Office. “I don’t know what it is, but I haven’t heard that there’s a problem. I heard (Blanche) is going through quite nicely.”
Cornyn made clear to Blanche during his confirmation hearing that he will not get his support until he agrees to reopen and modify the settlement. Due to the committee’s narrow Republican majority, one GOP “no” vote is enough to sink Blanche’s nomination.
The senator has asked Blanche to provide proof that the proposed nearly $1.8 billion “anti-weaponization” fund established as part of the deal between Trump and the IRS is formally dead, and he has also demanded Blanche narrow the tax audit immunity provisions the settlement afforded to Trump and his family.
Blanche has publicly stated that his department has dropped the fund, but he and the DOJ have dodged requests from Cornyn and a federal judge to put that in writing.
After announcing his meeting with Blanche would not take place Wednesday morning, Cornyn told reporters that changes from Blanche “in a modified release form” would be acceptable, but that “for some reason … they simply refuse to do it,” referring to the DOJ.
Shortly after the meeting was called off, a Justice Department official told MS NOW that the department “provided a written proposal to Senator Cornyn’s staff yesterday following ongoing discussion with both the Committee and the Senator’s office.”
Cornyn said that proposal was “not responsive” to his demands because it did not address the tax audit immunity provisions in the settlement, one of his key demands.
In May, Blanche signed an addendum as part of the deal that granted Trump, his family and his businesses immunity from pending IRS tax audits. That agreement, which has been decried by former IRS officials and legal experts as unlawful self-dealing, is being contested in federal court.
Cornyn noted that Blanche testified under oath that he could meet the request during his confirmation hearing.
“Maybe they think I’m just going to give up or you know, go along, but they’re mistaken,” Cornyn said when asked why he thinks the DOJ could be slow-walking his request.
Kevin Frey contributed to this report.
Sydney Carruth is a breaking news reporter covering national politics and policy for MS NOW. You can send her tips from a non-work device on Signal at SydneyCarruth.46 or follow her work on X and Bluesky.
Mychael Schnell is a reporter for MS NOW.
Ebony Davis is a breaking news reporter for MS NOW based in Washington, D.C. She previously worked at BLN as a campaign reporter covering elections and politics.
When Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu arrived this week for his tour of Washington, he may have had a mission in mind.
Netanyahu needed to overcome his newly diminished stature and waning influence over his once close friend President Donald Trump as both leaders grapple with the unpopularity of a war they started together and is escaping their control.
His meeting at the White House with Trump on Tuesday, which was closed to the press, was the first face-to-face encounter between the two allies since the U.S. and Israel launched a joint attack against Iran on Feb. 28.
Trump gave him a muted welcome and afterwards simply described the meeting as “very good.” “Obviously, many important subjects were discussed,” the president wrote on Truth Social.
Rather than an intimate one-on-one setting, the Oval Office was full of top U.S. officials — Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Dan Caine, and special envoy Steve Witkoff.
But Netanyahu continued the full court press on the Trump administration.
Over the course of two days, in addition to seeing Trump and attending Sen. Lindsey Graham’s funeral at the Capitol, Netanyahu also met separately with Vance, Hegseth, and Rubio, White House and Israeli officials confirmed to MS NOW.
The Israeli prime minister’s slate of meetings with key U.S. national security officials comes at a pivotal moment in the Iran conflict as tensions escalate in the region and Americans increasingly sour on the war. A recent Quinnipiac poll shows 60% of American voters opposing U.S. military action against Iran and 74% against sending U.S. ground troops into Iran.
Not only does Trump face pressure as Republicans face an uphill battle to retain congressional control in this fall’s midterms, Netanyahu’s fate as prime minister is at stake in Israel’s upcoming September elections – and he can’t afford to lose Trump’s favor.
The talks largely focused on what to do next as Iran continues to menace shipping in the Strait of Hormuz and retaliate against American bases in the region and launch attacks on Gulf allies.
According to a senior Israeli official who was granted anonymity to describe the closed-door meeting, President Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu did not come to a final decision after discussing three paths forward: get a “good deal” focused on Iran’s nuclear program and enriched material, have no deal and instead continue the blockade and economic pressure, or take escalated military action.
But Netanyahu did not tell Trump what he should do – nor did he express a preference.
The senior Israeli official noted Netanyahu has not ruled out diplomacy – as long as it is coupled with “very strong pressures,” calling the push to dismantle Iran’s nuclear program “a contest of will and a contest of force.”
“There are ways of squeezing them and squeezing them and squeezing them and negotiating at the same time,” the official said.
Netanyahu did not present President Trump with new intelligence regarding the underground Iranian nuclear facility Pickaxe Mountain, per the senior Israeli official, noting the U.S. and Israel already are constantly sharing intelligence – and know where Iran’s highly enriched material is. “We don’t think it’s moved, and I think we have a pretty good grasp on that,” the official said.
During their meeting on Tuesday, Trump and Netanyahu discussed ways Israel and the U.S. can work together to stop Iran’s nuclear program and get the Strait of Hormuz open to maritime trade, the senior Israeli official said.
The two leaders also discussed a third goal: to continue to undermine the Iranian regime and “possibly create future conditions for a change in that area.” U.S. officials have backed away from pursuing paths that would overthrow the current leadership, but Netanyahu still believes that could happen.
“The chasm that has been created between the people and the regime is not about to be closed,” the senior Israeli official said of Netanyahu’s thinking.
Netanyahu advised Trump in February that Israeli intelligence indicated launching strikes against Iran would lead to the toppling of the Islamic Republic’s regime – and five months later, the slain ayatollah’s son retains power with a close circle of hardliners, calling into question the accuracy of Israel’s intelligence apparatus.
But the senior Israeli official said at the time, Netanyahu did not promise the Iranian people would take fate into their own hands following a coordinated attack. Rather, he chose his words carefully and said that an attack could create conditions to “advance the probability or the possibility that that would happen.”
The conditions needed for the Iranian regime to fall, “did not materialize,” the official told MS NOW, adding, “not for lack of insight, but for either operational failure or decisions that were made.”
Despite Netanyahu insisting Israel and the U.S. are on the same page, differences still remain: the sale of F-35 fighter jets to Turkey and the Saudi nuclear arrangement did not come up during Wednesday’s White House meeting, according to a second Israeli official granted anonymity to describe sensitive discussions.
Meanwhile, the conflict continues to spread, with an Iranian drone attacking a U.S. gas storage tanker off the coast of Egypt on Wednesday.
Trump indicated he would not let Iran’s latest action slide, telling reporters on Wednesday that the U.S. would retaliate against Iran even as he leaves room for diplomatic talks to resume.
“It’s our turn, and we’ll see if we get there with an agreement at some point,” Trump said. “But we’re going to hit them very hard.”
As for what it would take for Israel to join the U.S. strikes, the senior Israeli official said that if Israel is attacked by Iran, “We will respond very, very forcefully and very quickly. And I think Iran would make a great mistake.”
Julia Jester covers politics for MS NOW and is based in Washington, D.C.
International rage over FIFA’s close ties to President Donald Trump has reached a fever pitch after soccer’s governing body announced a plan to sell a significant stake to an investor group led by Joshua Kushner, the brother of Trump’s son-in-law.
The president and his family have all but turned the White House into their personal piggy bank. And FIFA — which has its own sordid history of corruption — seems to have made itself a party to Trump’s self-enrichment under Gianni Infantino’s leadership, such as by paying for space inside Trump Tower in New York. (The organization has defended the office rental as a World Cup outpost.)
Soccer is seen by many as a unifying game. But Trump’s incorporation of FIFA into his political dynasty is threatening that idea.
FIFA has announced plans to sell a large minority stake in a new company that will run its main events, including the World Cup and Club World Cup, as part of a plan to triple the amount of development money it dishes out to its 211 member associations.
Under the proposals — which are subject to approval by a majority of those national associations and FIFA’s 37-member council — a new entity called FIFA Forward Enterprises (FFE) will take over all commercial operations, while FIFA remains the game’s global governing body and retains a majority stake in FFE.
A press release from FIFA confirmed the plans and said Thrive Eternal, which was launched by Joshua Kushner, is expected to lead the investment group that would control FIFA Forward Enterprise. FIFA did not clarify why Thrive Eternal was selected, and Kushner was already dabbling in sports.
But Trump basically has already given son-in-law Jared Kushner carte blanche to dictate U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East while simultaneously hatching business plans in the region. (Jared Kushner has denied any conflicts of interest.)
Joshua Kushner reportedly has been a major donor to Democrats. But, predictably, the idea of another Kushner becoming financially entwined with the World Cup — the world’s most popular sporting event — and basically being dropped into a position of global significance isn’t going over well. Several other soccer governing bodies have expressed concerns, including Europe’s UEFA.
“This crosses a line that football’s governing institutions should never cross,” UEFA said in a statement about The Athletic’s report, adding: “The soul and governance of football are not assets to trade — especially with zero transparency as to who gains financially. None of us are the owners of football. It is not FIFA’s to sell.”
Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee also rebuked the plan, writing on X: “Apparently the fake Peace Prize and giant lease with Trump Tower weren’t enough — now Infantino performs a kickback hat trick by pursuing a multibillion-dollar deal with Jared Kushner’s brother to sell ownership stakes in the World Cup to private investors.”
FIFA, Donald Trump’s favorite corrupt racketeering enterprise in world sports, is now going directly into business with the Trump family!
Apparently the fake Peace Prize and giant lease with Trump Tower weren’t enough—now Infantino performs a kickback hat trick by pursuing a… https://t.co/knSZibuMea
— House Judiciary Dems (@HouseJudiciary) July 28, 2026
Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., has already launched an investigation into the FIFA leader’s relationship with the Trump administration, while dozens of European lawmakers — citing concerns about “potential breaches of political neutrality” — have called for the FIFA Ethics Committee to investigate Infantino. This new proposal seems unlikely to assuage those concerns.
But what it does seem likely to do is fuel global anger toward the U.S. — the kind that has been growing since Trump retook office.
And when you consider that, it’s truly remarkable how the same MAGA movement whose members whined for years about politics mixing with sports is now in lockstep with a president who seems dead-set on casting his shadow over every sports event he can.
This post on X basically sums up the foul stench around FIFA’s latest proposal.
Sepp Blatter was Infantino’s predecessor as FIFA president and oversaw the organization amid some of its many scandals. When heof all people, is warning about how Trump and Infantino’s relationship is “deeply damaging” soccer, it’s a sign of how far FIFA has descended into the gutter.
Ja’han Jones is an MS NOW opinion blogger. He previously wrote The ReidOut Blog.
- GOP anxiety grows over North Carolina Senate race
- Convention puts GOP’s reality on display: Midterm policy agenda is skimpy
- At 9/11 ceremony, Giuliani and Mamdani … shake hands?
- Court deals first blow to Trump’s coal rescue campaign
- House sets vote on Russia sanctions bill
- House eyes Tuesday vote on bill to curb data center costs
- This climate problem isn’t on the UN agenda — data centers
- Democrats revamp their midterm playbook for GOP’s anti-trans attacks
- Capitol agenda: Trump tells Republicans to vote or ‘go to hell’
- Rand Paul and his staff travel by private jet with taxpayer dollars while preaching fiscal restraint
-
Politics2 years agoFormer ‘Squad’ members launching ‘Bowman and Bush’ YouTube show
-
Uncategorized2 years ago
Bob Good to step down as Freedom Caucus chair this week
-
Politics2 years agoFormer Kentucky AG Daniel Cameron launches Senate bid
-
The Dictatorship2 years agoLuigi Mangione acknowledges public support in first official statement since arrest
-
The Josh Fourrier Show2 years agoDOOMSDAY: Trump won, now what?
-
The Dictatorship2 years agoPete Hegseth’s tenure at the Pentagon goes from bad to worse
-
Politics2 years agoBlue Light News’s Editorial Director Ryan Hutchins speaks at Blue Light News’s 2025 Governors Summit
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoMike Johnson sums up the GOP’s arrogant position on military occupation with two words