I'm sure all major figures in American health insurance companies get threats. They deny a lot of people coverage those folks really need. I'm sure some small number of those people or their family members are off-balance enough to think about taking revenge. Though for all we know it could be someone else he pissed off in an entirely different way who took out the hit on him.
Per Section 3 of the Twentieth Amendment: “If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President, the President-elect shall have died, the Vice President-elect shall become President.”
OK if he dies, but what if he's hit on the head by a falling gargoyle and becomes permanently unable to function intellectually?
A lot of people have apparently been absolutely brutal on social media about United Healthcare CEO Brian Thompson's murder (stuff like "sorry, thoughts and prayers are out of network, coverage denied"). Not like the company demonstrated a lot of caring about him either -- he was killed at 6:45 AM, and they went ahead with their 8 AM investor meeting, stopping it at 9, I guess because they figured out it looked bad?
The Gizmodo piece makes what seems to me like a relevant connection to the Trump era:
The history of the U.S. is one of tremendous violence, but the past two decades have been relatively stable when it comes to blood being spilled domestically for political purposes. The U.S. was averaging about five bombings a day in the early 1970s, according to the FBI, a simple fact that isn’t often remembered here in the 21st century. And a century ago, it was completely normal for dozens of people to be killed at once during labor actions in the U.S., as workers and bosses fought for control. All of which is to say this is likely the beginning rather than the end of people embracing political violence, especially as Trump prepares to take power with promises of retribution. Peace and stability are not the norm.
Section 4
Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.
Thereafter, when the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that no inability exists, he shall resume the powers and duties of his office unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit within four days to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. Thereupon Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty-eight hours for that purpose if not in session. If the Congress, within twenty-one days after receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not in session, within twenty-one days after Congress is required to assemble, determines by two-thirds vote of both Houses that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge the same as Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers and duties of his office.
I'd be utterly unsurprised if Vance were to make a justified but half-arsed and ultimately unsuccessful attempt to invoke the 25th. Followed by Trump railing that Vance is fired and refusing to accept he can't fire him while simultaneously demanding congress impeach Vance and/or the DOJ charge him with treason.
As for the United Healthcare CEO, the phrase "banality of evil" was one that sprung to mind. How much suffering has this man caused? How many people in more pain than they needed to be? How many people fretting about cost when they're trying to get well? How many people taking their own lives rather than fight the system any further? He killed people by squeezing them for profit. It seems to me not substantially different from operating a factory using forced labour in Nazi Germany, and with the same "oh but he was really a lovely man" rhetoric from those who knew him personally.
I'm with Gandalf about those who "deserve death" but sheesh.
My wife and I have United Health Care Advantage as part of our Medicare coverage. We are quite satisfied with it given the usual limitations of private health insurance (deductibles, and network provisions).
One item they would not cover is a spinal stimulator insertion in my back, even though it is approved by Medicare. They said the data was insufficient. Turns out, I really did not need it since I lost 40 lbs of weight using a GLP-1 injectable which they did cover.
I still take a small dose of Naproxen in the morning when I know I will be doing some physical work.
Per Section 3 of the Twentieth Amendment: “If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President, the President-elect shall have died, the Vice President-elect shall become President.”
OK if he dies, but what if he's hit on the head by a falling gargoyle and becomes permanently unable to function intellectually?
Good question. The Twentieth Amendment addresses death and failure to qualify before inauguration, but it doesn’t specifically mention incapacity, and the Twenty-fifth Amendment only applies after inauguration.
Per Section 3 of the Twentieth Amendment: “If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President, the President-elect shall have died, the Vice President-elect shall become President.”
OK if he dies, but what if he's hit on the head by a falling gargoyle and becomes permanently unable to function intellectually?
Good question. The Twentieth Amendment addresses death and failure to qualify before inauguration, but it doesn’t specifically mention incapacity, and the Twenty-fifth Amendment only applies after inauguration.
If he's incapacitated he can't take the oath of office. Presumably invocation of the 25th would follow shortly after.
Per Section 3 of the Twentieth Amendment: “If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President, the President-elect shall have died, the Vice President-elect shall become President.”
OK if he dies, but what if he's hit on the head by a falling gargoyle and becomes permanently unable to function intellectually?
Good question. The Twentieth Amendment addresses death and failure to qualify before inauguration, but it doesn’t specifically mention incapacity, and the Twenty-fifth Amendment only applies after inauguration.
If he's incapacitated he can't take the oath of office. Presumably invocation of the 25th would follow shortly after.
Maybe. But the 25th refers to the “President,” not “President-elect,” and he’s not President until he takes the oath of office. And the 25th also says “Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide . . . .” There are no “principal officers of the executive department” until the President appoints them, the Senate confirms them and they take their oaths. So the 25th doesn’t quite fit.
I would probably argue that it should be treated as the President “failing to qualify,” even though there’s no specific constitutional qualification of mental competence. I’ve seen resources that say mental incompetence is treated like death under the 20th, but the 20th doesn’t actually say that.
And that’s the problem—the 20th doesn’t specifically address this possibility at all, so any course would be trying to figure out the closest fit.
I'm sure all major figures in American health insurance companies get threats. They deny a lot of people coverage those folks really need. I'm sure some small number of those people or their family members are off-balance enough to think about taking revenge. Though for all we know it could be someone else he pissed off in an entirely different way who took out the hit on him.
The NY Times is now reporting that “delay” and “deny” were inscribed on some of the bullet casings, so that does indeed suggest it may have had to do with denial of insurance coverage.
Per Section 3 of the Twentieth Amendment: “If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President, the President-elect shall have died, the Vice President-elect shall become President.”
OK if he dies, but what if he's hit on the head by a falling gargoyle and becomes permanently unable to function intellectually?
Good question. The Twentieth Amendment addresses death and failure to qualify before inauguration, but it doesn’t specifically mention incapacity, and the Twenty-fifth Amendment only applies after inauguration.
If he's incapacitated he can't take the oath of office. Presumably invocation of the 25th would follow shortly after.
Maybe. But the 25th refers to the “President,” not “President-elect,” and he’s not President until he takes the oath of office. And the 25th also says “Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide . . . .” There are no “principal officers of the executive department” until the President appoints them, the Senate confirms them and they take their oaths. So the 25th doesn’t quite fit.
I wondered about that. Do cabinet members automatically cease to hold office on inauguration day or is firing them / accepting their resignations the first act of the new president?
Otherwise, would the new congress have to legislate for "such other body" and wait out the 10 days for it to be deemed signed?
I believe that the convention is that all cabinet members submit letters of resignation toward the end of the current president’s term, which take effect unless the presidents does not accept the resignation.
I don’t think anyone would want a process that doesn’t move pretty quickly.
Per Section 3 of the Twentieth Amendment: “If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President, the President-elect shall have died, the Vice President-elect shall become President.”
OK if he dies, but what if he's hit on the head by a falling gargoyle and becomes permanently unable to function intellectually?
How - as he doesn't appear to function intellectually now - could you tell?
There is now indication of motive in the healthcare CEO's murder: NY Times reports that shell casings were found at the scene inscribed with the words "delay" and "deny." Law enforcement also released stills from surveillance footage showing the shooter's face: young white man, it looks like. So he stands a chance of being taken alive if they find him, which would mean a trial, and I would very much like to see how that would play out. They'd have to seat a jury of New Yorkers who don't despise health insurance executives, just for starters.
I don't think either of them is actually the Antichrist (who is, IIRC, supposed to be an attractive personality, loved by all), but Musk is apparently the puppetmaster, pulling the strings of Putin as well as those of Trump.
BTW, I see that the Tangerine Tyrant is due to meet the heir to the UK throne today (in Paris), which will be fun for them both. Perhaps.
My son refers to Trump as a "budget Antichrist," because he's the version you'd get at a two-for-one sale--a knock-off imitation of the real thing. And if (God forbid) he turned out to BE the real thing, I'd be dying of embarrassment in the Kingdom some day, to have such a two-bit villain playing a starring role in the end of humanity. Just imagine the conversations with angels and other species! "How did things go for your people?" "Um..." (Where's the vomiting smiley again?)
The older I get and the more I learn the more I think evil just is a two-bit knock-off version of goodness and great evil is a two-bit knock-off version of the lesser evil.
Musk is apparently the puppetmaster, pulling the strings of Putin as well as those of Trump.
Musk owes much of his current position to the current order, both in terms of state subsidies and lax enforcement of securities law.
Yes, so he does, and will no doubt ensure that the current order continues, to his advantage. He may throw Trump to the wolves at some point, if that acts to his advantage, without compunction.
Musk is apparently the puppetmaster, pulling the strings of Putin as well as those of Trump.
Musk owes much of his current position to the current order, both in terms of state subsidies and lax enforcement of securities law.
Yes, so he does, and will no doubt ensure that the current order continues, to his advantage.
It's equally in Trumps gift to throw him to the wolves should be so minded, there was also nothing stopping the current administration from looking at his dealings closely. Ditto people genuinely worse than Musk (Thiel et al).
There's a particular line of liberal thought that likes to locate the bad as coming from an outside source without reckoning with their own culpability.
So, why is Trump at the Notre Dame shindig? Not that I really care, but it just seems kinda strange. I don't see it as the kinda thing he'd really care about, nor can I imagine that Macron would be desperate to have him there, especially given that he's not even president yet.
He even had a seat of honour in the front row, placed between President Macron and Mme Macron, who looked distinctly uncomfortable - I watched most of the ceremony/service *live* on YouTube.
The cameras naturally homed in on Macron from time to time, thus treating us all to a view of Trump as well... There seemed to be something odd about his appearance, and it took me a few moments to realise what it was - he was wearing a bright yellow tie, instead of his trademark red tie.
Maybe M Macron is hedging his bets, and hoping to keep a good relationship with the US? Despite his current political troubles, he presumably expects to still be in charge in January!
BTW, there was also a brief glimpse of none other than Elon Musk, sitting further back. Now what the hell was the Lord of Misrule doing there?
Maybe M Macron is hedging his bets, and hoping to keep a good relationship with the US?
Yeah, my guess would be wants to talk things over with Trump, without having to go through what would probably be an awkward state visit. So he invited him, and Trump said yes.
Point of infromation: the AntiChrist is from within the church. It is whatever is preventing the spread of the Gospel. Trump is preventing the spread of the Gospel, but he is certainly not from within the church.
On the other hand, he does fit the image of the leader 666 in that he claims to be the modern Messiah, but he is really not. He will never be a perfect 777,
The older I get and the more I learn the more I think evil just is a two-bit knock-off version of goodness and great evil is a two-bit knock-off version of the lesser evil.
Well, yes. Evil is corrupted goodness, not a thing in itself.
Point of infromation: the AntiChrist is from within the church. It is whatever is preventing the spread of the Gospel. Trump is preventing the spread of the Gospel, but he is certainly not from within the church.
On the other hand, he does fit the image of the leader 666 in that he claims to be the modern Messiah, but he is really not. He will never be a perfect 777,
He may not actually be from within the church, but he's certainly endorsed by a large part of the church in the US. That, of course, doesn't make him the AntiChrist by default...
Point of infromation: the AntiChrist is from within the church. It is whatever is preventing the spread of the Gospel. Trump is preventing the spread of the Gospel, but he is certainly not from within the church.
On the other hand, he does fit the image of the leader 666 in that he claims to be the modern Messiah, but he is really not. He will never be a perfect 777,
He may not actually be from within the church, but he's certainly endorsed by a large part of the church in the US. That, of course, doesn't make him the AntiChrist by default...
Technically, no church body in the US can endorse anyone running for office. To do so would result in the loss of tax-exempt status, thus religious bodies tend to avoid that. However, many individual pastors and some leading people who claim to be Christian did endorse him. But I would not say a large part of the church in the US endorsed DJT. Just because someone claims to be Christians does not mean he/she/they are Christian.
So, why is Trump at the Notre Dame shindig? Not that I really care, but it just seems kinda strange. I don't see it as the kinda thing he'd really care about, nor can I imagine that Macron would be desperate to have him there, especially given that he's not even president yet.
I assume Macron hopes to appeal to Trump's sense of vanity - it is reminiscent of the time he invited him to the Bastille Day celebration.
As for the murder of the healthcare CEO, two wrongs don’t make a right. The people cheering on the murderer creep me out.
Personally, they don't creep me out, in fact, I find the whole phenom rather interesting, probably because Thompson's fate seems to be a case of Live By The Sword, Die By The Sword, so the emotional horror isn't there for me.
But were I on the shooter's jury, I would certainly vote guilty if the evidence warranted.
So, why is Trump at the Notre Dame shindig? Not that I really care, but it just seems kinda strange. I don't see it as the kinda thing he'd really care about, nor can I imagine that Macron would be desperate to have him there, especially given that he's not even president yet.
I assume Macron hopes to appeal to Trump's sense of vanity - it is reminiscent of the time he invited him to the Bastille Day celebration.
I think Trump went to that? Isn't that where he got the idea to hold a big military parade in DC?
I think Trump went to that? Isn't that where he got the idea to hold a big military parade in DC?
Yes, and at the time it seen in some circles as a coup for Macron to have got in a visit with Trump so early in his presidency.
Trudeau enjoyed a similar vogue in some circles as "the Trump whisperer", as one writer put it. He studied Trump's handshake, did playful photo-ops at the Resolute Desk, and gave Donald J. a photo of Trump and Trudeau at a dinner-lecture in the 80s and another of the Trump "hotel" on the Klondike Trail.
Well, there is some bad news and some good news today,
First the bad news: ABC settled a lawsuit Trump had against it for $14 mil. This is enfolding trump to go after other news outlets. He is going after the De Moines Register now over the polling they had just before the election. The poll predicted Trump would lose, Other news outlets are now fearing he will come after them. CNN story.
Now the good news. The state judge in the New York case were Trump was found guilty is refusing to vacate the verdict. He is saying while the SCOTUS is saying a president in office cannot be federally charged for official acts, it does not apply to a president elect. Besides, it is a state charge. News Report here
Comments
OK if he dies, but what if he's hit on the head by a falling gargoyle and becomes permanently unable to function intellectually?
The Gizmodo piece makes what seems to me like a relevant connection to the Trump era:
https://constitutioncenter.org/the-constitution/amendments/amendment-xxv
As for the United Healthcare CEO, the phrase "banality of evil" was one that sprung to mind. How much suffering has this man caused? How many people in more pain than they needed to be? How many people fretting about cost when they're trying to get well? How many people taking their own lives rather than fight the system any further? He killed people by squeezing them for profit. It seems to me not substantially different from operating a factory using forced labour in Nazi Germany, and with the same "oh but he was really a lovely man" rhetoric from those who knew him personally.
I'm with Gandalf about those who "deserve death" but sheesh.
One item they would not cover is a spinal stimulator insertion in my back, even though it is approved by Medicare. They said the data was insufficient. Turns out, I really did not need it since I lost 40 lbs of weight using a GLP-1 injectable which they did cover.
I still take a small dose of Naproxen in the morning when I know I will be doing some physical work.
Sorry for the tangent.
If he's incapacitated he can't take the oath of office. Presumably invocation of the 25th would follow shortly after.
I would probably argue that it should be treated as the President “failing to qualify,” even though there’s no specific constitutional qualification of mental competence. I’ve seen resources that say mental incompetence is treated like death under the 20th, but the 20th doesn’t actually say that.
And that’s the problem—the 20th doesn’t specifically address this possibility at all, so any course would be trying to figure out the closest fit.
The NY Times is now reporting that “delay” and “deny” were inscribed on some of the bullet casings, so that does indeed suggest it may have had to do with denial of insurance coverage.
I wondered about that. Do cabinet members automatically cease to hold office on inauguration day or is firing them / accepting their resignations the first act of the new president?
Otherwise, would the new congress have to legislate for "such other body" and wait out the 10 days for it to be deemed signed?
I don’t think anyone would want a process that doesn’t move pretty quickly.
Aye, there's the rub.
How - as he doesn't appear to function intellectually now - could you tell?
I suppose they could achieve that by seating a jury who were all health insurance executives.
Or politicians, by the looks of it.
BTW, I see that the Tangerine Tyrant is due to meet the heir to the UK throne today (in Paris), which will be fun for them both. Perhaps.
Musk owes much of his current position to the current order, both in terms of state subsidies and lax enforcement of securities law.
Yes, so he does, and will no doubt ensure that the current order continues, to his advantage. He may throw Trump to the wolves at some point, if that acts to his advantage, without compunction.
It's equally in Trumps gift to throw him to the wolves should be so minded, there was also nothing stopping the current administration from looking at his dealings closely. Ditto people genuinely worse than Musk (Thiel et al).
There's a particular line of liberal thought that likes to locate the bad as coming from an outside source without reckoning with their own culpability.
The cameras naturally homed in on Macron from time to time, thus treating us all to a view of Trump as well...
Maybe M Macron is hedging his bets, and hoping to keep a good relationship with the US? Despite his current political troubles, he presumably expects to still be in charge in January!
BTW, there was also a brief glimpse of none other than Elon Musk, sitting further back. Now what the hell was the Lord of Misrule doing there?
Yeah, my guess would be wants to talk things over with Trump, without having to go through what would probably be an awkward state visit. So he invited him, and Trump said yes.
On the other hand, he does fit the image of the leader 666 in that he claims to be the modern Messiah, but he is really not. He will never be a perfect 777,
Well, yes. Evil is corrupted goodness, not a thing in itself.
He may not actually be from within the church, but he's certainly endorsed by a large part of the church in the US. That, of course, doesn't make him the AntiChrist by default...
Technically, no church body in the US can endorse anyone running for office. To do so would result in the loss of tax-exempt status, thus religious bodies tend to avoid that. However, many individual pastors and some leading people who claim to be Christian did endorse him. But I would not say a large part of the church in the US endorsed DJT. Just because someone claims to be Christians does not mean he/she/they are Christian.
That's how it appears to some of us on this side of the Pond, anyway.
I assume Macron hopes to appeal to Trump's sense of vanity - it is reminiscent of the time he invited him to the Bastille Day celebration.
Personally, they don't creep me out, in fact, I find the whole phenom rather interesting, probably because Thompson's fate seems to be a case of Live By The Sword, Die By The Sword, so the emotional horror isn't there for me.
But were I on the shooter's jury, I would certainly vote guilty if the evidence warranted.
I think Trump went to that? Isn't that where he got the idea to hold a big military parade in DC?
Yes, and at the time it seen in some circles as a coup for Macron to have got in a visit with Trump so early in his presidency.
Trudeau enjoyed a similar vogue in some circles as "the Trump whisperer", as one writer put it. He studied Trump's handshake, did playful photo-ops at the Resolute Desk, and gave Donald J. a photo of Trump and Trudeau at a dinner-lecture in the 80s and another of the Trump "hotel" on the Klondike Trail.
https://www.msnbc.com/the-reidout/reidout-blog/trump-energy-secretary-chris-wright-climate-change-rcna183502
Dear God. Who are these guys?
The inhabitants - nay, denizens - of the Bottom Half of the Internet. Or at least that's where they should be left.
CEO of an oil company who was willing to be interviewed by PragerU
First the bad news: ABC settled a lawsuit Trump had against it for $14 mil. This is enfolding trump to go after other news outlets. He is going after the De Moines Register now over the polling they had just before the election. The poll predicted Trump would lose, Other news outlets are now fearing he will come after them. CNN story.
Now the good news. The state judge in the New York case were Trump was found guilty is refusing to vacate the verdict. He is saying while the SCOTUS is saying a president in office cannot be federally charged for official acts, it does not apply to a president elect. Besides, it is a state charge. News Report here
Short answer: yes. State crimes are different from federal crimes. The lawyers can explain this.
But now Trump is claiming juror misconduct; however, his claim is vague.