There was a time when the NYTimes supported the 25th Amendment remedy.

[kentuck]

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/16/opinion/25th-amendment-trump.html

<snip>
It is not squishy New York Times conservatives who regard the president as a child, an intellectual void, a hopeless case, a threat to national security; it is people who are self-selected loyalists, who supported him in the campaign, who daily go to work for him. And all this, in the fourth month of his administration.

This will not get better. It could easily get worse. And as hard and controversial as a 25th Amendment remedy would be, there are ways in which Trump’s removal today should be less painful for conservatives than abandoning him in the campaign would have been — since Hillary Clinton will not be retroactively elected if Trump is removed, nor will Neil Gorsuch be unseated. Any cost to Republicans will be counted in internal divisions and future primary challenges, not in immediate policy defeats.

Meanwhile, from the perspective of the Republican leadership’s duty to their country, and indeed to the world that our imperium bestrides, leaving a man this witless and unmastered in an office with these powers and responsibilities is an act of gross negligence, which no objective on the near-term political horizon seems remotely significant enough to justify.


There will be time to return again to world-weariness and cynicism as this agony drags on. Right now, though, I will be boring in my sincerity: I respectfully ask Mike Pence and Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell to reconsider their support for a man who never should have had his party’s nomination, never should have been elevated to this office, never should have been endorsed and propped up and defended by people who understood his unfitness all along.

Now is a day for redemption. Now is an acceptable time.

[Hortensis]

1. Well, this is an OPINION piece, not an article that goes through

an intensive editorial process -- as that other shamefully did.

Of course, let's never forget that the NYT is proven to engage in betrayal and corruption when it seems important enough to someone at some level. I'm thinking of the October 31, 2016 article (just over a week before the fatal election) that was rewritten at instruction from above to hide the truth and deliberately give the false impression that the Trump-Russia investigation had turned up nothing of significance.

Btw, one of the original authors of the 25th is still with us, and he says it would not apply. Trump is now still essentially what he was when people voted to make him POTUS. The people's choice.

And this is, of course, yet another argument weighing in FOR Rosenstein's claim of sarcasm, not a serious suggestion. He would know the 25th would only apply if, for instance, Trump had become insane or otherwise mentally incapacitated, not just a particularly trumpish version of himself. In that case, the WH would be gushing like a colander under a fire hose, no covert intrusions from outside needed.

The remedy is in impeachment, trial and removal.