Brooks: I’m for Impeachment, But the 25th Amendment Is for Incapacitation, Which Trump Isn’t

On Friday’s “PBS NewsHour,” New York Times columnist David Brooks stated that while he supports impeaching President Donald Trump, he is against the 25th Amendment. Because “That’s for incapacitation. The problem is, he’s not incapacitated.”

Brooks said, “I don’t support the 25th Amendment. That’s for incapacitation. The problem is, he’s not incapacitated. I would, I think, on the merits completely support impeachment. If interfering with an election certification by sending an invading force is not an impeachable offense, I don’t know what is. And so, I do support that. I think it would be very useful. Even if the House did it, and the Senate was deliberating, it would be an act of discipline. It would be a sword hanging over his head, which might restrain him in his final twelve days of office. I think it’s highly unlikely the Senate would ever convict.”

He continued, “The fallback position could be censuring him under Article 3 of the 14th Amendment, which prevents someone who’s taken part in an insurrection against the United States from ever running for federal office. And that’s important, I think. Because it would reduce his role as an intimidator in the Republican Party and reduce the possibility that he runs for office in 2024, which I do not think he has — deserves the standing to do right now.”

Follow Ian Hanchett on Twitter @IanHanchett


Please let us know if you're having issues with commenting.