There is a "loophole," if you will, in the 25th amendment that allows a unique "body as Congress may by law provide..."
This bill is about defining that body, but it still is within the two methods that you cited for removing a sitting President. It's just that this "body" has not been defined "by law" yet.
I think of it as being similar to the two Article V methods for proposing amendments. We've done it the Congressional way previously, but there is also the Convention of States way to propose amendments. With the 25th amendment, there is the Vice-President plus Cabinet way, but also the Vice-President plus "such other body as Congress may by law provide" way.
But first, Congress must "by law" define that "other such body." That's what this bill tries to do, albeit with a flawed body.
-PJ
Thank you for making that point.
One thing that really bothers me about Congress is it’s ability to shift the buck.
Instead of doing their duty, they set up some sham investigation or committee to look at things, which will never turn into anything tangible.
Here they have the ability to defer their job on yet another issue.
If anyone thinks our past presidents would conform to the law, I think they’re sadly mistaken.
Bill Clinton and Obama committed acts that could be seen as treason. That doesn’t convince me they’d stick to the law now, or at a future date.
If anything, this loophole you’ve pointed out should be eliminated.