⚡ BREAKING NEWS
Sponsor Advertisement
Greene Demands Trump's Removal Under 25th Amendment
Marjorie Taylor Greene - Gage Skidmore from Surprise, AZ, United States of America

Greene Demands Trump's Removal Under 25th Amendment

Former Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene publicly called for President Donald Trump's removal from office under the 25th Amendment. This demand followed a Truth Social post by President Trump regarding Iran, which Greene criticized as "evil and madness.

On April 7, the day voters in Georgia's 14th Congressional District participated in a special election to fill a vacant House seat, former Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene publicly demanded President Donald Trump's removal from office under the 25th Amendment. Greene's call came in response to a social media post by President Trump concerning Iran, which she characterized as "evil and madness."

"25TH AMENDMENT!!! Not a single bomb has dropped on America. We cannot kill an entire civilization. This is evil and madness." — Former Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene

The catalyst for Greene's statement was a Truth Social post issued by President Trump earlier that Tuesday. In his post, President Trump issued a stark warning to Iran, stating that the country's "whole civilization will die tonight" unless "something revolutionarily wonderful" occurred. He linked this warning to what he described as "Complete and Total Regime Change," asserting that "47 years of extortion, corruption, and death, will finally end." President Trump informed his followers that the world would witness the outcome by Tuesday night, framing the moment as "one of the most important moments in the long and complex history of the World."

Shortly after President Trump's post, Greene took to X (formerly Twitter) to voice her strong disapproval. Her post read: "25TH AMENDMENT!!! Not a single bomb has dropped on America. We cannot kill an entire civilization. This is evil and madness." The constitutional mechanism Greene invoked, the 25th Amendment, addresses presidential disability and succession. Specifically, Section Four of the 25th Amendment allows the Vice President and a majority of the Cabinet to declare the President "unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office," at which point those powers and duties would temporarily transfer to the Vice President. Should such a declaration occur, Congress would then have the authority to act, with lawmakers able to "determine by a two-thirds vote whether to permanently remove the President or to return the President to his duties."

Greene's demand unfolded as her former constituents were casting ballots in a special election to determine who would succeed her in Georgia's 14th Congressional District. Greene resigned from Congress in January, creating the vacancy. For this special election, President Trump had publicly endorsed Clay Fuller, whom he described as an "America First Patriot," since February. Fuller's background includes service as district attorney for the Lookout Mountain Judicial Circuit and holding the rank of lieutenant colonel as deputy staff judge advocate in the Air National Guard. President Trump had expressed his expectation that Fuller would advance the administration's agenda upon entering the House. The night before the election, President Trump extensively promoted Fuller, writing: "There is a very important Special Election tomorrow, Tuesday, April 7th, in Georgia’s 14th Congressional District! I am asking all Republicans, America First Patriots, and MAGA Warriors, to please GET OUT AND VOTE for a fantastic Candidate, Clay Fuller, who has my Complete and Total Endorsement!" He also provided specific voting instructions, including poll hours.

The tension between Greene and President Trump is not a recent development. Breitbart Editor-in-Chief Alex Marlow described Greene's decision to resign from Congress in November as "deeply selfish," arguing it deprived Republicans of a crucial House vote. Since her departure from Congress, Greene has consistently made President Trump's Iran policy a focal point of her public criticism of the administration. In March, during an appearance on CNN, she characterized President Trump's military posture toward Iran as a "perverted, deranged version" of the "Make America Great Again" (MAGA) platform. She stated, "This is not what we campaigned for. We said on every single rally stage, no more foreign wars, no more regime change. It’s time to put America first." Greene further escalated her critique, asserting that President Trump's actions represented "100% a betrayal" of the mandate voters entrusted to him in 2024. During an interview on 60 Minutes, Greene argued that a president committed to America First priorities should prioritize domestic policy, an area she suggested President Trump had not sufficiently focused on.

Greene's anti-war stance has also led her to forge connections with unexpected allies. In December, CODEPINK cofounder Medea Benjamin visited Greene's Capitol Hill office and subsequently praised her as a "strong anti war voice in congress." Greene acknowledged this relationship, stating she had "enjoyed a friendship" with Benjamin "for a few years" and was "fully against funding foreign wars."

President Trump has shown no inclination toward reconciliation with Greene. He publicly welcomed her congressional exit as "great news for the country," asserting she was "not AMERICA FIRST or MAGA." He has also referred to her as "Marjorie ‘Traitor’ Brown" and characterized her as "a very dumb person." The former Representative's latest demand for President Trump's removal underscores a deepening public rift between the two prominent Republican figures, particularly concerning foreign policy and constitutional powers.

Advertisement

The Flipside: Different Perspectives

Progressive View

The invocation of the 25th Amendment, even by a former legislator, highlights significant concerns regarding presidential conduct and rhetoric, particularly in foreign policy. From a progressive viewpoint, a President's public statements threatening "complete and total regime change" or the demise of an "entire civilization" are deeply troubling. Such rhetoric can escalate international tensions, risk military conflict, and potentially violate humanitarian principles. The 25th Amendment exists as a crucial safeguard to address situations where a President's actions or judgment could endanger national or global stability. While acknowledging the gravity of such a call, progressives would emphasize the importance of accountability for leaders and the ethical implications of using inflammatory language on the world stage. The focus on "no more foreign wars, no more regime change" resonates with progressive anti-interventionist sentiments, prioritizing diplomacy and peace over military aggression. This incident underscores the need for systemic checks and balances to prevent unilateral actions that could have catastrophic consequences, emphasizing collective well-being over unchecked executive power.

Conservative View

The call for a President's removal via the 25th Amendment is an extraordinary measure, reflecting deep divisions even within the conservative movement. From a conservative perspective, such an action should be reserved for clear cases of presidential inability, not policy disagreements. While individual liberty dictates that former Representative Greene is free to express her views, challenging the President's foreign policy decisions through this constitutional mechanism is seen by many as undermining the executive's authority, especially during sensitive international situations. Conservatives typically advocate for a strong executive in foreign affairs, believing the President must have the flexibility to protect national interests without undue interference. Furthermore, internal party disputes, particularly during an election cycle or a crucial special election, can be perceived as detrimental to party unity and the broader conservative agenda. Emphasizing personal responsibility, some may argue that political disagreements should be handled through conventional legislative and electoral processes rather than invoking mechanisms designed for presidential incapacitation. The focus should remain on promoting policies that strengthen the nation and uphold constitutional order.

Common Ground

Despite the stark disagreements, both conservative and progressive perspectives share common ground regarding the gravity of the 25th Amendment and the importance of constitutional processes. There is a mutual understanding that invoking such a mechanism is a serious matter, not to be taken lightly, and should be considered only under extreme circumstances. Both sides generally agree that foreign policy decisions, particularly those involving potential conflict or regime change, require careful deliberation and consideration of their global impact. A shared desire for peace and stability, albeit through different approaches, underlies much of the debate. Furthermore, the importance of open public discourse and the right to criticize government actions are values upheld across the political spectrum. While approaches to national security and executive power may differ, both conservatives and progressives can agree on the fundamental need for responsible leadership and adherence to constitutional principles in navigating complex international relations.