A Democratic Congress Could Weaponize the 25th Amendment's Vice-Presidential Vacancy Process to Seize the Presidency
Source: https://www.facebook.com/americanspectator/. "Speaker Jeffries and the Nightmare Scenario | The American Spectator | USA News and Politics." October 16, 2026. spectator.org
The Gist
The author argues that if Democrats win Congress and Trump is removed or harmed, they could drag out or sabotage the process of filling a vice-presidential vacancy, as they could not be trusted to act like the Democrats who confirmed Ford and Rockefeller. That could leave a Democratic Speaker next in line for the presidency, which he sees as a looming crisis.
Conclusion
If Democrats win Congress and Trump is removed or harmed, the bipartisan Ford-Rockefeller confirmation precedent would collapse, and Democrats could obstruct the filling of a vice-presidential vacancy and put a Democratic Speaker in the presidency, which would begin a new national nightmare.
Premises
- In 1973-74, a heavily Democratic Congress confirmed Ford and Rockefeller by overwhelming margins after a thorough, bipartisan vetting process, putting national interest ahead of partisanship.
- Today's Democratic Party is poised to win Congress, is threatening a third impeachment of Trump, and operates in an environment of rising political violence, including three attempts on Trump's life.
- Modern Democrats would weaponize each element of the 1973 process: wide distribution or leaking of FBI raw files, hearings swamped with partisan witnesses, decades-deep scrutiny of nominees' finances, and subpoena fights, all of which would prolong the vacancy.
- If Vance became president and the vice presidency stayed vacant, and if tragedy then befell him, a Democratic Speaker would ascend to the presidency.
- Leading Democrats (Ocasio-Cortez, Khanna, Raskin) support a third impeachment, Jeffries would struggle to resist them, and Senate Republicans may defect on removal.
- Democrats have trouble condemning violence that aligns with their worldview (e.g., Mangione, Robinson), making them less trustworthy to act in good faith.
Assumptions
- Democratic leaders and members would act in bad faith and put partisan advantage above constitutional norms, unlike their 1970s predecessors.
- The political climate of 2026 is similar enough to 1973 for the same procedures to be exploited, but the norms of restraint no longer hold.
- Democrats would deliberately delay confirmation to keep the vice presidency vacant, rather than merely conducting rigorous vetting.
- A third impeachment would lead to removal, or violence against Trump or Vance is plausible enough to treat the succession scenario as realistic.
- Democratic ambivalence toward some violent acts implies willingness to exploit or benefit from political violence against Republican leaders.
- Nothing in the Constitution or in Republican control of other levers would prevent obstruction of a nomination.