Yale psychiatrist urges Pelosi: Request 72-hour mental health hold on Trump after Iran attack

[CousinIT]

https://www.salon.com/2020/01/04/yale-psychiatrist-urges-pelosi-request-72-hour-mental-health-hold-on-trump-after-iran-attack/

Yale psychiatrist who has warned of the dangers of President Donald Trump’s mental health for years urged House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to request a mental health hold of the president after he ordered a drone strike that killed a top Iranian general.

Bandy X. Lee, a professor of psychiatry at the Yale University School of Medicine, founded the World Mental Health Coalition after convening a conference at Yale on the president’s mental health. She is the editor of the book “The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump: 27 Psychiatrists and Mental Health Experts Assess a President" and more recently was joined by psychiatrists at universities around the U.S. in calling for the House of Representatives to convene a panel of mental health experts to weigh in on the president’s impeachment proceedings.

Lee recently told Salon that Pelosi has not done enough to respond to the president.

“As a co-worker, she has the right to have him submit to an involuntary evaluation, but she has not,” she said. “I am beginning to believe that a mental health hold, which we have tried to avoid, will become inevitable.”

Lee told Salon this week that the president's decision to order the drone killing of a top Iranian general was further evidence that Pelosi should do more to rein in Trump. The Pentagon said on Thursday that Trump ordered a drone strike that killed Iranian Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani, commander of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard and widely considered the second-most powerful official in Iran. Democrats quickly warned that the escalation threatens to plunge the U.S. into a full-blown war with Iran.

“This is exactly the kind of dangerous event we foresaw as Donald Trump’s response to the impeachment proceedings, just as his pulling troops from northern Syria was a direct response to the announcement of an impeachment inquiry,” Lee told Salon. “This was why more than 800 mental health professionals petitioned Congress to consult with us, since, without intervention, this kind of crisis was a matter of time, not just a possibility."

[Marengo]

1. Ridiculous headline, there was no attack on Iran. An Iranian posing an imminent threat to US...

Personnel was neutralized. IMO this was absolutely justified and defensible.

[rockfordfile]

3. No it's not justified. To try and divert from trump's crimes.

[Marengo]

6. Nope, Soleimani's mission in Iraq was to plan and coordinate attacks against US targets

[dware]

7. And he's been doing it for years and years.

I refuse to lose any sleep over the death of this man, although it should have been done covertly so there would be plausible deniability and at the same time, send a very powerful message to the leadership of Iran.

[Marengo]

8. I am amazed at how few here are willing to acknowledge that.

[dware]

9. I'm not,

I kind of expected it.


Semper Fi fellow Marine.

[dware]

27. Now there's an intelligent reply.

[Marengo]

37. I've been on DU a number of years (V1&2) and I was not prepared for the degree of apologism

Back at ya Devil Dog!

[jberryhill]

51. Yes, well, that oversight has been remedied

[pangaia]

48. I simply disagree with it. It was a wrong move, in my blind view, ignorant,

never been in the military view.and ...


........ election.......
pompeo religio/fascist nut job.
end of days
putin et al
etc
etc
etc

I'm surprised at how few here are willing to acknowledge that..

[Eyeball_Kid]

34. The US "plans" attacks on adversaries of all kinds, all the time.

Making future plans for military events is as common as a morning cup of coffee.

As it's true that Soleimani has a history of coordinating terror attacks, there were STILL a myriad of alternatives to outright murder, including counterintelligence maneuvers that expose Soleimani's plans and his history of terrorism. He could have been made into an international pariah with ease. But no. Trump had to assassinate him and ignite fury in the middle east. What a foolish move.

[pangaia]

49. I just tried to reply to what his name... but seems his post was hidden.

[pangaia]

47. And what was the great ole US OF A doing in Iraq to begin with ???

[ramen]

52. Can you elaborate on the justification?

[mr_lebowski]

54. Dude was part of their government and therefore what Trump did could be argued as being Terrorism

Quite literally, and quite easily argued, I would add.

If Russia illegally invaded Mexico on bullshit charges of being a threat to their country, and the US took an interest and killed Russians, would it be justified? OF COURSE, we'd say. And if the US Defense Secretary went to Mexico and the Russians murdered him, would we be pissed and call it Terrorism? OF COURSE.

I don't tend to start my thinking on things like this w/the presumption that what the US does is always justified and right. Other countries have a right to defend their interests, just like US.

What Trump did was ABSOLUTELY an attack on Iran itself, not just 'some Iranian'.

[uponit7771]

58. This is a text book act of war, Sol was a cabinet level member not just some low level general

[MineralMan]

2. I would suggest that the Yale Psychiatrist read the Constitution

of the United States. When it comes to issues regarding Presidents and House Speakers, that document lays out who can do what. No other rules apply.

While his suggestion might seem logical, it is, in fact, ludicrous. Nancy Pelosi has no authority to request a psych exam on the President. No authority whatsoever.

[Hortensis]

10. :) Agree, at THIS point. Now, if they were to

pass the law indicated in the constitution... Congress has never passed such a law, however.

Section 4. Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.

It would be within the authority of congress right now, though, as one of the checks on the presidency, to discuss use of the 25th to remove the president. I don't know other reasons which must exist and be well known, but it does seem to me that congressional consideration would be required in order to set up a body that could bypass Trump's VP and cabinet filled with corrupt political hacks.

[MineralMan]

15. Congress cannot initiate a 25th Amendment action.

Once again, a reading of the Constitution will help with understanding that Amendment. Congress has Impeachment and Removal powers, but cannot initiate a 25th Amendment action.

[Hortensis]

18. You're right. The VP has to be involved. "AND"

a majority of the body congress establishes would be involved.

However, I don't see that congress couldn't ask the VP and cabinet to act. Obviously, neither Pelosi nor Schumer could compel an involuntary mental health exam "as a coworker."

Fwiw, I've never believed Pence has any loyalty to Trump. Trump's deliberately surrounded himself with people of bad character who'll go along with him, including some religious zealots, for whom corruption is SOP and who'd all betray him, and probably anyone else, in a flash.

[MineralMan]

20. Pence keeps his own counsel.

I have no idea where he stands, except that he is a dominionist.

Many of his supporters would quickly abandon him under some circumstances, but have not done so yet. I'm not sure what circumstances would turn them against him, really. They're benefiting in some way from his actions, I suppose, so they continue to support him. It's puzzling, but clearly that support is strong, for whatever reason.

[Hortensis]

31. I was reading that these charismatic-leader relationships are

more complex than just leading and following. Trump's formed himself to and incorporated some of their expectations into his self identity, not just vice versa.

Masha Gessen said the one big thing most likely to cause authoritarian followers to turn on their leader is to decide they've backed a loser. We saw that with W, but only in the last year, and for some only the last months, even weeks or days, when more and more gave up expecting him to finally pull a winning rabbit out of his hat and smite us with it.

Me neither for Pence. But I suspect his loyalty is to God and our new kleptocrats, and himself, not always in that order but believing it is. It's so common, after all.

[MineralMan]

35. With Pence, We'll Have to Ask Mother.

[Hortensis]

41. Inevitably occurred to me also.

Someone once said that when they're out in public together you can't get a dime between them, and he meant physically. Guarding him from ungodly temptations presumably.

What a zoo.

[StarfishSaver]

19. This is an interesting argument

Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide

Hortensis is right - arguably, Congress COULD pass a new law giving another entity - even itself - the ability to trigger the 25th Amendment. But that would raise all kinds of separation of powers issues. And, unlike impeachment, this could be resolved in the courts, which I think would take your position - that the Constitution implicitly limits Congress' power to remove a president to the impeachment process and that although the 25th Amendment allows Congress to designate additional entities to invoke the 25th Amendment, the language of the Amendment (including giving Congress powers to decide if a president remains incapacitated) suggests that Congress' role in the 25th Amendment is very limited to this and doesn't include the power to invoke it.

[MineralMan]

24. With a Republican majority in the Senate, I cannot imagine this Congress

making any such law. It would be easier to simply impeach and remove that bastard. That doesn't seem very likely, either.

Congress has never set up such a body since the 25th Amendment was ratified. I doubt it ever will, frankly.

Under the 25th, the President can reassert his capacity to serve as President. To override that, Congress must say so with a 2/3 majority of BOTH HOUSES. So, the 25th Amendment is actually quite toothless when it comes to removing an unwilling President.

Impeachment and Removal are easier to accomplish, yet they have never been accomplished so far with any President.

I suspect your assessment of how the SCOTUS would see a Congressional usurpation of that 25th Amendment power is accurate.

The Constitution is very simple at first glance, but very complicated in practice.

[StarfishSaver]

25. Yes

[Hortensis]

32. And, again, that word "and" I passed over. The VP has to be in.

[StarfishSaver]

42. Good catch

I was reading that as "the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments" OR "of such other body as Congress may by law provide" but you're right that it probably means "Vice President" AND "a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or such other body as Congress may by law provide" - two different things.

[StarfishSaver]

12. Apparently, the Pelosi and Trump are "co-workers" and co-workers can force each other

to have psychiatric evaluations against their will. Or something.

[MineralMan]

14. Not in the Federal Government at that level, though.

The laws involved in such things do not apply to Presidents and members of Congress. They simply don't.

[StarfishSaver]

16. I know. I was being sarcastic

Her argument is just stupid.

And it's one of the problems with the internet, where anyone can quote anything any "expert" says and others assume that it's authoritative.

[MineralMan]

17. OK. Today, someone posted Meat Loaf's opinion on Global Climate Change

Apparently, even garden variety celebrities should be listened to on every subject.

Feh!

[StarfishSaver]

21. Exactly. Why does anyone care what Meat Loaf thinks about anything?

The same goes for Michael Moore.

[live love laugh]

56. Michael Moore has done legitimate journalistic work

Why shouldn’t he be listened to?

[StarfishSaver]

57. Geraldo Rivera has done legitimate journalistic work, too

That doesn't mean I have to give credence to everything he says today.

[live love laugh]

59. What is your issue with Michael Moore? nt

[dware]

4. Well, this was a wasted read.

Maybe this woman should read the Constitution before spouting off nonsense like this.

Speaker Pelosi has no authority to order such a thing and you would think a Yale graduate would know this.

[Hortensis]

39. I learned and remembered a few things. That

person might have been pointing to a theoretical string. Perhaps something appropriate for a a Walmart manager to demand as a precondition to allowing a guy who chased a customer with a forklift to return to work.

[StarfishSaver]

11. Co-workers can require a person to submit to involuntary evaluation?

And a Speaker of the House and President of the United States are "co-workers"?



Maybe she should stick to psychology and let other folks handle the law ...

[dware]

13. Again, as usual,

you are spot on, even I know that Speaker Pelosi has no such authority, and I'm just a retired Marine and now a truck driver.

[StarfishSaver]

30. There's NO such thing a being "just" a retired Marine

You've done more for us that most. Thank you.

[dware]

33. I thank you for your knowledge on the law

and your kind words.

[StarfishSaver]

43. ...

[dware]

22. If she truly believes this,

then she's an idiot.

[onenote]

23. Yale psychiatrist should stick to psychiatry or get a law degree

Pelosi does not have a "right" to demand a mental health examination of the President. Period.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

28. This is nonsense. While it does seem that Trump is, in fact, as mad as a box of frogs,

Pelosi has no authority under the Constitution or any federal law to bundle him off for a psych eval like Hannibal Lecter in a straight jacket, tied to a hand truck. If during the SOTU Trump takes off his clothes and starts yelling about the Illuminati, somebody should probably call an ambulance, but otherwise we're stuck with the crazy for now. Dr. Lee might be a qualified psychiatrist but she doesn't seem to know squat about much else.

[StarfishSaver]

44. "bundle him off for a psych eval like Hannibal Lecter in a straight jacket, tied to a hand truck."

Oh, but if wishes were reality ...

[janterry]

36. As someone who has sectioned someone before

this is nonsense. She's gone off the deep end and someone needs to tell her. Sure, trump has a personality problem. He may even have an addiction issue. Or some cognitive loss.

BUT even accepting all of that, he can't be held involuntarily by anyone. He DOES NOT meet criteria.

Enough, Ms. Lee. Enough.

[MichMan]

40. It seems that Yale psychiatrist Lee's coworkers should request the same from her

if she actually believes what she wrote.

[StarfishSaver]

45. Boom!!!

Perfect response!

[Pepsidog]

46. Pelosi has no power to do this but hey why not suggest it? Take a page out of Republicans book and

call him insane, a danger to the country. I really don’t think Americans want another war in the Middle East. Yea this General was a bad guy but both Bush and Obama passed on killing him. It was like a turkey shoot, killing the guy at the airport. Trying to equate this guy’s killing to Bin Laden’s death is ludicrous. Trump is a coward.

[AllaN01Bear]

50. NO NO NO NO NO!

wve had four us prez get into trouble and they distract , distract,distract by going to war. this idiot needs to be removed along with his idiot supreme ct , his idiot vp and the idit upper crust r senate alont with cruz and moscow mitch. NO NO NO NO! ive lost my patience , and guess where the thing is now , mar a lago.

[Iwasthere]

53. Focus

"“This was why more than 800 mental health professionals petitioned Congress..." 800, that's a lot. His deteriorating mental state is visable for all to see, yet we all just shrug our shoulders, nothing we can do. A Fucking madman is running the country, and wants to run the world with his friend putin. This beyond Orwellian.

[dware]

55. Ok,

but that doesn't change the fact that she's completely wrong about Speaker Pelosi being able to force Trump to be mentally evaluated against his will.

As a Yale graduate, you would think she knows this.