The irony is thick enough to cut with a knife, friends.

John Brennan, the former CIA Director who served under President Obama and now finds himself under investigation by the Justice Department, has taken to the airwaves demanding President Donald Trump be removed from office. Let that sink in for a moment. A man currently being scrutinized by federal authorities for his own conduct believes he has the moral authority to call for a sitting president's ouster.

Brennan made his case during a television interview, arguing that the 25th Amendment, the constitutional provision establishing procedures for removing a president from office, "was written with Donald Trump in mind." That is quite a claim, considering the amendment was ratified in 1967, decades before Trump entered politics.

The former intelligence chief's concerns center on Trump's recent statements regarding Iran on Truth Social. Brennan expressed alarm over what he characterized as threats to "eliminate an entire civilization," suggesting the president's control over America's military capabilities, including nuclear weapons, poses a danger to the nation.

"We really are in very, very troubling times," Brennan declared, echoing sentiments from more than 70 lawmakers who have joined the chorus calling for the 25th Amendment to be invoked.

But here is where the story gets interesting, and where questions of credibility come into sharp focus.

The Justice Department's investigation into Brennan stems from his time leading the Central Intelligence Agency. While the specifics of that probe remain under wraps, the fact that it exists at all raises legitimate questions about whether Brennan's public pronouncements are driven by genuine concern for the country or by personal animosity toward an administration that has made accountability a priority.

This is not the first time Brennan has positioned himself as a vocal Trump critic. Since leaving office, he has consistently attacked the president's policies, decisions, and character. That is his right as a private citizen, of course. But when those criticisms come from someone facing his own legal scrutiny, the American people deserve to view them through that lens.

The 25th Amendment was designed for situations where a president becomes genuinely unable to discharge the duties of the office due to physical or mental incapacity. It was not intended as a political tool to remove presidents whose policies or rhetoric certain officials find objectionable. Using it as such would set a dangerous precedent that could haunt future administrations of any political stripe.

The growing number of Democratic lawmakers joining Brennan's call suggests a coordinated effort rather than spontaneous concern. More than 70 members of Congress now support invoking the amendment, a number that conveniently provides political cover for what amounts to an attempted constitutional coup.

The American people elected Donald Trump to serve as their president. They did so knowing full well his communication style and policy positions. Whether one agrees with his approach to Iran or any other matter, the proper remedy for disagreement in our system is the ballot box, not constitutional mechanisms designed for genuine emergencies.

As this drama unfolds, one thing remains clear: John Brennan's credibility on matters of presidential fitness is compromised by his own legal troubles and his well-documented history of partisan opposition to this administration.

The courage to question is always warranted. So is the wisdom to consider the source.

Related: Eric Swalwell Suspends California Governor Campaign Amid Misconduct Allegations