I don’t think they’re going to let a little thing like the laws get in the way of a good time.
I remember the Russian military recruitment offices burning these past years, and their railroads getting sabotaged.
The western press proudly stated “this is what happens when you don’t allow people to protest, they turn to sabotage”.
But I guess this administration missed the memo.
Lol, lmao even. There is, and will be, no “national militia.” What’s going to happen is that the American people will sit in their couches, maybe cry, and say “why is this happening to us, somebody save us.” Anything that doesn’t take effort.
We are quite factually already NOT doing that. Get involved with a movement before you post doomer shit like this. Remember, every war we ever lost has been against fighters that blend in with the population. Its why we lost Vietnam, why we lost in Bush’s little scandal, and why they’ll lose when Trump tries to do this. Our biggest hurdle isnt getting people off their asses.
Yes, but if Trump refuses to leave office then he will need some serious guards. My understanding of the Constitution is that he becomes a domestic threat at that point and “fighting him” is technically legal … and required by anyone that took an oath to defend the Constitution.
Technically he’s barred from office per the 14th amendment.
Technically is great until it’s ignored.
It is impossible to write an eternal constitution. Believing that is the biggest flaw of the American mindset.
Ideally the courts would rule on it and it would be up to congress with a supermajority to reverse it.
To be clear, a court did rule that he committed treason and was barred from running. SCOTUS did not say they were wrong, they only stated that they (the fucking courts) did not have the power to APPLY THE CONSTITUTION.
So yeah. It would be up to the courts to apply the constitution and SCOTUS would have the final word. I’m not sure why it would be any different from any other ammendment.
Just remember, if his new administration has proven anything, it is that the difference between legal and illegal in the American political system is mostly down to everyone being willing to go along with that law. There is very little actual teeth behind a lot of it at the high up federal level.
So it might be unconstitutional for him to run again, but who is actually going stop him? He has more guns and more sycophants than the court system.
It’s an article about Trump being a turd. Do we have to get mad about something a Democrat might do, but hasn’t done?
Twenty-Second Amendment
Section 1
No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President when this Article was proposed by the Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term within which this Article becomes operative from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such term.
Section 2
This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years from the date of its submission to the States by the Congress.
To make this explicit, the law is what Trump and his merry band of miscreants say it is, unless we’re willing to step up as a country and say ‘No it isn’t’ and back those words up with action, if needed. All the words in the Constitution are is ink on a piece of paper, unless we’re willing to stand and fight for them.
Elected to the office of the President
If you are looking for a loophole, I think there is an argument to be made that if he is elected to the office of the vice president and the president steps down, that would allow a “3rd term”.
I would love to be wrong, but I wouldn’t be shocked if that is the play.
Edit: dhork points out the 12th amendment should block this.
The 12th amendment states
But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States
That seems pretty definitive. The only attack to it I can see (and it’s total bullshit) is that the Originalists on this court may insist on interpreting this amendment based on the state of the Constitution when it was ratified in 1804, and the term limits weren’t passed until 1952.
The way around that is making him speaker of the house and having both the president and vice president resign. Speaker doesn’t have any real requirements on it.
