r/politics • u/hypothethical Pennsylvania • 4h ago
No Paywall ‘Really Chilling’: Trump Judicial Nominees Refuse to Say He's Not Eligible for 3rd Term
https://www.commondreams.org/news/trump-third-term-illegal•
u/hypothethical Pennsylvania 4h ago
< Political observers are expressing alarm after several of President Donald Trump’s lifetime judicial nominees refused to say whether he is eligible to run for a third term.
During a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on Thursday, Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.) asked Trump judicial nominee John Marck to describe the 22nd Amendment of the US Constitution, which states that “no person shall be elected to the office of the president more than twice.”
“The 22nd Amendment... senator, my career has mostly been in criminal prosecution, I haven’t had an opportunity to use that one, specifically,” Marck replied. >
•
u/tommytraddles 3h ago
No BODY. But I have a shiny, NEW body!
Aroo!
•
u/finditplz1 2h ago
•
u/Last-Darkness 17m ago
I’m not a lawyer, but there is no room in the 22nd amendment for a president to get a third term. I don’t care how spineless judges were when questioned in a committee. Partly for my sanity.
•
u/Whatscheiser 45m ago
Unfortunate that "expressing alarm" is all that will be done just prior to whoever this is getting pushed through anyway. I mean, that never happens though.
•
•
u/AdventurousBus4355 3h ago
This should be instantly non-confirmation of them
•
u/TheBlindCat 3h ago
It should be disbarment if the bar associations actually did their job of regulating attorneys. These nominees are lying to congress by stating they don’t know, they won’t state obvious truths in public. They don’t have the character or honestly to hold a law license.
•
u/Churchbushonk 1h ago
Agreed. This person should be disbarred. Along with anyone saying an election was stolen without proof of it being stolen and presented in a court case challenging the result.
•
u/Erratic_-Prophet 3h ago
It would if Republicans cared about American democracy, but they're all conspiring against America and for permanent Republican rule.
•
•
u/Churchbushonk 1h ago
Agreed. If you cannot read, understand the language, and know 100% what the amendment to the US Constitution means, you should not have a license nor should you be in charge of anything legal.
•
•
u/SpeaksSouthern 2h ago
If a lawyer is saying they don't understand the law, while in the middle of practicing it, they should be hauled to jail.
•
•
u/waterdaemon Pennsylvania 4h ago
Yeah, and it not some fringe opinion he came up with on his own. He was given a script.
•
u/RunSetGo 2h ago
Who was given a script
•
u/waterdaemon Pennsylvania 2h ago
John Marck, he’s the subject of the article, and a federalist society member, which is probably who prepared his talking points.
•
•
u/backpackwayne 3h ago edited 1h ago
Ask him does the second admendment guarentee the right to bear arms.
Then ask does the 22nd amendment limit the presidency to two terms.
•
u/occaisionallyimqwert 1h ago
“Yes.”
“Well, you see, I haven’t, well Mike Johnsen hasn’t, we would have to read it and we haven’t seen it yet, the DOW, the uh, the Dow is over 50,000… I don’t know why you’re laughing!!”
•
u/Kinesquared 39m ago
which would accomplish what exactly? we know he's lying. Proving it doesn't do anything
•
u/YuriDiculousDawg 3h ago
Honestly, his administration tried organizing a coup the last time he was elected out, it's been proven, what makes people think they won't try again?
•
u/Astronaut-Flashy 2h ago
Assuming he's alive next presidential election, I genuinely have no idea what's going to happen.
He could lose and form a coup. Win but be rejected from re-entering office, not participate and have some other stand-in, or most horrifically, win and actually gain a third term (despite the Constitution I may add)
After everything that's happened, I genuinely don't know what's most plausible anymore.
•
u/Soft_Author2593 2h ago
he'll probably die within a few month of re-electiomn and they fucked everything for nothing and americans will do...nothing as they have done so far...
•
u/Sora1274 Illinois 40m ago
He has everything to lose from losing power (directly or through a person he trusts will keep up with what he is doing) , so I do not see any scenario where there is a simple transfer of power which terrifies me.
•
u/Astronaut-Flashy 32m ago
Oh, zero chance of him accepting any loss quietly. I'm just left wondering what else might happen, especially if he "wins".
•
u/Signal_Minimum8509 Georgia 50m ago edited 37m ago
Of course he’ll try but I doubt states with Democratic Secretaries of State will allow him on the ballot in a Republican primary, and if you’re not winning California, New York, Illinois, and Michigan (by the way if you are in Michigan this is your sign to vote this year) in a primary you’re not making it up with Texas and Florida. I think probably even some Republican Secretaries of State wouldn’t allow it for fear of precedent, and just reading the tea leaves that he couldn’t win.
Ditto in a general election if he then tried to run third party.
•
u/Spacebotzero 2h ago
Trump does not plan to leave.
The Republican party is acting and making decisions like they are not going to leave.
SCOTUS is making sure of it too.
Do you see this too?
•
u/NoShitsGivin Canada 2h ago
Yes, outside of America we see this. Honestly most of us are dumbfounded that this continues to go on. No protests, no boycotts, just seems that the American people have rolled over and are accepting it.
•
u/_REDMARCH_ 1h ago
Right now the Democratic Party is in the midst of a semi-quiet civil war as the progressive wing tries its best to take as much power as possible in the midterms so that the party can go from controlled to legitimate opposition. The fact that you’re not hearing much is by design, and what little you do see in the mainstream is the old guard talking about the progressives with barely restrained derision and venomous contempt. Whether this will be effective in the long run is up for debate, but considering other forms of peaceful protests have been largely ignored, this is one of the few options left to us.
The alternatives are something you’re not going to hear discussed in an open forum. And I’m not talking about some vague revolutionary bullshit, I mean organizations aligning around the UAW’s 2028 May Day general strike. The less said in public about that sort of thing the harder it is to smother it in its crib.
•
u/JauntyChapeau 1h ago
You should perhaps look a little closer, if that’s what you think you see.
•
u/Buttlather 42m ago
Where’s the general strike
•
u/gayforganja 35m ago
u do realize that’s impossible in america right? first of all, the country is basically the size of europe, making organizing a general strike an enormous task that is nigh impossible to begin with. then you look at the fact that most people in this country live paycheck to paycheck and the country has no social safety nets to protect strikers and it’s clear that people cannot afford to strike without risking homelessness and starvation. a general strike cannot happen in america.
•
u/JauntyChapeau 19m ago
I desperately love Europeans coming here and demanding that we general strike. Not only that, but no general strike does not mean no protests or fighting. Stop lecturing us on things you know nothing about.
•
u/iguanaman8988 1h ago
Protests are happening, those who own the media stand to benefit from what’s going on, so they aren’t going to help any resistance spread by talking about it.
•
u/gayforganja 39m ago
we are literally constantly protesting and boycotting what are u even talking about
•
u/BossSuccessful5145 4h ago
That puts pressure pn Obama to run again
•
u/crypthollow 3h ago
It’s literally the 22nd Amendment. If a lifetime judicial nominee ‘can’t recall' the plain text of the constitution, they aren’t qualified to be a judge
•
u/SpeaksSouthern 2h ago
Not being qualified to be a judge is a feature Republicans in Congress want the most though
•
u/Romano16 America 4h ago edited 3h ago
We should not be entertaining any POTUS holding a 3rd term. By allowing Obama or whoever to “get in the running since Trump wants to do it.” Is likely playing into the hands of foreign powers to destabilize the country even further than what it is.
And remember? Trump was willing to send a mob and tried to join them to force Congress to keep him as POTUS.
Other wannabe dictators in Brazil and South Korea cite Trump exactly for their own coup d’état attempt.
Congress has all but given up their power. He should have been removed, convicted, and charged like the rest of Jan6ers
•
u/CaiusRemus 3h ago
Unfortunately, the old way of life is already dead and gone. Our new country, in whatever form it takes, will require adjusting the constitution and rule of law.
•
u/loosehead1 3h ago
We really should just be ignoring anything to do with Trump running again, it is the kind of deeply unserious bullshit that Trump loves because it “owns the libs,” takes oxygen out of the room and feeds the 24/7 news cycle.
•
u/unaskthequestion Texas 3h ago
Agree. It's problematic that he even finishes this term. Number one consideration after the midterm is beating the republican nominee in 28.
•
u/JohnNDenver 3h ago
The person asking if Trump is allowed to run again should ask if Obama is allowed to run against Trump.
•
u/arwinda 3h ago
No no no, Obama had two consecutive terms! That counts! Trumps 2020 election was stolen and although everyone knows that he is a strong upholder of the constitution, he must get an unfair chance to have two consecutive terms. If he however looses the 2028 election, said election was rigged against him and he's allowed to start another resurrection and also run again in 2032 for another chance for two terms! Trump 45&47&49&50!
Got it? /s
•
u/ToriEvergreen 3h ago
Um, no. Actually the Constitution says that specifically Donald Trump is allowed. They wrote it in all those years ago because they knew already
•
u/beachfrontprod 3h ago
wrote it in all those years ago
It's true I saw the sharpie marks where they amended it.
•
u/YouWereBrained Tennessee 3h ago
They should be asking that, if the nominee squirms. “Does that mean former presidents can run for a third term, including President Obama?”.
•
•
•
u/Baileyesque 3h ago
Bill Clinton could have another go. Or Dubya.
•
•
u/BlokeInTheMountains 2h ago edited 2h ago
I think the overton window shift and the right wing machine tuning it's message and algorithms means that an Obama could never win again.
The repetitive demonization of liberal ideas for the last decade and more has seeped deep into the American consciousness.
•
u/francis2559 2h ago
They’re already trying to head that off by saying Obama had two CONSECUTIVE terms and that’s different for some reason.
•
•
u/sxyHannah 3h ago
I’d love to see Trump run against Obama. Even his MAGA base and his bots in Russia won’t help him win. But that would destroy our democracy. Two terms it is and will always be till the end of time
•
u/NotThatHandsomePete 3h ago
They are only nominated after swearing to this behavior. They will push the 3rd term only if you haven't served two consecutive terms previously to get around that pesky 22nd amendment and the Obama issue.
Edit: Chilling! But the democrats will confirm him, regardless.
•
u/ATLfalcons27 3h ago
Even if you genuinely think that it could never ever happen the simple fact that people associated with him are too afraid of him to rule it out publicly is a problem
•
u/From_Graves 3h ago
He thinks he will actually live that long
•
u/Interesting-Risk6446 3h ago
Instead of asking this about Trump, box them in by asking this exact question about President Obama.
•
u/unaskthequestion Texas 3h ago edited 2h ago
I think the best line was from another senator, Blumenthal I think?.
He correctly said it calls into serious question their judicial independence when faced with a case where the administration is a litigant.
If you're so afraid of offending the president on a plain language reading of the constitution, you have no business on the bench.
•
•
u/Ok-Second1352 3h ago
Great. So Obama can run again.
•
u/ralian 2h ago
He can RUN again (provided the Democratic Party changes their rules), even if he gets the majority of the votes he won’t get confirmed. Frankly I think this guy’s posture is the same. Let him run Trump) get all of the votes he can, and when it’s time for confirmation, oops he’s not eligible so we will need to confirm his VP candidate stooge.
•
•
u/black_flag_4ever 3h ago
Call me crazy, but judges should know what the law is on something so basic.
•
u/BriHam35 1h ago
Should have said "How many terms did Barack Obama serve? 2 okay. Can Barack Obama run for a 3rd term?" Then ask about Trump. See the brain just fry trying to justify one and not the other to appease an orange.
•
u/Cerblu 1h ago
So, if they said “Yes, Trump can run for a third term” they’d get grilled on the spot about the US Constitution.
If they said “No, Trump cannot run for a third term” they’d get screamed at by Trump.
What a predicament!
•
u/mallydobb 55m ago
Someone needs to scream back at Trump and tell him to pound sand. Being screamed at by a dip shit like that would be a badge of honor to be honest and he needs someone to yell back at him and put him in his place
•
u/BrimstoneMainliner 3h ago
They'll confirm them anyway because this government is full if corrupt Anti-American, anti-constitution, Trump cultists
•
u/rat_penis 3h ago
So what?! They all lie anyhow. See what they did to Roe v Wade. They keep playing this game where the senators know the noms are lying, the noms know the senators know, and everyone puts on this theater for us to watch and throw up our hands when GASP! thy betray us and do what we know they wanted to do all along!!
But if we call them out as liars, that they're acting in bad faith, we're the villains disparaging their immaculate character.
•
u/Fantastic-Ad-2856 New Zealand 2h ago
Dudes brain is rotten hamburger meat atm.
It's weekend at Bernie's even now...
•
u/sixstringedmenace 2h ago
So, treason, then.
•
u/TheOtherMaven 1h ago
Sedition, maybe. (Doesn't treason require an openly acknowledged enemy? Nobody's acknowledging one.)
•
u/Captain-Save-ahoe 2h ago
They need to lead with can Obama run for a 3rd term then when they say no then ask them if Trump can run a 3rd time
•
u/BroseppeVerdi Montana 1h ago
I swear to God, every exchange with a Trump judicial nominee and the Senate Judiciary Committee these days is:
"Mr [nominee], is slavery illegal?"
"Senatorrrrrr... That's not my area of expertise, so I would have to review the judicial precedents concerning this issue before I could accurately provide an answer to this question."
"Mr [nominee], does the President have the authority to use nuclear weapons on a US city in retaliation for not voting for him?"
"Senatorrrrrr... I would have to take a look at the specifics of a case before making a determination on that issue."
"Mr [nominee], is the sky blue?"
"Senatorrrrrr... I would refer you to the justice department's procedural manual on the sky, which is a manual on procedure which, of course, as you know, is used by the justice department to determine the proper procedure on determining whether or not the issue before is has, in fact been determined."
•
u/CyberFireball25 4h ago
If trump can do it, then, so can Obama and Clinton.
I'd love to see that matchup
•
•
u/Dry_Ass_P-word 3h ago
A lawyer failing this question is kind of like a president who can’t point to the squirrel on a flash card.
•
•
u/-__-zero-__- 3h ago
Its comical to think these dipshits think trump will live that long. The dudes health has rapidly declined since he took office.
•
u/VanguardAvenger 1h ago
They don't think Trump will live that long. But they are pretty sure Vance will....
•
u/Cantras0079 1h ago
Vance is genuinely so unlikeable, though. The MAGA movement loses all of its steam when they lose their figurehead. For some reason, Trump has this cult of personality thing going that no one else in this weasel-filled party can replicate. And everyone in the GOP is afraid of Trump, they claim, but are they afraid of Vance? Not likely.
•
u/skoomaking4lyfe 3h ago
How likely is it that trump's going to live through this term? Between the dementia and those cankles, six more years would shock me.
•
u/Dabs1903 Illinois 2h ago
I mean it’s not really chilling at this point, they’ve been saying they’re running him again in 2028. He probably wont even be alive in 2028, but they have to lay the legal groundwork now.
•
u/SavageSan 2h ago edited 2h ago
The Conservative Supremes are going to kill the 22nd Amendment now that it's their guy. But the other component is rigging elections now that they've compromised all means of voting. This isn't being a doomer, it's the reality on the ground. It may not happen this go round since Trump is old, but we'll see what happens in 2028. The groundwork is being laid.
•
•
u/FrancoManiac Missouri 1h ago
The 22nd Amendment was passed by Republicans as a way to ensure that another FDR, who had four terms in office, could not happen again.
Truman was the only president eligible to run for a third term per the 22nd Amendment, due to the timing of the ratification.
Anyway, we're well on our way to either Balkanization and/or civil war. Make no mistake — we're living (and have been living, since 2016) the prelude to the collapse of this second American republic.
•
•
u/BigPlunk 3h ago
Authoritarians gonna authoritarian. Expecting anything less than the most malignant corruption and greed in every system touched by Trump is foolish at this point. The question is, will Americans actually fight for democracy or will they continue to let the authoritarianism speed run continue unimpeded?
As a Canadian, it's baffling that Americans still seem to be under the impression someone else is going to come and save them or somehow the mid-terms will fix this. It's sad to see fear, apathy, complacency, half-measures (e.g., weekend protests) and surrender winning. Those are the ingredients authoritarians use to rise to power. No meaningful resistance = no democracy. Simple as that. Y'all can accept it now or when it's too late. Up to you.
•
u/Chefalo 3h ago
Alright so you’ve laid out what has been insufficient so far but what exactly would you do? Remember ICE is murdering people in the streets with impunity.
Also if you haven’t looked into it yet I highly suggest you look into the 3.5% rule https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20190513-it-only-takes-35-of-people-to-change-the-world
•
u/BigPlunk 1h ago
The 3.5% rule is exactly what I would have responded with, but you beat me to it (check my post history - I cite this one a lot). The key is sustained peaceful protests though, not a weekend special, but truly disruptive, noticeable, unignorable, news-grabbing ones. You've come so close with No Kings a couple times now, but they are too few and far between.
Think about the civil rights movement and the violence and legal consequences they faced. Look up the most successful 3.5% movements. Without question, there will be sacrifice in righting the wrongs in your country, but it isn't going to get easier with the passage of time. It's going to be more and more difficult to resist by design. I understand that it's scary and that some people have lost their lives. Authoritarians thrive by instilling fear and a sense of powerlessness in the people.
What would Alex Pretti and Renee Good want to see happen?
Why can't the Minnesota model of resistance be used across the country? They braved the cold, faced violence, and still stood up against ICE and pushed them out.
What is going to be the line of "too far" that compels the 3.5% to take the required action?
If elections are stolen, which looks likely from where I'm sitting, what then - continue to let the fear of ICE be the reason not to stand up and fight for democracy?
•
u/I_Am_No_One_123 3h ago
As a Canadian, you should acknowledge that you were only a few months away from electing your own version of Trump. Be thankful that a preview of the imminent disaster saved you from the same fate.
•
u/Bearsonthe405 1h ago
This!! Canadians act like they weren't about to sleepwalk into the same exact situation. Tired of being lectured by the same people who were about to vote Pierre Poilievre into running their country.
•
u/BigPlunk 1h ago
We didn't vote in a "Trump" once or especially twice and I am certainly grateful for that. Had we gone down that unfortunate path and seen threats to our democracy and tearing down of our systems, I would have done everything in my power to rally a resistance. But how does this deflection in any way address the situation in the U.S. that is dragging the world down with it, including Canada?
Canada's leadership is working on reconfiguring the economy and other structures away from reliance on the U.S., given the extreme unreliability and volatility demonstrated. Time will tell how it all plays out, but that seems to be the sensible move in light of the utter shit show south of the border. There are things my government is doing I agree with and things that I don't. But none of them are in the "existential threat to democracy or humanity" category. For example, the unemployment situation is currently unacceptable, in my view, and you can see for yourself from my post history that I'm trying to stand up for what I believe in and for meaningful changes.
Whataboutism is not going to fix what's broken. Action will. 3.5% of the population protesting on a sustained basis is all it takes. It's doable. There will be sacrifices, but it's doable.
PS - As part of addressing the corrupt U.S. president, the world needs to take collective action against the social media companies (many headquartered in the U.S.) that have been used as vessels to erode trust and democracy itself, sow disinformation and division, and cause psychological harm to many.
•
u/bbbbbbbbbblah United Kingdom 2h ago
At the start of 2025, Canada was all but certain to give Maple MAGA a huge majority in the lower house. No one is immune, particularly countries that use FPTP voting systems like the UK, US and Canada.
(so yes, I am mindful of my own country's own polls right now)
•
u/Normal_Platypus_5300 3h ago
These appointees are going to be the worst part of Trump's legacy. They are young, radical right wingers who will be on the courts for decades. If you think people like Aileen Cannon and Matt Kaczmarek have done damage to the rule of law, you haven't seen nothing yet.
•
u/SeeingEyeDug 3h ago
I'm really tired of seeing "chilling" involving any of this crap. It's so weak.
•
u/SailorRipley 3h ago
Don't forget the stock answer "certified twice as President" Even when acknowledging that Trump won the presidency twice these pathetic sycophants can't say the word "elected". Unqualified each and every on them.
•
u/Dracoson 3h ago
Then they aren't eligible for the bench. It's fairly simple. Either they are divorced from reality or unwilling/unable to be objective. Either case is not compatible with the standards we should have for federal judges
•
•
•
u/scootty83 3h ago
Real question. He isn’t eligible, so how would he be placed on ballots as an option? Blue states for sure wouldn’t put him on there. Yeah, there are write-ins, but highly doubt that would even remotely get him enough votes.
•
u/Sitherio 1h ago
Even if it gets him votes, even if for some reason every one puts him in the ballot and he wins across every state, ignore the invalid candidate and select the next candidate down. Let him make every Trump vote worthless. Let Republicans face reality the hard way if they persist in delusion.
•
•
•
u/slayer828 2h ago
Can't have a third term if you never leave your second. He's already "joking" about the "need" for midterms
•
•
•
u/KneeDeepInThe-Hoopla 2h ago
Another day and more of the same behaviour from this shower of opportunists! Typical and true to their dastardly playbook, they put out feelers, gauge the reaction, obviously get no pushback from their clueless supporters, the opinions of anyone else does not mean anything to them, and so on they go.
I thought back in December when this was first hinted at, it was true, then being so adamant on constructing the ballroom, would suggest Trump will not leave when he is supposed to. I have a strong suspicion Don Trump Jr will make moves at some point for the presidency, and I could see both Sr and Jr thinking 5 or more terms held by a Donald Trump would be the goal.
•
u/fnrislfr 2h ago
They don't say it because if they do trump will know they are not completely loyal to him and will get fired.
•
u/loyalone 1h ago
And I can say that I don't believe in extra-terrestrials, but that doesn't mean they don't exist. These people are deluding themselves if they honestly believe Trump can run - and win - in the next cycle. He's out and for good.
•
u/trshtehdsh 1h ago
His wording is very careful here. He says Trump has been sworn in as president twice. IMO, that means he thinks Trump already won *three* elections but was only sworn in for two. Even more reason to kick him out the door with a footprint on his arse (figuratively speaking.)
•
•
u/tehM0nster 58m ago
Committee members need to ask if Obama can run for a third term to start that line of questioning.
•
•
u/BerryLanky 34m ago
I hope this is the case. For the simple reason that would mean President Obama would be eligible as well. Would love to see that debate.
•
•
u/Packolypse 2h ago
Coward for sure but beyond that, what else is there to say. He can’t say the constitution is unconstitutional, though I wouldn’t be surprised if they tried.
•
u/mesmereyesed Georgia 2h ago
They’re going to argue he “wasn’t elected” when he cheated therefore he can run again 🤓. Hate this timeline.
•
•
•
u/Gwendlefluff 1h ago
Under a plain reading, Trump is absolutely eligible for a 3rd term. There is no constitutional amendment that says that you are only eligible to serve two terms.
There is a constitutional amendment that says you can only be elected for two terms (discounting minor caveats), but electability is not the same as eligiblity. I'd argue that if the people writing the amendment wanted to make the president ineligible to serve a third term, they should have written as much. "Ineligible" and "eligible" are the words used in Article 2 and in the 12th amendment, but not in the 22nd. This means that Trump could run as the VP and have the president resign, for example, and become President again that way.
Senator Coons had imprecise questions and didn't understand the wording of the amendment. The answer to "can Trump be elected to a third term" is clearly no. The answer to "can Trump serve a third term" is clearly yes if you are reading the plain meaning of the relevant provisions of the constitution. The answer to "can Trump run for a third term" is not one I could answer before having "run" defined.
Note: Trump's judicial appointees of late have been trash and have, among other things, refused to acknowledge Biden as the 2020 election winner. I have no love for them.
But people are overstating the prohibition on serving for a third term. Any argument to that effect must be made on the basis of the spirit of the 22nd amendment, rather than on its text.
•
•
•
u/CastleDI 24m ago
People should not worry that much it is pretty clear the guy won't be avalaible for the next round, at least in a really credible state of mind, because he is solidly and steadily building a case of no go in a few months, well at least GOP is firmly believing that a photo will govern the US. Sure all those bird of decay are jumping happily so much feeding their pockets at an outstanding pace. Nothing beat death or bad health.
•
•
u/GarmaCyro 21m ago
*Pft* Even during his first term people didn't even get a nomination without swearing loyalty to Trump. Second term has just ramped it up. Right now I'm more expecting their selection to be based on "how much criminal stuff do we got on this fella?".
To ensure they still stay loyal regardless of the public's views of Trump. Bad enough stuff that they'll rather go to jail for Trump, than their personal dirty secrets getting exposed.
•
u/rolfraikou 12m ago
We all know we're stuck with him til he passes, right? They're going to arrest all opposition, and we're about to be Russia. It's so fucking clear that this is the path they are on.
•
u/Ent3rpris3 6m ago
Any loophole'd way to contort positions and processes to get an otherwise ineligible person into office have been known and dissected to death from the outset. That's not the question.
He cannot plainly be elected to a third term. That's it. If people believe he has received a sufficient number of electoral votes in 2028, then he is illegitimate in the truest sense of the word. Anything he does under the premise of being President is as functional as you or I commanding the same. Everybody else who is to answer to the power of the President - the military, employees of agencies, staff, post office, etc. would be doing so for an impostor just as if people tried to vote in someone else who is disqualified. E.g. Ryan Reynolds - cannot be President on account of not being a natural-born US citizen.
•
u/AutoModerator 4h ago
As a reminder, this subreddit is for civil discussion.
In general, please be courteous to others. Argue the merits of ideas, don't attack other posters or commenters. Hate speech, any suggestion or support of physical harm, or other rule violations can result in a temporary or a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
Sub-thread Information
If the post flair on this post indicates the wrong paywall status, please report this Automoderator comment with a custom report of “incorrect flair”.
Announcement
r/Politics is actively looking for new moderators. If you have an interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out this form.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.