681
submitted 3 days ago by tyrant@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Davin@lemmy.world 24 points 2 days ago

Weird, guy who breaks laws with impunity doesn't care about laws.

[-] FundMECFSResearch 33 points 2 days ago

When Donald Trump’s former chief strategist Steve Bannon said “I’m a firm believer that President Trump will run and win again in 2028,” last week, it should have been a surprise, but wasn’t. “We’re working on it. … We’ll see what the definition of term limit is,”the dishevelled Bannon told NewsNation. It wasn’t the first time he had mentioned it either. The president’s adviser, who went to prison for refusing to testify before a congressional committee about the 6 January insurrection, suggested it in December. Then, he argued that Trump could circumvent the 22nd amendment, which codifies the two-term limit, because the word “consecutive” is not in the text of the document.

Trump has been making his feelings clear too. Shortly after his election victory last November, the president told congressional Republicans: “I suspect I won’t be running again unless you say, ‘He’s so good we’ve got to figure something else out’.” 

Then, in January, during the annual House Republican retreat in Florida, he joked with speaker Mike Johnson: “Am I allowed to run again, Mike?” In February, he asked supporters at the White House: “Should I run again? You tell me.” Offhand musings about a third term in office sound less like bluster and more like a blueprint.

If we’re sharing articles can we make the effort to add a couple relevant paragraphs under the headline? Otherwise the discussion ends up being about the headline and often innaccurate.

[-] derfunkatron@lemmy.world 12 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice

You’d think that the absence of the word “consecutive” and the phrase “no… more than twice” would mean quite clearly that it’s two terms period, not one, plus two consecutive terms.

Unless, of course, these fuckheads are arguing that consecutive terms count as one.

Fuck.

[-] Fillicia@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 day ago

If consecutives terms would count as one then Obama could run again.

[-] derfunkatron@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

No, no. You see, you have to serve one term, skip one, and then serve two.

Or, just be republican.

[-] tyrant@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago

Ill try to do that but... People should also read the article before before impulse commenting.

[-] FundMECFSResearch 8 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

As someone who’se shared hundreds of articles on reddit then lemmy.

Good luck getting more than 1% to read the article. People want headlines, scrollable information bits that they can instinctively react on.

That’s why paragraphs under are useful. Makes people atleast read those before commenting a gut reaction to an oversimplified headline.

[-] barnaclebutt@lemmy.world 14 points 1 day ago
[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago

If I understand correctly, the magoffs like Bannon want to craft it to exclude Obama (and Bill Clinton and W) but include donvict.

https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-third-term-proposal-has-clause-stop-barack-obama-running-2020334

[-] Joeffect@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

For me not for thee...

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] BlackSheep@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 day ago

There is a dictatorship happening to the south. Professors are leaving Yale University for the University of Toronto. For God’s sake, get out and vote in Canada in our upcoming election. Danielle Smith is blatantly snuggling up with MAGA. And PP keeps changing his ideologies with the political wind. Save our sovereignty.

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 15 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Why? Because no matter how much the unhinged right, many "centrists", and some of the leftists and a lot of the corporate media mocked those among the Democrats that said democracy is at risk....it is.

[-] peteyestee@feddit.org 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

At risk? It's dead no matter what party. It's time to start rebuilding.

[-] Wilco@lemm.ee 111 points 2 days ago

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.

[-] dryfter@lemm.ee 13 points 2 days ago

He's already a domestic threat, he doesn't care about the Constitution or laws

[-] sith@lemmy.zip 21 points 2 days ago

The constitution means whatever the guy with the biggest guns says it means.

[-] MantisToboggon@lazysoci.al 168 points 3 days ago

I don't think they're going to let a little thing like the laws get in the way of a good time.

[-] 9tr6gyp3@lemmy.world 67 points 3 days ago

How about a national militia of tesla burners?

[-] alvvayson@lemmy.dbzer0.com 68 points 3 days ago

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.

[-] ArchmageAzor@lemmy.world 24 points 3 days ago

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.

[-] Sanctus@lemmy.world 27 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

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.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] raoulduke85@lemm.ee 2 points 1 day ago

Like he’ll be alive in 4 years.

[-] flop_leash_973@lemmy.world 76 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

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.

[-] DistressedDad@lemmy.ca 8 points 2 days ago

If Trump was elected in the 80s, he wouldn't be alive long enough to change the name plate of the oval office desk. We're living through such a wild time in history.

[-] StopTouchingYourPhone@lemmy.world 60 points 2 days ago

Yesterday, former President Donald Trump told a group of supporters that they won’t have to vote again if they elect him to the presidency. “You won’t have to do it anymore,” Trump said at the Turning Point Believers’ Summit in Florida. “It’ll be fixed; it’ll be fine; you won’t have to vote anymore, my beautiful Christians.” - The Atlantic, July '24

'When someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time.' - Maya Angelou

[-] prole 4 points 2 days ago

It'll be fixed

Dude straight up just says it and nobody gives a fuck.

[-] GoodOleAmerika@lemmy.world 35 points 2 days ago

Conservative don't like bypassing term limit. Conservative subreddit are already not happy. So yep it's matter of time some maga nut bag will revolt against him.

[-] pleasegoaway@lemm.ee 13 points 2 days ago

Conservatives WILL like it when their media tells them how to justify/spin it.

[-] GreenSkree@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago

Yeah. Outrage now doesn't mean outrage when it matters. Things will look very different in 4 years and conservatives always seem willing to fall in line.

[-] Cool_Name@lemm.ee 34 points 2 days ago

I hope the republicans have better aim this time.

load more comments (7 replies)
[-] carrion0409@lemm.ee 17 points 2 days ago

Last I checked werent the mods going full gestapo and banning anyone who questioned trump ? That sub really is a shithole.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] atempuser23@lemmy.world 70 points 3 days ago

I assume Schumer will agree to this because we wouldn’t want deny the American people a choice. I wish the democrats lived in reality.

[-] FaceDeer@fedia.io 21 points 3 days ago

"Maybe someday they'll let a Democrat be president for three terms!"

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] AmidFuror@fedia.io 22 points 3 days ago
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] ZMonster@lemmy.world 42 points 2 days ago

The comments seem to be missing the fact that elections are state run, so if he is allowed to run a third time, it won't be him that broke the law it will be the states and their reps.

[-] tyrant@lemmy.world 65 points 3 days ago

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.

[-] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 70 points 3 days ago

Supreme court:

Amendment schmamendment.

[-] jhymesba@lemmy.world 37 points 3 days ago

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.

[-] Leeks@lemmy.world 20 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

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.

[-] dhork@lemmy.world 34 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

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.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] VeryInterestingTable@lemm.ee 33 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

You mean The Third Reich ?

[-] Ramenator@lemmy.world 26 points 2 days ago

Remember: The Nazis never officially abolished the democratic Weimar constitution. They just hollowed it out until it was completely ineffectual

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] skozzii@lemmy.ca 48 points 3 days ago

I remember when Republicans used to say things like "if you threaten my consitumitutional rights I will fight you to the end"

[-] andallthat@lemmy.world 24 points 2 days ago
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] SirMaple__@lemmy.ca 40 points 2 days ago

Canuck here. When is the Civil War kicking off? I'm sure they'll be a fair number of Canadians who will come and help remove him from office. We'll for sure send some of our highly trained Canadian Geese to assist lol

[-] moncharleskey@lemmy.zip 26 points 2 days ago

When the Civil War happened there was a somewhat clear division between northern and southern states due to slavery, but now that division is between neighborhoods and houses, amongst families and coworkers. Add that into life in a surveillance state and it's going to be hard for a civil war to gain traction I think. But I'm sure any day now those 2A nuts are going to go up against the tyrannical government they have been prepping for, right?!

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] PurpleSkull@lemm.ee 29 points 2 days ago

Trump already looks 20 years older 2 months into his second presidency. Look at pictures of him yesterday. How on earth would he even run for a third term, physically I mean? He will be the oldest president EVER by the time his term ends. 2 Years older than Biden when he left. A third term would serve no one but the actual rulers Peter Thiel and Musk behind him....oh.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] mapmyhike@lemmy.world 19 points 3 days ago

I don't see him surviving this term. He is too old, his mind and body is going. He could be living his best life but instead is destroying everyone eleses.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 29 Mar 2025
681 points (100.0% liked)

News

28227 readers
4304 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS