• TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 days ago

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

    Those are the exact words of the 22nd amendment. It’s explicit. There’s no ambiguity or room for other interpretations. Trump was elected twice, he’s hit his limit, that’s it.

    • Colonel_Panic_@eviltoast.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      Sure, but we didn’t enforce the 14th amendment section 3, which clearly states that he shouldn’t be president currently.

      No one enforced our laws, so we have NO LAWS.

      Which means, he can just run for president again and if no one enforced the law then it could happen again.

      I agree with you on the law, but NO ONE IS ENFORCING ANY LAWS LATELY!!! So what the fuck does any of it even matter anymore? Hmm?

    • FrChazzz@lemmus.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 days ago

      Unless those rumors are true and they did manage to game enough voting machines to clinch the election. In which case he was not actually elected twice…

      • frongt@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 days ago

        …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.

      • Zahille7@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 days ago

        There better be a real fucking riots in the streets across the entire damn nation if they come out with this bullshit.

        Like I mean burning down federal buildings and police stations, storming the homegrown concentration camps to free the prisoners, a literal million+ person march on Washington DC right to the front door of the White House.

        • GuyFawkesV@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 days ago

          Like the riots when an insurrectionist was allowed to run for a second term after being ruled ineligible by a State?

          • obvs@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 days ago

            But the Roberts Court, dontchaknow, intervened and went directly against the Constitution and made a BLATANTLY unconstitutional ruling that should have invalidated literally all of their appointments.

            Trump was ineligible for the second term, whether or not the Roberts Court wanted to acknowledge it.

            And hell will freeze over before I give those judges on the Roberts Court the dignity of referring to them with the words that other people call them or that court.

          • Taldan@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 days ago

            How exactly do you guys think riots would go?

            Do you think Trump would just say, “guess they don’t like me, I’ll leave office”?

            Or do you think he would brutally crack down on everyone against him?

            Riots would be the casus belli he wants to take military control of the country

            • Stormy@thelemmy.club
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 days ago

              Idk man. They did fly the army apache over them last time there was a big protest in Tennessee and then that time they did that weird stuff with firing the missiles in Cali. You’re right, but something has to change, I think we’re supposed to be brave and strong and united instead of shocked daily and then retreating, frightened, back under a rock to safety.

      • frongt@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 days ago

        It does specify that he has to be a person. Perhaps they’re going to argue he isn’t?