Jump to content

The Leopards Eating Faces and Unlubed Dildo of Consequences Thread


Recommended Posts

Posted

The Constitution doesn't allow a third term, period.  If he tries, either by arguing that the Constitution does allow it or by just defying the Constitution outright, then it goes to the courts and ultimately SCOTUS will rule.  There, either SCOTUS abandons the Constitution and officially becomes a member of the fascist Trump party or they rule against him and according to the Constitution.  From there, if he defies the SCOTUS order then SCOTUS will order federal marshals to remove him from the White House.  If those dudes refuse to enforce the order then we're fucked.  Trump Co. could also meet those marshals at the White House with armed guards.  There might actually be a shootout.  Whoever is left standing when the smoke clears wins.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
5 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

That’s one. Get chosen by rep majority as speaker, then have potus and vp resign or die. 
 

also, have vp resign and have Trump chosen as vp, approved by Congress, then potus resigns. 
 

it’s a card game with the rules of succession. 

It's amazing to watch. This became normalized immediately. 

  • Rage+1 2
Posted (edited)
41 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

https://www.npr.org/2025/03/31/nx-s1-5191889/is-trump-running-for-a-third-term

Other legal experts, however, point to the last sentence of the 12th Amendment, which covers the Electoral College, as a roadblock for any twice-elected president attempting to return to the White House through the vice presidency. It says that "no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States."

Still, in court, a lawyer could try to argue that being a "natural born" citizen, at least 35 years old and a resident within the U.S. for at least 14 years are the only presidential eligibility requirements specified in the Constitution, says Stephen Gillers, a professor emeritus at New York University School of Law, who proposed in 2004 that Clinton run for vice president.

"I want to make it very clear that I'm identifying an argument that Trump could make in order to get back into the White House. I'm not endorsing it," Gillers says. "But we know from experience that even if it's far-fetched and it offers the possibility of a third presidential term, Trump will make it. If his health holds up, he will make the argument he likes the job. Whether or not it succeeds in court is another matter."

Gillers posits that Trump "could make a deal" with Vance that, ahead of the 2028 election, they switch places on the Republican ticket, and if they win the White House again, Vance resigns and Trump becomes president.

To avoid any debate about whether the 12th Amendment forbids presidential electors from choosing a twice-elected president as vice president, Gillers says there could be a similar arrangement in which Trump does not run on the winning Republican ticket but, after the newly elected vice president resigns, becomes vice president with congressional approval.

"It is not implausible. And just the existence of the possibility of it in the next four years gives Trump power that enhances his position," Gillers says. "The members of Congress in 2027 will know that they're not dealing with a lame duck necessarily because Trump could still hold out, through 2027 and 2028, the possibility of his return to power and the power that that possibility gives him — to get Congress to bend to his will."

I

 

3 hours ago, Chad Fuck said:

All this is true.  I heard a law professor on NPR yesterday and she was quoting everything quoted above re the 12th and 22nd Amendments.  She finished with the following point, and I paraphrase:

So?  Who is going to stop this person who has so far not been bound by Constitutional laws and norms?  Is the most ineffectual and compliant Republican Congress ever going to stop him?  Is there an expectation that he will suddenly say to himself, "Well, now I've just gone too far."? There is nothing in what we know of him so far that would lead anyone to believe this to be the case.  So we should expect the unthinkable, as that's what we've witnessed from him so far.

 

 

 

3 hours ago, High Plains Drifter said:

 

Again, this doesn't matter if he's not on a ballot. Which I don't think he will be, either way. 

 

I think the way this would come up is sane states object to putting Trump on the ballot as VP.  Trump would sue, and it would go pretty much just like the 14th Amendment/insurrectionist cases as far as timing and procedure go.

And if Stephen Gillers says it's plausible, he is super-credible.

Edited by TwiceHorn
Posted
12 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

Jamelle Bouie had a good thread on this yesterday in response to some lawyers with terminal lawyer-brain:

 

 

 

What all of this glosses over is that when pushed far enough, laws are only enforced by the barrel of a gun.  That's why opting out of the rule of law -- as the Republican party has done, without any hesitation or reservation -- is so fucking dangerous and stupid.

We are going to have a resolution to this question in 2028-2029.  The only question is how many people will die resolving it.  I set the over/under at 100.  If it spreads beyond DC.....I don't want to think about those numbers.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

For the intellectual exercise only (because Trump and his bootlickers aren't bound by rules), what legal mechanism do you think exists for someone to become President if they aren't elected President and can never be Vice President? The only other option is being in the line of succession and everyone above them dying simultaneously. 

As trump, run as vice president with vance as president. After the election, Vance resigns  as president and trump (now president) makes vance his vp. Assessing this approach against the 22nd and 12th -  

22nd - 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. 

Not violated - trump not elected as president 

12th - But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.

Trump is still eligible to be president by age and bornnin the usa. The 12th doesn’t specify anything about elected; it just speaks to eligibility.

 

  • Rage+1 1
Posted
11 minutes ago, InkaUtexas said:

Run as a rep, get appointed Speaker.

Everyone above him resigns.

Pretty sure the speaker of the house thread revealed anyone can be speaker; you don’t have to be an elected representative to hold that position.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Posted
18 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

Jamelle Bouie had a good thread on this yesterday in response to some lawyers with terminal lawyer-brain:

 

Jamelle strikes me as someone that hasn't read any of the Supreme Court's recent case law - i mean, I'm pretty sure "Nihilistic Textualism" is the name of Alito and Clarence's garage band - it's their written rationalization for what is ultimately just Calvinball.  

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
20 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

Jamelle Bouie had a good thread on this yesterday in response to some lawyers with terminal lawyer-brain:

 

 

 

The fundamental problem with that is that Constitutional law has ALWAYS been a word game, Calvinball if you prefer.

Yes, it's worse now than it's ever been (although the Court during FDR's administration was quite incoherent), but it's just a matter of degree, not difference.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, GenXer said:

Pretty sure the speaker of the house thread revealed anyone can be speaker; you don’t have to be an elected representative to hold that position.

Well shit.

Get Vance to run as Pres. Ivanka as VP. Done.

  • Rage+1 1
Posted

I don’t think that Trump would ever try the VP president scam with JD Vance. Vance would tell him to go fuck himself - he’s the president now!

The problem with Trump not having any loyalty to anyone is that he naturally assumes that no one will be loyal to him. He wouldn’t be.

 

  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted
1 minute ago, Gatorubet said:

I don’t think that Trump would ever try the VP president scam with JD Vance. Vance would tell him to go fuck himself - he’s the president now!

The problem with Trump not having any loyalty to anyone is that he naturally assumes that no one will be loyal to him. He wouldn’t be.

 

Trump controls the gop purse. Vance knows this. Trump controls all.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Gatorubet said:

I don’t think that Trump would ever try the VP president scam with JD Vance. Vance would tell him to go fuck himself - he’s the president now!

Trump gets on Truth Social:

"wont someone rid me of this meddlesome POTUS!" 

problem solved
 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
20 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

Oh I get it. We're being super dumb here. Fair play considering the actors. 

I mean I’ve already said I don’t know shit about this domain at least twice, and you did request the intellectual exercise.

Posted

I honestly do not believe the conversation about a possible Trump 3rd term as all that important.

For one, he's old. He's 78. He'll be 82 for the next election. 86 by the time that term is done. The chances of him dying or becoming otherwise incapacitated increase considerably with his every breath. If he has a serious fall, or he breathes in the wrong bacteria/virus, or some malignant cancer forms in a place that makes it difficult to force it go into remission, or he develops dementia, or dozens of other hypotheticals, this isn't going to matter.

Two, for him to run for a third term is not going to mean smooth sailing until that occurs. He's already run roughshod over all kinds of institutional protections from doing so, but he's going to have to run over a lot more. He's going to have to get through the midterms. If the Democrats take control over either the House or Senate, the relationship with the legislative branch changes considerably. We're not going to suddenly get this test case of whether he successfully wins the election in 2028. We're going to have a myriad of test cases prior to that which becomes Rubicon moments of whether we really want to live in a Republic or not. While it feels like we're there already, at the end of the day if we held an election right now, I still think who people vote in would matter, just like it did in 2020, even with all the horseshit that ensued.

To me the most important thing is what would lead up to him being able to run for a 3rd term. It's my belief we're on the precipice of losing the ability to decide who our leaders will be at the ballot box. That's going to be crystal clear whether it has occurred or not before 2028. How much are Republicans able to stifle any potential opposition vote? How much do they weaponize the executive branch, just like they're doing with Columbia University and the various law firms who have struck deals with the administration rather than going to the mat? Who do they investigate? Arrest? How well do they control the media? It's not clear how important controlling the mainstream media is any more, frankly. How well do they control the messaging at the places people are actually getting their news these days? How invested does the military become?

And how much is dependent on Trump as the figurehead? How much of this cult of personality survives him? All of it? None of it?

I just feel like there are underlying factors going on that are way more important than the specifics of whether Trump is able to run for a 3rd term or not. The polarization in this country is real, and it's increasing. We no longer want to know our neighbors. We are more solitary than we ever have been. We depend on echo chambers for discourse, mostly through online mediums. Whoever is able to successfully identify others that can be targeted, isolated, bullied, and either ghettoized, deported, jailed, or executed, is going to win in those environments. It doesn't have to be the next Hitler. It can be the next Robespierre, the next Lenin, Mao. "Those other guys have been the bad guys, and we're going to take care of it for you!"

The biggest danger of Trump is he's helping to create an environment where the only way to win is to play his game. If you're not all in, he's going to beat you. But if you go all in, you become what you're fighting against. It takes a tremendous leader to both win that game, and then to give up power once they've won. There aren't that many examples in history, to be honest. Look at China. They had it for 40 years under a totalitarian regime that voluntarily gave up power every ten years until Xi Jingping came along. I don't actually know about an equivalent to that. Normally leaders are scared (rightfully) about what is going to happen to them if they cede power. The Romans used to do something similar by giving ultimate power to consuls during times of crisis. They expected the "dictators" to give up their power when the crisis passed. Which worked until it didn't. 

We don't understand how fragile our system is. We think 250 years is a long time and it's going to go on like this forever just because, when actually it very well may be a blip in human history. "Here are all the lessons to learn from the failed American Experiment, 1776 to 20xx" says future history books. 

  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted

This is idiotic. Putin got elected and rose to power because he made Russia relevant economically and politically around the world. It's only recently after the total dissolution of anything resembling democracy that Russia has started to completely collapse. 

Trump is trying to dictator during the collapse or right before it. He's a fucking moron, not a former KGB mastermind.

Xi rose to power as China became a swelling economic powerhouse etc. 

Trump has done less than jack shit and is showing his ass early and often. People aren't happy now, wait till actual bad shit happens from the ripple effect from all this idiotic destruction of the government. 

Posted
12 minutes ago, SL Xpress said:

The biggest danger of Trump is he's helping to create an environment where the only way to win is to play his game. If you're not all in, he's going to beat you. But if you go all in, you become what you're fighting against. It takes a tremendous leader to both win that game, and then to give up power once they've won. There aren't that many examples in history, to be honest. Look at China. They had it for 40 years under a totalitarian regime that voluntarily gave up power every ten years until Xi Jingping came along. I don't actually know about an equivalent to that. Normally leaders are scared (rightfully) about what is going to happen to them if they cede power. The Romans used to do something similar by giving ultimate power to consuls during times of crisis. They expected the "dictators" to give up their power when the crisis passed. Which worked until it didn't. 

We don't understand how fragile our system is. We think 250 years is a long time and it's going to go on like this forever just because, when actually it very well may be a blip in human history. "Here are all the lessons to learn from the failed American Experiment, 1776 to 20xx" says future history books. 

Excellent post.  And.... ^^^^ this.  It's already done.  The Rubicon has been crossed, there is no going back.

Whatever comes next, it will be a far cry from the "Shining City on a Hill" that we liked to think we were -- or, at least (being realistic) we could aspire to be.  America 2.0 is going to be super-shitty, for a long time.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
11 minutes ago, immamac said:

This is idiotic. Putin got elected and rose to power because he made Russia relevant economically and politically around the world. It's only recently after the total dissolution of anything resembling democracy that Russia has started to completely collapse. 

Trump is trying to dictator during the collapse or right before it. He's a fucking moron, not a former KGB mastermind.

Xi rose to power as China became a swelling economic powerhouse etc. 

Trump has done less than jack shit and is showing his ass early and often. People aren't happy now, wait till actual bad shit happens from the ripple effect from all this idiotic destruction of the government. 

lol and I'm sure all those people will learn their lesson and we'll be well past this all soon, right? right?

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 2
Posted
12 minutes ago, immamac said:

This is idiotic. Putin got elected and rose to power because he made Russia relevant economically and politically around the world. It's only recently after the total dissolution of anything resembling democracy that Russia has started to completely collapse. 

Trump is trying to dictator during the collapse or right before it. He's a fucking moron, not a former KGB mastermind.

Xi rose to power as China became a swelling economic powerhouse etc. 

Trump has done less than jack shit and is showing his ass early and often. People aren't happy now, wait till actual bad shit happens from the ripple effect from all this idiotic destruction of the government. 

I don't agree with any of that. Russia was always going to go with a strongman eventually. If it wasn't Putin, it would have been someone else. 

I don't know what Trump being a mastermind has to do with it. He communicates in a way that appeals to our basest instincts. I'm not sure what else is needed. 

China was already a swelling powerhouse. The time came for him to give up power and he chose not to. He used a campaign against corruption - a favorite of populists and dictators everywhere - to silence opposition. Any of the leaders before him could have done something similar. They chose not to, starting with Deng Xiaoping. I have no idea what point you're trying to make, actually.

Maybe you're right, and Trump has his power curtailed in all kinds of ways. But what I'm seeing is a group of people in power who have no intention of giving it up, and a bunch of people who are willing to enable their behavior because they don't want to lose power and they naively believe they won't be next. 

  • Hook 'Em 7
Posted

Rarely does the find out come so quickly on the heels of the fuck around.

Quote

Once-in-a-lifetime flooding: Wednesday’s storms will start multiple days of nearly nonstop rain that could trigger “generational” flooding in Arkansas, Missouri, Tennessee and Mississippi, forecasters warned.

https://www.cnn.com/weather/live-news/us-weather-tornado-flooding-04-02-25/index.html

  • Like 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 3
Posted
11 hours ago, Gap03 said:

If the Dems were smart, they'd be pushing the Supreme Court to consider this in the run-up for the 2028 election.  I know that the SC would say that the issue isn't ripe, but there needs to be existing political pressure in place to prevent Roberts and Co. from pulling the same old "Aw shucks, we just can't rule on this so close to the election, so maybe next time ..." bullshit.   

This right here. Have Obama gear up for some sort of President / Vice President campaign, and MAGA will ensure the Court closes every single loophole* Trump might use just to keep "that boy" (as my uncle called him) off the ballot. 

 

*does not apply to the "I'm going to create a national emergency and eliminate the election for "the good of the country" option 

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
Posted
17 hours ago, The Original Greaser Bob said:

Trump's going to cut a deal where he and his family and every family friend gets a lifetime pardon and a payment of a billion trillion dollars a year for his lifetime plus 25 years in exchange for him not running for and winning a third term.

 

“That’s one bargain of a buyout, where do we sign?” - Aggy

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Haha 2
Posted
14 hours ago, Chuckie Finster said:

https://www.npr.org/2025/03/31/nx-s1-5191889/is-trump-running-for-a-third-term

Other legal experts, however, point to the last sentence of the 12th Amendment, which covers the Electoral College, as a roadblock for any twice-elected president attempting to return to the White House through the vice presidency. It says that "no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States."

Still, in court, a lawyer could try to argue that being a "natural born" citizen, at least 35 years old and a resident within the U.S. for at least 14 years are the only presidential eligibility requirements specified in the Constitution, says Stephen Gillers, a professor emeritus at New York University School of Law, who proposed in 2004 that Clinton run for vice president.

"I want to make it very clear that I'm identifying an argument that Trump could make in order to get back into the White House. I'm not endorsing it," Gillers says. "But we know from experience that even if it's far-fetched and it offers the possibility of a third presidential term, Trump will make it. If his health holds up, he will make the argument he likes the job. Whether or not it succeeds in court is another matter."

Gillers posits that Trump "could make a deal" with Vance that, ahead of the 2028 election, they switch places on the Republican ticket, and if they win the White House again, Vance resigns and Trump becomes president.

To avoid any debate about whether the 12th Amendment forbids presidential electors from choosing a twice-elected president as vice president, Gillers says there could be a similar arrangement in which Trump does not run on the winning Republican ticket but, after the newly elected vice president resigns, becomes vice president with congressional approval.

"It is not implausible. And just the existence of the possibility of it in the next four years gives Trump power that enhances his position," Gillers says. "The members of Congress in 2027 will know that they're not dealing with a lame duck necessarily because Trump could still hold out, through 2027 and 2028, the possibility of his return to power and the power that that possibility gives him — to get Congress to bend to his will."

Does anyone seriously believe Trump would trust Vance (or anyone not named Trump) to step down if they’re elected president and allow him to take their place?

  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
26 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Does anyone seriously believe Trump would trust Vance (or anyone not named Trump) to step down if they’re elected president and allow him to take their place?

True as far as it goes.  But, what does he have to lose?  

Assuming the law holds as written, he can't run for re-election to a third term.  That much is clear.

Other schemes to avoid application of the 22nd involve certain post-election events that he can't completely control.

Posted
10 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

True as far as it goes.  But, what does he have to lose? 

His narcissism. Except he can’t lose that. So he will never play second fiddle to anyone for any reason even if it’s an obvious sham. He’s not going to be anyone’s opening act.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
6 hours ago, NWBuck said:

This right here. Have Obama gear up for some sort of President / Vice President campaign, and MAGA will ensure the Court closes every single loophole* Trump might use just to keep "that boy" (as my uncle called him) off the ballot. 

 

But Obama had consecutive  terms and Trump didn’t!  See, it’s different you stupid lib.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted

Well If that guy is also a principled and pragmatic conservative, how about he don’t about to get married, buy a house, and have kids. Simple. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1


×
×
  • Create New...