They introduce it now, and even some conservatives laugh it off as “just a joke,” but within the next 4 years, it will be raised many more times, each time with them getting more serious. They put it out there like this so it’s less shocking the second, third, and fourth time you hear it. By the end, every conservative bootlicking moron will be lining up to say “presidents should be allowed to have an uninterrupted span of 8 years of rule so as to enact the agenda we ‘voted’ for!”
It’s predictable. I’m going to buy some guns and start hitting the range.
I hear you and understand the precedent. But I don’t think it applies here. Yes, our institutions are weakened–but they still stand. This would never be passed into law as an amendment. Thus, they’d need a supreme court willing to engage in such an egregious miscarriage of justice that most would consider it to be treason.
While I find the Robert’s court troubling, I don’t think they’re capable of such a thing.
It could be that, it’s more likely that this never passes/or is ratified and is effectively a Benghazi or hunter Biden trope that plays well on Fox News.
My bigger fear is that Trump just runs for a 3rd term anyways because who’d stop him? The supreme Court will vote 6:3 that their hands are tied any they can’t keep him off the ballot. And if he’s elected, they’ll rule 6:3 that “well, the Constitution says we can’t do this, but it’d go against the will of the people and would be hard to unwind so we won’t do anything”
They introduce it now, and even some conservatives laugh it off as “just a joke,” but within the next 4 years, it will be raised many more times, each time with them getting more serious. They put it out there like this so it’s less shocking the second, third, and fourth time you hear it. By the end, every conservative bootlicking moron will be lining up to say “presidents should be allowed to have an uninterrupted span of 8 years of rule so as to enact the agenda we ‘voted’ for!”
It’s predictable. I’m going to buy some guns and start hitting the range.
I hear you and understand the precedent. But I don’t think it applies here. Yes, our institutions are weakened–but they still stand. This would never be passed into law as an amendment. Thus, they’d need a supreme court willing to engage in such an egregious miscarriage of justice that most would consider it to be treason.
While I find the Robert’s court troubling, I don’t think they’re capable of such a thing.
Let’s hope I’m right.
It could be that, it’s more likely that this never passes/or is ratified and is effectively a Benghazi or hunter Biden trope that plays well on Fox News.
My bigger fear is that Trump just runs for a 3rd term anyways because who’d stop him? The supreme Court will vote 6:3 that their hands are tied any they can’t keep him off the ballot. And if he’s elected, they’ll rule 6:3 that “well, the Constitution says we can’t do this, but it’d go against the will of the people and would be hard to unwind so we won’t do anything”