President-elect Donald Trump has already been musing about a possible third term, though his campaign team is really keen to note that he’s so totally kidding because, well – obviously that would be unconstitutional. He is after all, currently about to begin his second term if you are counting at home. And yes, we have heard Trump talk openly about a third term before, though it was always prior to January 6th so it might not have had the urgency that such talk might now have. And he is actually talking again…
It was only last week that talk of a third term came up yet again. According to The New York Times:
While talking to House Republicans recently about clinching the White House and both chambers of Congress, Mr. Trump jokingly hinted that they could help prolong his presidency.
“I suspect I won’t be running again unless you say, ‘He’s so good we’ve got to figure something else out,’” Mr. Trump said.
Interesting. Most presidents would say that supporters will have to figure something else out because the country benefits from having different management, no matter how good a president is. And then there is that Constitution thing again!
But not Donald Trump, he is – obviously, openly inviting supporters in Congress to already be thinking about ways to make him president for life. Yes, he may be joking, sure. Except Donald Trump only jokes about what he’s serious about.
So the Times finally got the ass-whooping they’ve worked so damned hard to receive because it is not like Trump has so much respect for the Constitution that the Times needed only to note:
But can he run for re-election again in 2028 and seek a third term? The simple answer: No, the Constitution does not allow it.
At least the NYT sort of notes that there is a problem with getting Trump to follow the Constitution by quoting Rep. Daniel Goldman’s point about Trump’s trial balloons:
“How he operates is by floating trial balloons that he often claims are jokes, but he’s very serious about it,” Mr. Goldman, who was lead counsel during Mr. Trump’s first impeachment in the House, said on Bloomberg TV. “And he’s been talking about staying on past this next term for years.”
Right. The Times is 100% oblivious – I guess, to the fact that Donald Trump doesn’t feel constrained. Indeed, if one wants to be more aggressive than Goldman, one can say that the “musing” was less a trial balloon than it was an order, telling his supporters to get on board with “checking out” how to best ensure that he remains president as long as he can.
According to Rawstory, some were quick to come down on the Gray Lady. Joyce Vance took to “Blue Sky” to offer a great little side-poke and reiterate how the Constitution fails to constrain Trump in many other contexts:
The Constitution also says he requires the “advise & consent” of the Senate to approve his nominations.
Exactly, Assume nothing. (By the way, I just signed up for Blue Sky – the “X” alternative, and though I do not have everything all nice with a picture and everything, I do have to say that Blue Sky is infinitely cleaner as a platform, less cluttered, lighter, it feels and appears elegant compared to imperial “X” – I like it and will be staying. Follow me on Blue Sky)
Fellow “Sister in Law” Jill Wine-Banks wrote:
Joyce is right to be skeptical. Criminals find ways around inconvenient laws, and in Trump’s case, the Constitution. He violated the Emoluments Clause with no consequences. He’s getting away with violating criminal laws because of SCOTUS. But (continue to next)
Oh, wow. “Criminals find ways against laws… ” She wasn’t done:
This is even worse because if he gets away with recess appointments, it destroys the foundation of our democracy.
That is the exact point. No one should be very comfortable with anything right now – at least not with any certainty. Even Trump’s biggest supporters should think long and hard about whether they want to throw out two hundred years of “stuff that worked” in order to please one of the very very few people to have ever sat in the Oval Office to even want to be president for more than two terms.
Countries do need certainty with respect to their Constitution and whether that Constitution will be followed by everyone or at least enforced by everyone. If not, it is hard to rely on much of anything in that country and corruption will near immediately set in, similar to Russia – a country that now exports corruption around the world.
The New York Times is the entity that should know better and should be writing an article on the implications of not getting promises regarding 2028 now. Presuming anything about Donald Trump is how mistakes happened in the first place and – though the NYT may be the last entity to do so, everyone should long have gone by that point where anyone presumes anything about Donald Trump.
With respect to 2028 there is only one real certainty. Donald Trump should not be allowed to be considered for another term. Whether that matters in any way – well, we’ll only see down the road…
God Bless: I can be reached at [email protected] and @JasonMiciak and @jasonmiciak.bsky.social
I believe that people who swore an oath to uphold the constitution and then commit insurrection against the same are not allowed to hold public office.
I’ll bet he still gets sworn in on January 20. Assume nothing with this POS.
You’d think that someone who has lost so often in law courts would have begun to see, however dimly, that laws DO apply to everyone. Particularly laws like The Constitution.
He’s already forgotten that he hasn’t gotten away with his past crimes yet.
Sure looks like he’s gotten away with it. I’d be under the jail, he’s not even in it.