Question is who is also trying to stop bailing out the Titanic to make some things, ah, happen faster? I'm not sure having a model dinner plate at the table will do anything against all the other lack-of-reasonableness that helped make him attractive (even a role model), somehow, to many.
🦄Once and Future Trump Presidency Perpetual Scandal Thread🦄
- Thread starter Ecmaster76
- Start date
I am getting the feeling that Trump's TV personality choices are intended to draw media attention away from the damage his Stephen Millers and Russell Voughts will be doing.
I'm also thinking his Rubio pick is just to get him replaced with a more MAGA friendly choice, and he won't last a half a Rex Tillerson.
I'm also thinking his Rubio pick is just to get him replaced with a more MAGA friendly choice, and he won't last a half a Rex Tillerson.
It's way easier to conjure her cooking dinners made from, rather than for, her family.
I like to think this whole eating healthier thing is a plot cooked up by Melania and RFJ Jr. to, ah, hurry things along. Their hope is that when Trump asks for his nightly 20 chicken McNuggets with ranch sauce, but instead is presented with an oozy hunk of tofu with a parsley sprig, he’ll be so incensed that he’ll have a rage stroke and drop dead, a la Valentinian I.
So the New York Times got ahold of an email sent to Trump’s Secretary of Defense nominee by his own mom: (Link to Bluesky excerpt of paywalled NYT article)
But can you imagine:
In damage control mode, mom now says she regrets writing the email, and has apologized for writing it. And given, well, everything, I doubt this will by itself torpedo the nomination, though it certainly should.
But can you imagine:
- Receiving an email like this from your mother
- Knowing that the claims are most likely true
- Having it published for all to see in the New York Times?
I imagine her goals are much less ambitious. Just get him to refuse to come to whereever she lives.
Trump's transition team finally signed one of the remaining memoranda of understanding with the Biden administration.
I loved this paragraph:
I loved this paragraph:
I don't know why they would be reluctant to sign an ethics agreement. It's not like they would ever be held accountable.
I suspect it's more of a safety issue. Several Trump staffers (and Trump himself) are likely to go into spontaneous combustion should they try to sign an ethics pledge.
Lots of news about Hegseth recently.
You'd think raping a woman would have been enough to kill his nomination, but Trump is a rapist himself, so I guess that doesn't bother him.
Aren't those optional-but-beneficial resume entries for this administration?
Last month, before Gaetz withdrew, the tally was 3: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/do...face-allegations-sexual-misconduct-rcna180872
And Linda McMahon has been accused, along with her husband, of covering up sexual abuse of teens who worked for the then-WWF. https://www.advocate.com/politics/trump-gaetz-nominees-sexual-misconduct
Since Musk isn't a nominee for anything official he doesn't count in that tally, but the allegations against him are well-known at Ars.
It really is a cabinet of rape culture.
Judge Merchan just ruled Trump has no immunity from prosecution in the hush money case. Still lots of questions to be answered though. I mean I'd still think he won't face any sentencing until after he gets out of office. I expect lots of screaming from Republicans though, which means something is going right.
Trump weighs in on NY mayor, vaccines and drones in freewheeling press conference at Mar-a-Lago (AP)
We can definitely count on Trump telling us the truth next month due to his impressive record of following through on claims like this.
We can definitely count on Trump telling us the truth next month due to his impressive record of following through on claims like this.
Really tells you what you need to know about all of this.
'Fake electors' from 2020 are casting 2024 votes for Trump while facing felony charges
The guy who tried to claim every election he ever ran in was rigged against him literally had people file false elector certificates to get him in despite the real electors' votes, and now he and the party are embracing those same election-rigging individuals while their criminal cases are still being heard.
'Fake electors' from 2020 are casting 2024 votes for Trump while facing felony charges
The federal charges against them have been threatened with a Trump pardon, but these are state-level charges.
The guy who tried to claim every election he ever ran in was rigged against him literally had people file false elector certificates to get him in despite the real electors' votes, and now he and the party are embracing those same election-rigging individuals while their criminal cases are still being heard.
rainynight65
Ars Scholae Palatinae
So apparently Steve Bannon has suggested Trump should just run again in 2028.
Obviously that's hogwash, but as a foreigner, I just want to ask: what would stop someone from doing so, should they try?
I am aware of the 22nd Amendment. But as remarked elsewhere, the constitution doesn't enforce itself. So if Trump were to just say "fuck it, I've gotten away with so many other things, screw the constitution, I'll run again". And if the GOP were to say "Yeah, screw the constitution, we want President Trump", and they put him up as their candidate. Is there any actual mechanism in place to stop this from happening, any authority that can clearly intervene, stop him from being on the ballot, stop electors from certifying a win for him, anything like that?
Obviously that's hogwash, but as a foreigner, I just want to ask: what would stop someone from doing so, should they try?
I am aware of the 22nd Amendment. But as remarked elsewhere, the constitution doesn't enforce itself. So if Trump were to just say "fuck it, I've gotten away with so many other things, screw the constitution, I'll run again". And if the GOP were to say "Yeah, screw the constitution, we want President Trump", and they put him up as their candidate. Is there any actual mechanism in place to stop this from happening, any authority that can clearly intervene, stop him from being on the ballot, stop electors from certifying a win for him, anything like that?
Not a constitutional expert by any means, but as you relate, what good are laws if not enforced? It’s a possibility, and based on past precedent, doesn’t look like much would be happening. He has the Supreme Court, and unless Congress gains Democratic majorities who actually will stand up to him, he will have the legislature.
Since he has official immunity, what could stop him?
Under the presumption that everybody will just ignore the law? Nothing I guess. The states and electors will either disqualify him from the ballot or they won't. Electors will either vote for an ineligible candidate or they won't. Congress will either confirm and ineligible President or they won't. Government officials will either obey the orders of an illegal President or they won't.
That’s the million dollar question that @Thank You and Best of Luck! has been asking. If institutionalists behave fecklessly and muddle along as if everything’s normal, instead of doing their jobs, this type of situation may come to pass. Trump can behave as if the rules don’t apply to him, because up to this point, they largely haven’t. He can’t be blamed for this if no one holds him to account.
What is supposed to happen in that scenario is that SoS of the states would disqualify him from presidential ballot. Litigation would potentially rise to SCOTUS. It's a "black letter" constitutional violation and no court should give the claim consideration, but the same was true of Section Three of the 14th Amendment (despite the counter-claims of the ignorant). And of course, should it get to SCOTUS, all bets are off.
(My bold)
I agree with what you're saying, except the final point. We can blame others for failing to hold him to account - as you say, de facto, the law does not apply to him as there are no apparent consequences for violating one after another - but it is Trump's choice to act in such a way that requires being held to account, and he can, and should, be blamed for that.
Anyone who thinks Melania wants to help Trump live longer is kidding themselves.
She downright hates him.
She downright hates him.
Individual States can refuse putting him on the ballot, but how much that would get upheld in front of SCOTUS is probably a coin toss.
Well originalism just matters when you look at it, before George took office, it was assumed you could have as many terms as you wanted =D And if we're going to start ignoring/removing the 14th amendment, whyy not get ready to get rid of others as well? or just the parts you don't like while you control the scotus, houses, and executive? No one really cares about the 22nd amendment right?
It would of course be a constitutional crisis, but there are a few bits and pieces along the way.
From a legal point of view, even if he were elected to the office of the president and sworn in, he would not formally wield any of the office's powers, on account of not being eligible for the office.
His word would no more binding for anyone else in the executive branch as that of any rough sleeper from the street, his executive orders would not have any force of law, and if I understand the situation correctly the same situation would extend down to any person he appointed to whose power derives from being a presidential appointment. This includes all secretaries as I understand it.
He would also lack the legal capacity to issue orders to the military in his role as Commander In Chief.
Arguably presidential succession would be triggered immediately with the start of the term under the 'incapacity' criterion, making the VP the president according to the 25th Ammendment. If the VP also was inelligible (ie someone like Elon) it would follow down the line of succession according to the constitution and the Presidential Succession Act of 1947., making the highest qualified person Acting President.
The President would hence 'hold' office under the ever-present threat of being 'couped' (tho I am not sure if this is the right word here?) by their VP.
The military situation would also be, uh, interesting. Both officers and enlisted swear an oath on the constitution; the oath also and quite explicitly (this is no accident; the people who wrote this had the British situation -- where the officers swear personal allegiance to the reigning emperor/empress and their progeny, and not any institution -- in mind and were determined to have none of that shit) requires them to uphold the constitution against all its enemies.
Arguably this oath would obligate serving military from anything between refusing to acknowledge let alone obey orders from Trump to obeying the highest qualified person according to the presidential succession.
As for how people actually would act ... I think nobody can tell.
...
Though I would prefer it if the US going through military coups was confined to Terra Invicta playthroughs, kthxbye?
From a legal point of view, even if he were elected to the office of the president and sworn in, he would not formally wield any of the office's powers, on account of not being eligible for the office.
His word would no more binding for anyone else in the executive branch as that of any rough sleeper from the street, his executive orders would not have any force of law, and if I understand the situation correctly the same situation would extend down to any person he appointed to whose power derives from being a presidential appointment. This includes all secretaries as I understand it.
He would also lack the legal capacity to issue orders to the military in his role as Commander In Chief.
Arguably presidential succession would be triggered immediately with the start of the term under the 'incapacity' criterion, making the VP the president according to the 25th Ammendment. If the VP also was inelligible (ie someone like Elon) it would follow down the line of succession according to the constitution and the Presidential Succession Act of 1947., making the highest qualified person Acting President.
The President would hence 'hold' office under the ever-present threat of being 'couped' (tho I am not sure if this is the right word here?) by their VP.
The military situation would also be, uh, interesting. Both officers and enlisted swear an oath on the constitution; the oath also and quite explicitly (this is no accident; the people who wrote this had the British situation -- where the officers swear personal allegiance to the reigning emperor/empress and their progeny, and not any institution -- in mind and were determined to have none of that shit) requires them to uphold the constitution against all its enemies.
Arguably this oath would obligate serving military from anything between refusing to acknowledge let alone obey orders from Trump to obeying the highest qualified person according to the presidential succession.
As for how people actually would act ... I think nobody can tell.
...
Though I would prefer it if the US going through military coups was confined to Terra Invicta playthroughs, kthxbye?
It could quite be that it would go the route Putin did, to do an end run around the term limits a Russian president was supposed to have. He switched places with his prime minister for a term, then ran again as the interruption in terms as a prez reset the term limits or something. Then, of course, changed their constitution so he didn't have to worry about such nonsense again.
I could see them arguing same for Trump, provided 1 there's another election and 2 Trump is still alive to do so- he is getting pretty old.
/edit added a letter
Last edited:
To be noted, this is where we are already. (More precisely, where we will be on Jan 20th.)
There was an interruption in terms because the 1st and this 2nd were not consecutive. My apologies I thought that was obvious.
The 14th isn't as clear cut. Trump was never found by any court but Colorado's to have engaged in an insurrection, and he didn't need Colorado's EV's to be elected President. (He lost the state.) But nobody will say he wasn't the 45th and 47th President.
Maybe he resigns in 2028 so he can run since he wouldn't have completed two terms?
edit: or he changes his name to Donald J. Trump, Sr. Different name, different person, amirite?
The sovereign citizens would approve.
The sovereign citizens would approve.
The 22nd amendment says that no one may be elected president more than twice, not that no one may complete more than two terms. He could resign on January 21, or even decline to take the office at all, and he would still be ineligible to be elected again.