Connect with us

News

‘Trump ’28, Come on, Man!’: Bannon Calls for Third Term

Published

on

Steve Bannon, the “far-right political provocateur,” strategist, podcaster, and longtime Trump advisor, over the weekend suggested that the President-elect should pursue a third term—despite constitutional experts affirming that the U.S. Constitution explicitly prohibits anyone from being elected to more than two terms. Bannon is not alone. Others, including Trump himself, have floated the idea of a third term.

“Donald John Trump is going to raise his hand on a King James Bible and take the oath of office, his third victory, his third victory and his second term,” Bannon, who served four months in jail after a jury found him guilty of contempt of Congress, said at the New York Young Republicans’ gala on Sunday. “And, and the viceroy Mike Davis tells me, since it doesn’t actually say ‘consecutive,’ that I don’t know, maybe we do it again in ’28. Are you guys down for that? Trump ’28, come on, man!”

Davis has declared he will be “viceroy,” as Media Matters reported in March, saying: “I’m going to be Trump’s viceroy of D.C. because I don’t like democracy. I want more authoritory — authoritory powers.”

The 22nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is clear:

“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.”

READ MORE: ‘Inconvenient’: Trump Wants to Kill Daylight Saving Time

Bannon, who The Times has reported “aided in the effort to overturn the 2020 election,” is not alone in calling for Trump—who has yet to be sworn in to his second term—to run for a third.

Saying he “has occasionally sent mixed and cryptic messages,” The New York Times reported last month: “No, Trump Cannot Run for Re-election Again in 2028.”

And yet, The Times reported, Trump “has repeatedly floated the idea that he might like to stay in the White House beyond his next term.”

“I suspect I won’t be running again unless you say, ‘He’s so good we’ve got to figure something else out,’” the President-elect told House Republicans in a meeting last month,” as The Times noted.

“In July, at a gathering of religious conservatives, he told Christians that if they voted him into office in November, they would never need to vote again. ‘Christians, get out and vote. Just this time,’ he said. ‘You won’t have to do it anymore, you know what? Four more years, it’ll be fixed, it’ll be fine, you won’t have to vote anymore, my beautiful Christians.’”

At an NRA convention in May, Trump said, “I don’t know, are we going to be considered three-term or two-term? Are we three-term or two-term if we win?”

Even before he lost his first run for re-election, in September of 2020, Trump told supporters: “We’re going to win four more years in the White House.”

“And then after that, we’ll negotiate, right? Because we’re probably — based on the way we were treated — we are probably entitled to another four after that.”

Constitutional law experts agree: Trump cannot run for a third term.

“When asked if there were legal loopholes or other ways for a president to get around the 22nd Amendment, Stanford University law professor Michael McConnell, a specialist in constitutional law, had a definitive answer,” Vox reported in November.

“No. There are none. This will be his last run for president,” McConnell told Vox.

“I don’t think there’s any realistic possibility that the 22nd Amendment could be repealed,” Kermit Roosevelt, a constitutional law professor at the University of Pennsylvania told FactCheck.org, also in November. “That would take another amendment (like the 21st, repealing the 18th) and I don’t think it would get 2/3 of both houses of congress, much less 3/4 of the states.”

But there are questions surrounding the word “elected.”

READ MORE: ‘Wants a Global Stage’: Trump’s ‘Power Move’ Fizzles as China’s Xi Blows Off Inauguration

FactCheck.org points to the Presidential Succession Act and two legal scholars noted in a  2019 Congressional Research Service report that reads:

“By their reasoning, a former President serving as Speaker of the House, President pro tempore of the Senate, or as a Cabinet officer would also be able to assume the office of President or act as President under the ‘service vs. election’ interpretation of the Twenty-Second Amendment.”

Michael Sozan, a Senior Fellow at the Center for American Progress, responding to video of Bannon’s remarks, warns, “As some of us have been saying, Trump will try to serve for a 3rd term — AND the far-right Supreme Court could reinterpret the 22nd Amendment to allow it. They already reinterpreted the Constitution to turn presidents into kings above the law, right?”

Watch the video below or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘Bad Idea’: Trump’s Plan to Cut Vaccines He Deems ‘Dangerous’ Met With Concern by Experts

 

Image via Reuters

There's a reason 10,000 people subscribe to NCRM. You can get the news before it breaks just by subscribing, plus you can learn something new every day.
Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

Ethics Committee Reveals Latest Republican to Come Under Review: Report

Published

on

The House Ethics Committee has reportedly announced that U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC) is facing a review by the Office of Congressional Conduct.

The origin of the review was not been disclosed. Under committee rules, officials are prohibited from stating whether the matter constitutes a formal investigation or identifying its underlying cause. The Committee only stated that there is a “matter regarding Representative Nancy Mace.”

“The Committee notes that the mere fact of a referral or an extension, and the mandatory disclosure of such an extension and the name of the subject of the matter, does not itself indicate that any violation has occurred, or reflect any judgment on behalf of the Committee,” the Ethics Committee statement reads. It was posted to social media by congressional journalist Jamie Dupree.

The statement also says the committee will “announce its course of action in this matter on or before March 2, 2026.”

Congresswoman Mace is currently running for governor of South Carolina.

Earlier this month Mace warned that Republicans may lose control of the House, saying they have not “done enough” and could “do a lot more” to implement President Donald Trump’s agenda, The Hill reported.

 

Image via Shutterstock 

Continue Reading

News

Republican Vows to Block Trump’s Greenland Push

Published

on

A prominent Republican lawmaker is vowing to thwart any attempt by President Donald Trump to acquire Greenland through force or financial means.

Speaking from Copenhagen as part of a bipartisan delegation of U.S. congressional lawmakers, U.S. Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), told reporters it is “an important message for the people of the Kingdom of Denmark to understand” that the United States has “three separate but equal branches” of government.

Reminding them that under the U.S. Constitution it is Congress that controls spending, Senator Murkowski, who has broken ranks and stood up to President Trump at times, said, “In Congress, we have tools at our disposal under our constitutional authority that speaks specifically to the power of the purse through appropriations.”

She noted also that “Congress has a role. Certainly, when it comes to spending authorities, the Congress has a role in basically helping to facilitate the message that comes from our constituents, to be reflected in whether it’s legislation or appropriations, or actions or measures, that can indicate, again, the will of the Congress.”

READ MORE: Trump Dangles Another Insurrection Act Threat for Minnesota

The “vast majority” of Americans do not support the acquisition of Greenland, Senator Murkowski added, noting that “some 75 percent will say we do not think that that is a good idea.”

“Greenland needs to be viewed as our ally, not as an asset,” Murkowski also told reporters.

Politico reported that U.S. Senator Chris Coons (D-DE) “also took part in the visit by House and Senate lawmakers,” and “said he would push ahead with legislation to curb Trump’s power to act unilaterally.”

He also denied President Trump’s claims that Greenland is necessary to be owned by the U.S. for national security reasons.

“Are there real, pressing threats to the security of Greenland from China and Russia?” Coons said. “No, not today.”

READ MORE: With Shutdown Looming and Crises Growing Trump Heads Off for Long Mar-a-Lago Weekend

 

Image via Reuters 

Continue Reading

News

Trump Dangles Another Insurrection Act Threat for Minnesota

Published

on

Just one day after threatening to invoke the Insurrection Act in Minnesota, which would allow him to unleash domestic military forces onto American streets, President Donald Trump once again on Friday hinted he would do so while suggesting he may be “forced” to take action.

Trump targeted Governor Tim Walz and Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey, both Democrats, claiming they “don’t know what to do” after he deployed roughly 3,000 federal troops to the city.

“In Minnesota,” Trump wrote on Truth Social, “the Troublemakers, Agitators, and Insurrectionists are, in many cases, highly paid professionals.”

“The Governor and Mayor don’t know what to do, they have totally lost control, and our currently being rendered, USELESS! If, and when, I am forced to act, it will be solved, QUICKLY and EFFECTIVELY!”

The Guardian labeled Trump’s claims that protesters are paid as baseless.

Attorney Aaron Reichlin-Melnick wrote: “Note that the Trump admin hasn’t yet been able to produce evidence of a SINGLE ‘paid protestor.’ They’ve had total control of the FBI and the DOJ and ICE HSI and yet despite all of that, they can’t even find ONE person who they can accuse of being paid to protest.”

Separately, The Steady State, a group of over 365 former national security officials, while not referring to Trump’s remarks from Friday morning, noted that the Insurrection Act is “an extraordinary power meant for true emergencies, not a shield for unconstitutional policing. Using it to silence dissent or justify unlawful paramilitary activity at the hand of ICE undermines the rule of law.”

READ MORE: With Shutdown Looming and Crises Growing Trump Heads Off for Long Mar-a-Lago Weekend

 

Image via Reuters

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.