President Trump 2.0

Originally Posted by jfman

Is Trump beyond inventing, or creating, some crisis or other to prevent elections?
Someone has to hold executive power in that eventuality. Trump’s view would be that should be him.

Other countries have suspended their constitutions to extend the rule of a President beyond their initial term. Is there protection against this in the United States? What if that mechanism can’t meet safely?
.

I can’t think of a country (in this Century) that has suspended their Constitution to "extend the rule of a President beyond their initial term" - I know of one country where the Constitution explicitly allows the delaying of Elections under Parliamentary-approved Martial Law, which legally extends the term of the Parliament and the Head of State until the end of Martial Law.

Originally Posted by jfman

Is Trump beyond inventing, or creating, some crisis or other to prevent elections?
Someone has to hold executive power in that eventuality. Trump’s view would be that should be him.

Other countries have suspended their constitutions to extend the rule of a President beyond their initial term. Is there protection against this in the United States? What if that mechanism can’t meet safely?
.

There is no mechanism to suspend the constitution of the United States. If anyone declared the constitution suspended they would, unambiguously, be acting illegally. The president simply does not have that power. Elections must happen when they are supposed to because the constitution - which cannot be suspended - says they must.

The *only* way for him to stay in power would be for him to make a declaration in the face of all of that, and for the entire government apparatus to simply accept it, and for the military to be prepared to back it up. And even if he did so, the federal structure of the United States is such that he just wouldn’t be accepted by all the states as the legitimate president. He would have a civil war on his hands, and the States are not un-armed in their own right.

Given that to this day the vast majority of American kids come up through school swearing allegiance to the flag and the republic, and everyone in congress does, it is hard to see how enough people would accept a president’s attempt to usurp the constitution so easily.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Hugh

I can’t think of a country (in this Century) that has suspended their Constitution to "extend the rule of a President beyond their initial term" - I know of one country where the Constitution explicitly allows the delaying of Elections under Parliamentary-approved Martial Law, which legally extends the term of the Parliament and the Head of State until the end of Martial Law.

The mechanics elsewhere are less important than the underlying principle and what protections (or lack thereof) might exist in America.

The 20th Amendment implies Trump could continue to act as President so long as Congress agrees should a successor not be selected, a very similar proposition to your case of Parliamentary approved martial law in the absence of elections. (Congress could in theory pick anyone, since the post holder would only act as President and not “be” President. It’s likely implied that this person should be the Speaker since that is the line of succession, but that’s not what the provision states).

Edit: to add, once you hit early January there would be no Speaker, should elections not take place, for the same reason there would be no President elect or VP elect. Two thirds of the Senate would still hold their offices.

Originally Posted by jfman

The mechanics elsewhere are less important than the underlying principle and what protections (or lack thereof) might exist in America.

The 20th Amendment implies Trump could continue to act as President so long as Congress agrees should a successor not be selected,

Section 3 gives congress the power to nominate an acting president, but it does not give it the right to appoint someone who is not qualified. Again, because there is no provision to suspend the constitution of the United States, whoever occupies the Oval Office must be qualified as per the constitution. So they can’t nominate someone who has served 2 terms any more than they could nominate someone who was not a natural-born US American citizen, because the constitution explicitly prohibits that.

[Itshim]

The message given to me is that his team are working on it. To quote ," if putin can , so can he" make of it what you will

So to replicate Putin’s rise to President for life, he will put corrupt oligarchs in charge of Government departments, use the Government to prosecute anyone who opposes him, make himself rich off of running the country, close down/frighten off any media and lawyers who oppose him, ignore judges who disagree with him, and foment hatred against anyone who isn’t like him - can’t see that happening in the USA.

Oh, wait….

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Hugh

So to replicate Putin’s rise to President for life, he will put corrupt oligarchs in charge of Government departments, use the Government to prosecute anyone who opposes him, make himself rich off of running the country, close down/frighten off any media and lawyers who oppose him, ignore judges who disagree with him, and foment hatred against anyone who isn’t like him - can’t see that happening in the USA.

Oh, wait….

Didn’t work for Biden.

Ah, the MAGA equivalent of "your mum!"…

13 of Trump appointees are billionaires, there were none in the Biden Administration.

The Biden Administration didn’t sign Executive Orders banning any lawyers who had been involved in legal cases against the incumbent or his family from doing any Government work.

The Biden administration didn’t to seek sanctions against attorneys or law firms that challenged the administration’s actions in court for the last eight years

The Biden administration didn’t fire any FBI officers or DOJ lawyers who were involved in cases against the incumbent or his family.

The Biden administration didn’t call for the impeachment of Judges who ruled against them

The Biden administration didn’t try to overturn the 14th Amendment

The Biden administration didn’t fire 17 independent Inspector Generals, who provided independent oversight on Government departments

The Biden administration didn’t turn the White House lawn into a car showroom for his mate

But sure, they’re the same…

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Hugh

he will put corrupt oligarchs in charge of Government departments,

well at least it isn’t a load of unqualified “Diversity hires”

use the Government to prosecute anyone who opposes him,

Check

make himself rich off of running the country,

Him and his corrupt family

close down/frighten off any media and lawyers who oppose him,

He “owned” the media, all of CNN, MSNBC ran cover for him

ignore judges who disagree with him,

Pardons his son, after being record many t8mes saying he wouldn’t.

foment hatred against anyone who isn’t like him

Call Trump supporters “Garbage”

He was a lovely man and a president “for everyone”

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Pierre

Didn’t work for Biden.

It didn't work for Biden as he didn't try it!

[Stephen]

Originally Posted by Pierre

well at least it isn’t a load of unqualified “Diversity hires”


He was a lovely man and a president “for everyone”

Still clinging to the lies of Trump there. Just because someone of different skin colour or ethnic background has a job, it doesnt mean there were hired just because of that. They still had to match the job requirements and ability to perform said role.

For example, narrowed down to three Candidates who all showed they have the ability to do the job, the person best suited will be hired and not just because they were black or gay. You've been utterly misled as to what DEI means. Jobs must be advertised and made visible to as many people as possible and it does not mean they a just just for being in a marginalised group.

Finally that statement is true of Biden.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Stephen

Still clinging to the lies of Trump there. Just because someone of different skin colour or ethnic background has a job, it doesnt mean there were hired just because of that. They still had to match the job requirements and ability to perform said role.

For example, narrowed down to three Candidates who all showed they have the ability to do the job, the person best suited will be hired and not just because they were black or gay. You've been utterly misled as to what DEI means. Jobs must be advertised and made visible to as many people as possible and it does not mean they a just just for being in a marginalised group.

Finally that statement is true of Biden.

The Vice President and Supreme Court Judge Ketanji Brown, appointed by Biden at his own admission purely because of their sex and ethnicity.

Throw in Admiral Rachel Levine, Sam Brinton, for comedy value

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Pierre

The Vice President and Supreme Court Judge Ketanji Brown, appointed by Biden at his own admission purely because of their sex and ethnicity.

Throw in Admiral Rachel Levine, Sam Brinton, for comedy value

Either Biden was demented and not in charge of things or he was busy making strategic diversity hires and was fully in control. Which is it?

[Stephen]

Originally Posted by Pierre

The Vice President and Supreme Court Judge Ketanji Brown, appointed by Biden at his own admission purely because of their sex and ethnicity.

Throw in Admiral Rachel Levine, Sam Brinton, for comedy value

Trump appointed a female judge last time. I guess that means he made a DEI hire then..

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Either Biden was demented and not in charge of things or he was busy making strategic diversity hires and was fully in control. Which is it?

Scary that we didn’t know, isn’t it.

---------- Post added at 13:00 ---------- Previous post was at 12:55 ----------

Originally Posted by Stephen

Trump appointed a female judge last time. I guess that means he made a DEI hire then..

Not if it was because she was the best judge that just happened to be a woman.

Biden explicitly picked Brown because she was black, not that she was the best judge that just also happened to be black.


There’s a difference