Here is the full transcript (via @BrianStelter) of Kristen Welker’s interview with Donald Trump where he discusses a third term in office —
Welker: “Have you been presented with any potential plans that would allow you to serve a third term?”
Trump: “Well, there are plans. There are – not plans. There are, there are methods which you could do it, as you know.”
No she doesn’t fucking know why didn’t she bring up the 22nd amendment?
The "method" is a Constitutional amendment. Which would be nearly impossible to pull off, particularly in three years. Then of course they will bring up that "well, what if JD is elected president and Trump VP and then he'll just make all of the decisions". Well the 12thA cares for that with "But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States."
Here is the full transcript (via @BrianStelter) of Kristen Welker’s interview with Donald Trump where he discusses a third term in office —
Welker: “Have you been presented with any potential plans that would allow you to serve a third term?”
Trump: “Well, there are plans. There are – not plans. There are, there are methods which you could do it, as you know.”
No she doesn’t fucking know why didn’t she bring up the 22nd amendment?
The "method" is a Constitutional amendment. Which would be nearly impossible to pull off, particularly in three years. Then of course they will bring up that "well, what if JD is elected president and Trump VP and then he'll just make all of the decisions". Well the 12thA cares for that with "But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States."
Appointing trump president immediately before he serves as VP would possibly solve both the 12 th and 22nd since he would neither have served as VP nor elected to a third term.
Admittedly a wild scenario but the amendments are vague enough to allow Vance to appoint trump to an enhanced DOGE role and allow him to sit in the Oval, “while these serious constitutional matters are being sorted by the courts.
Of course this gets minimum three votes on the big court.
Hopefully not, but what’s stopping Vance from giving trump an enhanced DOGE position, a bully pulpit, and implementing all of his ideas? Red and purple state voters?
Will Donald Trump live long enough for a third term to be an issue? Probably 50/50.
Will there be a successful constitutional amendment to undo the 22nd Amendment (or, rather to change it for Trump while "Obama-proofing" it?) Almost certainly not.
Will Donald Trump, if he's still alive, start a third term? Probably. At that point the constitution will be a cute relic of our past. He's going to die in office. The only question is when.
1995 Milwaukee 1998 Alpine, Alpine 2003 Albany, Boston, Boston, Boston 2004 Boston, Boston 2006 Hartford, St. Paul (Petty), St. Paul (Petty) 2011 Alpine, Alpine 2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin 2024 Napa, Wrigley, Wrigley
Here is the full transcript (via @BrianStelter) of Kristen Welker’s interview with Donald Trump where he discusses a third term in office —
Welker: “Have you been presented with any potential plans that would allow you to serve a third term?”
Trump: “Well, there are plans. There are – not plans. There are, there are methods which you could do it, as you know.”
No she doesn’t fucking know why didn’t she bring up the 22nd amendment?
The "method" is a Constitutional amendment. Which would be nearly impossible to pull off, particularly in three years. Then of course they will bring up that "well, what if JD is elected president and Trump VP and then he'll just make all of the decisions". Well the 12thA cares for that with "But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States."
Appointing trump president immediately before he serves as VP would possibly solve both the 12 th and 22nd since he would neither have served as VP nor elected to a third term.
Admittedly a wild scenario but the amendments are vague enough to allow Vance to appoint trump to an enhanced DOGE role and allow him to sit in the Oval, “while these serious constitutional matters are being sorted by the courts.
Of course this gets minimum three votes on the big court.
They aren't vague. A president cannot "appoint" another person president.
Nothing prevents him from being a senior advisor or acting in an authoritative role. However, reality and sanity would say if Vance was elected president, he's not going to just abdicate his authority. At that point, he has all of the power. No one is giving that away.
Assuming he's alive, it'll be interesting to see the MAGA and disinformation source response to his continued hints that he should remain in office (which we know he'll make). I'm old enough to remember when the most intellectually dishonest partisans would never stand for such a thing. But things have changed.
Then it'll be interesting to see who tries to make it happen either by offering flimsy legal loopholes, trying to amend the constitution, or just saying "fuck the constitution; we need Daddy Trump."
1995 Milwaukee 1998 Alpine, Alpine 2003 Albany, Boston, Boston, Boston 2004 Boston, Boston 2006 Hartford, St. Paul (Petty), St. Paul (Petty) 2011 Alpine, Alpine 2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin 2024 Napa, Wrigley, Wrigley
Here is the full transcript (via @BrianStelter) of Kristen Welker’s interview with Donald Trump where he discusses a third term in office —
Welker: “Have you been presented with any potential plans that would allow you to serve a third term?”
Trump: “Well, there are plans. There are – not plans. There are, there are methods which you could do it, as you know.”
No she doesn’t fucking know why didn’t she bring up the 22nd amendment?
The "method" is a Constitutional amendment. Which would be nearly impossible to pull off, particularly in three years. Then of course they will bring up that "well, what if JD is elected president and Trump VP and then he'll just make all of the decisions". Well the 12thA cares for that with "But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States."
Appointing trump president immediately before he serves as VP would possibly solve both the 12 th and 22nd since he would neither have served as VP nor elected to a third term.
Admittedly a wild scenario but the amendments are vague enough to allow Vance to appoint trump to an enhanced DOGE role and allow him to sit in the Oval, “while these serious constitutional matters are being sorted by the courts.
Of course this gets minimum three votes on the big court.
They aren't vague. A president cannot "appoint" another person president.
Nothing prevents him from being a senior advisor or acting in an authoritative role. However, reality and sanity would say if Vance was elected president, he's not going to just abdicate his authority. At that point, he has all of the power. No one is giving that away.
Appoint is splitting hairs with the word. Vance “would” resign because he knows he won the 2028 race because he promised to bring trump back to power.
and as far as the Court? How confident were all the experts on his presidential immunity case before arguments heard? No chance trump wins that, this law was settled with Nix….
The constitution could have been written to clearly state no person may serve more than two full terms, no matter the method the office obtained. It does not.
Another way…He could easily be appointed as President Emeritus Trump with a DOGE type position with a bully pulpit and they’d all climb over themselves carrying out his will. Emeritus…that’s been done before lol. Certainly they’ll all be pointing that one out.
I already said he could serve in a non-presidential role, one that is not in the line of succession. But all of his power would be granted from the current president. Does Vance really abdicate his authority once he is elected? It would go against human extinct so no I don't think that would happen.
Second, it's not vague, it couldn't be any more clear. You tell me where this daylight exists. Trump has already been elected twice and he ineligible in the succession line because of that.
22ndA
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.
12thA But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.
And in order for this to be a possibility, it would have to be announced as Trump as the VP. And many states would refuse to put him on the ballot due to the Constitutional issues. Remember states determine who is eligible for the general election, not the federal gov't.
While I tend to think a third Trump term would be by forceful coup, how about this maneuver:
Trump is appointed speaker of the house (i.e., third in line, for which you do not have to actually be elected) and the Prez and veep bow out.
Now, this would take two people to give up power. But the goal is to get him into power for as long as he lives, thereby owning the libs and keeping Amagaca Great. All MAGA needs is two people willing to do it. Then between Elon's money, the courts, and whatever other crap they come up with "Graham/Greene" wins the election and they both resign on day 1.
1995 Milwaukee 1998 Alpine, Alpine 2003 Albany, Boston, Boston, Boston 2004 Boston, Boston 2006 Hartford, St. Paul (Petty), St. Paul (Petty) 2011 Alpine, Alpine 2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin 2024 Napa, Wrigley, Wrigley
Here is the full transcript (via @BrianStelter) of Kristen Welker’s interview with Donald Trump where he discusses a third term in office —
Welker: “Have you been presented with any potential plans that would allow you to serve a third term?”
Trump: “Well, there are plans. There are – not plans. There are, there are methods which you could do it, as you know.”
No she doesn’t fucking know why didn’t she bring up the 22nd amendment?
The "method" is a Constitutional amendment. Which would be nearly impossible to pull off, particularly in three years. Then of course they will bring up that "well, what if JD is elected president and Trump VP and then he'll just make all of the decisions". Well the 12thA cares for that with "But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States."
Appointing trump president immediately before he serves as VP would possibly solve both the 12 th and 22nd since he would neither have served as VP nor elected to a third term.
Admittedly a wild scenario but the amendments are vague enough to allow Vance to appoint trump to an enhanced DOGE role and allow him to sit in the Oval, “while these serious constitutional matters are being sorted by the courts.
Of course this gets minimum three votes on the big court.
They aren't vague. A president cannot "appoint" another person president.
Nothing prevents him from being a senior advisor or acting in an authoritative role. However, reality and sanity would say if Vance was elected president, he's not going to just abdicate his authority. At that point, he has all of the power. No one is giving that away.
While I tend to think a third Trump term would be by forceful coup, how about this maneuver:
Trump is appointed speaker of the house (i.e., third in line, for which you do not have to actually be elected) and the Prez and veep bow out.
Now, this would take two people to give up power. But the goal is to get him into power for as long as he lives, thereby owning the libs and keeping Amagaca Great. All MAGA needs is two people willing to do it. Then between Elon's money, the courts, and whatever other crap they come up with "Graham/Greene" wins the election and they both resign on day 1.
Can't be VP if ineligible to be POTUS
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018) The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago 2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy 2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE) 2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston 2020: Oakland, Oakland:2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana 2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville 2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2
While I tend to think a third Trump term would be by forceful coup, how about this maneuver:
Trump is appointed speaker of the house (i.e., third in line, for which you do not have to actually be elected) and the Prez and veep bow out.
Now, this would take two people to give up power. But the goal is to get him into power for as long as he lives, thereby owning the libs and keeping Amagaca Great. All MAGA needs is two people willing to do it. Then between Elon's money, the courts, and whatever other crap they come up with "Graham/Greene" wins the election and they both resign on day 1.
Can't be VP if ineligible to be POTUS
That's right. The order of operations requires the VP to be president. And to Wis's point, you would need two people with the opportunity to be president, to give that up. It just goes against nature.
The strategy of him being Speaker is the ONLY one with a touch of daylight since teh 12thA doesn't address each person in succession saying they cannot serve if ineligible. For example, the Sec'y of Transportation is in the line of succession but the Constitution doesn't mention them specifically. I think the argument is absurd and click bait for both Trump and the media.
It’s more about the fact that he’s even talking about it openly. It’s not going to happen. It’s just triggering to normal people to hear a president opining about something once considered “sacred”.
"every society honours its live conformists and its dead troublemakers"
And in order for this to be a possibility, it would have to be announced as Trump as the VP. And many states would refuse to put him on the ballot due to the Constitutional issues. Remember states determine who is eligible for the general election, not the federal gov't.
Your logic relies on red and purple states and the Supreme Court acting rationally. 22 says he can’t be elected and 12 says he’s ineligible to serve as VP. They’ll find other ways. Considering how trump has shaped politics and the court, to not view his third term as a realistic threat, is another example of an overconfident left. I’ll go no further than the dismantling of US v Nixon and the recent wild red state legislative actions…they can’t wait to anoint him emperor. Hopefully there are enough sane conservative voters to stop this, but it’s been ten years into maga and it took a bizarre covid campaign to pause him for four years. If anything, that loss made him stronger.
If he still has control of both houses and SC on his side and Hegseth as his pit bull he will refuse to leave! I’m done underestimating his drive to be a dictator
And in order for this to be a possibility, it would have to be announced as Trump as the VP. And many states would refuse to put him on the ballot due to the Constitutional issues. Remember states determine who is eligible for the general election, not the federal gov't.
Your logic relies on red and purple states and the Supreme Court acting rationally. 22 says he can’t be elected and 12 says he’s ineligible to serve as VP. They’ll find other ways. Considering how trump has shaped politics and the court, to not view his third term as a realistic threat, is another example of an overconfident left. I’ll go no further than the dismantling of US v Nixon and the recent wild red state legislative actions…they can’t wait to anoint him emperor. Hopefully there are enough sane conservative voters to stop this, but it’s been ten years into maga and it took a bizarre covid campaign to pause him for four years. If anything, that loss made him stronger.
US v Nixon was a supreme court decision, not an Amendment. But by all means, spend lots of sleepless nights worrying about this. Maybe it will distract you from all of the ways that the US and Ukraine are responsible for Putin killing civilians.
And in order for this to be a possibility, it would have to be announced as Trump as the VP. And many states would refuse to put him on the ballot due to the Constitutional issues. Remember states determine who is eligible for the general election, not the federal gov't.
Your logic relies on red and purple states and the Supreme Court acting rationally. 22 says he can’t be elected and 12 says he’s ineligible to serve as VP. They’ll find other ways. Considering how trump has shaped politics and the court, to not view his third term as a realistic threat, is another example of an overconfident left. I’ll go no further than the dismantling of US v Nixon and the recent wild red state legislative actions…they can’t wait to anoint him emperor. Hopefully there are enough sane conservative voters to stop this, but it’s been ten years into maga and it took a bizarre covid campaign to pause him for four years. If anything, that loss made him stronger.
US v Nixon was a supreme court decision, not an Amendment. But by all means, spend lots of sleepless nights worrying about this. Maybe it will distract you from all of the ways that the US and Ukraine are responsible for Putin killing civilians.
Really, I cite a court case and I need to be lectured that it’s a decision? And who exactly determines how the words in 12 and 22 get interpreted ? Who decides? Mick? Hal? Me? You?
When the court was 5v4 before three trump appointments, we’d be in full agreement. That court doesn’t exist anymore I am only saying it’s possible, and US v Nixon is an example of an interpretation no one expected and was mocked by the left when the immunity challenge was first made public. Similar to your mocking comments here. Now we get at hal level whataboutisms bringing up russia. And I slept excellent this week so far, thanks for asking. Cutting back more on Diet Coke is a big help.
And in order for this to be a possibility, it would have to be announced as Trump as the VP. And many states would refuse to put him on the ballot due to the Constitutional issues. Remember states determine who is eligible for the general election, not the federal gov't.
Your logic relies on red and purple states and the Supreme Court acting rationally. 22 says he can’t be elected and 12 says he’s ineligible to serve as VP. They’ll find other ways. Considering how trump has shaped politics and the court, to not view his third term as a realistic threat, is another example of an overconfident left. I’ll go no further than the dismantling of US v Nixon and the recent wild red state legislative actions…they can’t wait to anoint him emperor. Hopefully there are enough sane conservative voters to stop this, but it’s been ten years into maga and it took a bizarre covid campaign to pause him for four years. If anything, that loss made him stronger.
US v Nixon was a supreme court decision, not an Amendment. But by all means, spend lots of sleepless nights worrying about this. Maybe it will distract you from all of the ways that the US and Ukraine are responsible for Putin killing civilians.
Really, I cite a court case and I need to be lectured that it’s a decision? And who exactly determines how the words in 12 and 22 get interpreted ? Who decides? Mick? Hal? Me? You?
When the court was 5v4 before three trump appointments, we’d be in full agreement. That court doesn’t exist anymore I am only saying it’s possible, and US v Nixon is an example of an interpretation no one expected and was mocked by the left when the immunity challenge was first made public. Similar to your mocking comments here. Now we get at hal level whataboutisms bringing up russia. And I slept excellent this week so far, thanks for asking. Cutting back more on Diet Coke is a big help.
US v Nixon was a case centered around Executive Privilege, which Nixon was relying upon to refuse providing the tapes to the special counsel. Privilege is NOT explicitly mentioned in the Constitution, rather derived from the Separation of Powers provision. Term limits is explicit in the Constitutional Amendments. That's a pretty key difference.
And in order for this to be a possibility, it would have to be announced as Trump as the VP. And many states would refuse to put him on the ballot due to the Constitutional issues. Remember states determine who is eligible for the general election, not the federal gov't.
Your logic relies on red and purple states and the Supreme Court acting rationally. 22 says he can’t be elected and 12 says he’s ineligible to serve as VP. They’ll find other ways. Considering how trump has shaped politics and the court, to not view his third term as a realistic threat, is another example of an overconfident left. I’ll go no further than the dismantling of US v Nixon and the recent wild red state legislative actions…they can’t wait to anoint him emperor. Hopefully there are enough sane conservative voters to stop this, but it’s been ten years into maga and it took a bizarre covid campaign to pause him for four years. If anything, that loss made him stronger.
US v Nixon was a supreme court decision, not an Amendment. But by all means, spend lots of sleepless nights worrying about this. Maybe it will distract you from all of the ways that the US and Ukraine are responsible for Putin killing civilians.
Really, I cite a court case and I need to be lectured that it’s a decision? And who exactly determines how the words in 12 and 22 get interpreted ? Who decides? Mick? Hal? Me? You?
When the court was 5v4 before three trump appointments, we’d be in full agreement. That court doesn’t exist anymore I am only saying it’s possible, and US v Nixon is an example of an interpretation no one expected and was mocked by the left when the immunity challenge was first made public. Similar to your mocking comments here. Now we get at hal level whataboutisms bringing up russia. And I slept excellent this week so far, thanks for asking. Cutting back more on Diet Coke is a big help.
US v Nixon was a case centered around Executive Privilege, which Nixon was relying upon to refuse providing the tapes to the special counsel. Privilege is NOT explicitly mentioned in the Constitution, rather derived from the Separation of Powers provision. Term limits is explicit in the Constitutional Amendments. That's a pretty key difference.
The intent was not to raise specific merits of the case, only that trump has been able to accomplish very surprising things with that court, that was mocked by most if not all left leaning experts at the time it was filed.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
One of the questions coming up re: dealing with the SAVE Act is whether a state issued REAL ID proves citizenship.
Yes, " At a minimum, you must provide documentation showing: 1) Full Legal Name; 2) Date of Birth; 3) Social Security Number; 4) Two Proofs of Address of Principal Residence; and 5) Lawful Status."
But! REAL IDs are intended as identification documents only and REAL IDs do not include/show citizenship status.
So you had to prove it to get one but it doesn't prove it.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Comments
is poorly written and does not mean what you are implying.
It's all to distract from Signalgate and move the headlines.
The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2
Admittedly a wild scenario but the amendments are vague enough to allow Vance to appoint trump to an enhanced DOGE role and allow him to sit in the Oval, “while these serious constitutional matters are being sorted by the courts.
The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2
Will there be a successful constitutional amendment to undo the 22nd Amendment (or, rather to change it for Trump while "Obama-proofing" it?) Almost certainly not.
Will Donald Trump, if he's still alive, start a third term? Probably. At that point the constitution will be a cute relic of our past. He's going to die in office. The only question is when.
2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
2024 Napa, Wrigley, Wrigley
Nothing prevents him from being a senior advisor or acting in an authoritative role. However, reality and sanity would say if Vance was elected president, he's not going to just abdicate his authority. At that point, he has all of the power. No one is giving that away.
Then it'll be interesting to see who tries to make it happen either by offering flimsy legal loopholes, trying to amend the constitution, or just saying "fuck the constitution; we need Daddy Trump."
2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
2024 Napa, Wrigley, Wrigley
and as far as the Court? How confident were all the experts on his presidential immunity case before arguments heard? No chance trump wins that, this law was settled with Nix….
Another way…He could easily be appointed as President Emeritus Trump with a DOGE type position with a bully pulpit and they’d all climb over themselves carrying out his will. Emeritus…that’s been done before lol. Certainly they’ll all be pointing that one out.
Second, it's not vague, it couldn't be any more clear. You tell me where this daylight exists. Trump has already been elected twice and he ineligible in the succession line because of that.
22ndA
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.
12thA
But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.
Trump is appointed speaker of the house (i.e., third in line, for which you do not have to actually be elected) and the Prez and veep bow out.
Now, this would take two people to give up power. But the goal is to get him into power for as long as he lives, thereby owning the libs and keeping Amagaca Great. All MAGA needs is two people willing to do it. Then between Elon's money, the courts, and whatever other crap they come up with "Graham/Greene" wins the election and they both resign on day 1.
2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
2024 Napa, Wrigley, Wrigley
The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2
The strategy of him being Speaker is the ONLY one with a touch of daylight since teh 12thA doesn't address each person in succession saying they cannot serve if ineligible. For example, the Sec'y of Transportation is in the line of succession but the Constitution doesn't mention them specifically. I think the argument is absurd and click bait for both Trump and the media.
When the court was 5v4 before three trump appointments, we’d be in full agreement. That court doesn’t exist anymore I am only saying it’s possible, and US v Nixon is an example of an interpretation no one expected and was mocked by the left when the immunity challenge was first made public. Similar to your mocking comments here. Now we get at hal level whataboutisms bringing up russia. And I slept excellent this week so far, thanks for asking. Cutting back more on Diet Coke is a big help.
Jury will decide on damages.
https://www.reuters.com/business/media-telecom/delaware-judge-rules-newsmax-defamed-dominion-voting-systems-2025-04-09/
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Yes, " At a minimum, you must provide documentation showing: 1) Full Legal Name; 2) Date of Birth; 3) Social Security Number; 4) Two Proofs of Address of Principal Residence; and 5) Lawful Status."
But! REAL IDs are intended as identification documents only and REAL IDs do not include/show citizenship status.
So you had to prove it to get one but it doesn't prove it.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14