It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Gov. Huckabee asked to chair Trump 2024 election?

page: 3
24
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 12 2019 @ 10:25 PM
link   
Unsure if this is a joke or not, but I don’t support it whether he was cheated on his first term or not. I think they’re just trolling the left after all the nonsense.



posted on Dec, 12 2019 @ 10:26 PM
link   
Closed pending links from OP.

ETA
And reopened
edit on Fri Dec 13 2019 by DontTreadOnMe because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 13 2019 @ 08:17 AM
link   
There's zero % chance of this actually happening, but there is a 100% chance of liberals completely triggered over this announcement. Keep on trolling fellas.



posted on Dec, 13 2019 @ 09:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
Re mobile.twitter.com...

This is for Real. Mike Huckabee does not kid around.


You almost got me!
Huckabee has a great sense of humor & is perfecting twitter trolling from the Maestro.
His twitter feeds & cable show are 2 examples.

BESIDES...

If the Impeach-Obama-Cancel-POTUS44 'movement' is successful, Trump gets two more terms, since he'll have to redo both of Obama's terms after that presidency is erased.
Like, he was sworn in as POTUS45 so if potus44 is erased, doesn't Trump get to catch up with his original 45th president satus???


ganjoa



posted on Dec, 13 2019 @ 09:18 AM
link   
Trump haters really have no sense of humor.

It was clearly a joke.



posted on Dec, 13 2019 @ 09:21 AM
link   
First, this was a joke people. Stop letting someone trigger your TDS so easily. Frankly, it is embarrassing to see people think this was actually true. Think before you react with those hurt "feelz".


With regard to the fantasy scenario of Trump running as VP under someone else, then ascending to the POTUS position upon the stepping down of the elected POTUS, the 22nd Amendment actually does not specifically prevent it, however the wording can be interpreted both ways.

Here is the full text of the 22nd Amendment for reference (bolding added for the purpose of this conversation):


AMENDMENT XXII

SECTION 1
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. But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President, when this Article was proposed by the Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term within which this Article becomes operative from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such term.

SECTION 2

This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years from the date of its submission to the States by the Congress.


Now, interpreting the bolded text, we can surmise:

1. No person can be elected president more than twice.
2. No person who served in the role of president for 2 or more years, via succession, can be elected as president more than once.

What it doesn't clearly define is if a person who was elected to the office of president twice can be placed into that office via succession. It could be interpreted to mean never or not for more than one year.



posted on Dec, 13 2019 @ 12:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: schuyler
Violates the 22nd Amendment to the US Constitution. Can't be done unless the amendment is repealed, which would take an amendment. Not gonna happen.

According to the Democrats he is not a legitimate President. So does this actually count as a first term using their logic?



posted on Dec, 13 2019 @ 12:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Per the Democrats, this term was "illegitimate," they claim he didn't win the election, and they refuse to acknowledge he is holding the office, calling him an occupier or worse... so it wouldn't exactly be kosher to count it against the 22nd Amendment's clear definition of holding the office, now would it?


Trump can't have it both ways. He can't claim to have accomplished more than any other US President, take credit for a good economy, low unemployment, trade accomplishments, yada, yada, yada, and then claim he was gypped of his first term because the Dem's didn't recognize his "legitimacy".



Sure he can! That's basically how this all works.



posted on Dec, 13 2019 @ 12:53 PM
link   
I think a great point was made by Huckabee here... Look at how many voices who had just finished flapping their gums about how Trump would be out on his ear following the impeachment farce, or iron clad lock to be voted out in 2020, or will be soon thrown under the bus. What did those same voices do when Huck posted this "GASP! No, that would be Unconstitutional!!! He'd not be legally allowed to run! OMG, NO! He can't do that in 2024 again!" It would seem the confidence level of Donald Trump's enemies, the confidence that he won't ultimately be president of the USA leading into 2024, is running considerably lower than we would be told by The Narrative.

Huck bared some asses with that one.



posted on Dec, 13 2019 @ 11:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
I think a great point was made by Huckabee here... Look at how many voices who had just finished flapping their gums about how Trump would be out on his ear following the impeachment farce, or iron clad lock to be voted out in 2020, or will be soon thrown under the bus. What did those same voices do when Huck posted this "GASP! No, that would be Unconstitutional!!! He'd not be legally allowed to run! OMG, NO! He can't do that in 2024 again!" It would seem the confidence level of Donald Trump's enemies, the confidence that he won't ultimately be president of the USA leading into 2024, is running considerably lower than we would be told by The Narrative.

Huck bared some asses with that one.


Very very good point. Talk about a new way of polling....lol



posted on Oct, 19 2020 @ 11:14 AM
link   
Trump will 'run for re-election in 2024' if Biden is declared the winner.

So says Steve Bannon during the last couple minutes of this video.

www.youtube.com...



posted on Oct, 19 2020 @ 12:54 PM
link   
While it's funny there's no way. Even if he would be eligible somehow. Too old.



posted on Oct, 19 2020 @ 01:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: jjkenobi
While it's funny there's no way. Even if he would be eligible somehow. Too old.


Well he was already the oldest President ever by coming in at age 70. He would still be eligible because he only served one term.



posted on Oct, 19 2020 @ 01:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: spiritualarchitect

originally posted by: jjkenobi
While it's funny there's no way. Even if he would be eligible somehow. Too old.


Well he was already the oldest President ever by coming in at age 70. He would still be eligible because he only served one term.


Either way, Huckabee appears to have known something was afoot a long time ago.



posted on Oct, 19 2020 @ 01:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: highvein
After this impeachment fiasco I will be surprised if the Republicans only have 75% of the House and Senate after the next 2 elections.


It's not 75% of the Congress, it's 75% of the state legislatures to change the Constitution.

Did you not learn basic civics?



posted on Oct, 19 2020 @ 01:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

Anywho.....this should make some serious mental breakdowns occur...






posted on Oct, 19 2020 @ 06:54 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus


Which is why I did not mentioned anything about changing the Constitution.





Did you not learn basic civics?


Not a lot, but the more I educate myself about it, Civics has become less civil, which in and of itself is irony.



posted on Oct, 19 2020 @ 07:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: highvein
After this impeachment fiasco I will be surprised if the Republicans only have 75% of the House and Senate after the next 2 elections.


It's not 75% of the Congress, it's 75% of the state legislatures to change the Constitution.

Did you not learn basic civics?


Apparently you didn't learn basic civics, either.
It's a 2/3rds majority vote for state legislatures to call a Constitutional Convention, not 75%.



posted on Oct, 19 2020 @ 07:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: schuyler

originally posted by: highvein

originally posted by: schuyler
Violates the 22nd Amendment to the US Constitution. Can't be done unless the amendment is repealed, which would take an amendment. Not gonna happen.


Not when the republicans will have the House and Senate. The Democrats have killed themselves. Unless a viable party can step up and challenge the Republicans, this might become a reality.


No, it will not. Like I said, the 22nd amendment prohibits more than 2 terms. It doesn't matter if the GOP holds both houses. They still cannot override the Constitution with a vote. The only way to override it is to repeal it, just like they did with prohibition. And that would require a vote in each state with 75% approving. The GOP might very well win the presidencey in 2024, but not with Trump.

This is basic civics you ought to have learned in high school.


I thought the dems are the ones now claiming that the constitution is up for interpretation and modernizing ("It's a living document") and that it needs some tweaking every now and then? Right?
www.myheritage.org... 3fOvrPUfGjI4DRcphI%2BSLDwEYGJlv6SgFQrLBMa1ozrgOWxU%3D



posted on Oct, 19 2020 @ 08:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
Apparently you didn't learn basic civics, either.
It's a 2/3rds majority vote for state legislatures to call a Constitutional Convention, not 75%.


Try again, it's 3/4ths of state legislatures to approve an Amendment and Congress may call a Convention with 2/3rds of the state's legislature's application. Calling a Convention doesn't change the Constitution and I was pretty clear when I actually said 'change the Constitution'. Not only do I understand civics I can do that reading comprehension thing too.

Almost a sick burn but not really.


Authority to Amend the U.S. Constitution

Article V of the United States Constitution outlines basic procedures for constitutional amendment.

Congress may submit a proposed constitutional amendment to the states, if the proposed amendment language is approved by a two-thirds vote of both houses.
Congress must call a convention for proposing amendments upon application of the legislatures of two-thirds of the states (i.e., 34 of 50 states).
Amendments proposed by Congress or convention become valid only when ratified by the legislatures of, or conventions in, three-fourths of the states (i.e., 38 of 50 states). Some basic civis in here if you're interested




edit on 19-10-2020 by AugustusMasonicus because: Networkdude has no beer




top topics



 
24
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join