Go old school.Definitely use secure means of communication (not WhatsApp)
I'm not sure anyone is saying they would do it. The original question was if it was possible to impeach him after the immunity ruling. The answer is that he can be impeached regardless of the immunity ruling but of course it is extremely unlikely.You people are spitting in the wind. If they didn’t vote to remove last 2 times what makes ANYONE think they will do the right thing this time
It would be impossible without a constituional amendment, which there is no avenue that is realisticlly available for that to happen. So there is no owing anything to anyone, no matter what evidence they manufacture, I mean find in a new 2020 election investigation.Well they've already stated that they're forming another "commission" to investigate the 2020 election.
So, the roadmap becomes very clear if you have any sense of imagination. National emergency + "we found fraud from 2020" = Trump is owed a third term. If he even wants to run again. If not, they can still suspend elections and install whomever.
Who's going to stop him?
It would be impossible without a constituional amendment, which there is no avenue that is realisticlly available for that to happen. So there is no owing anything to anyone, no matter what evidence they manufacture, I mean find in a new 2020 election investigation.
The only way it wouldn't be impossible if the constituion is ripped up and burned, which completely changes what I said, because that means we no longer have a constitution. Otherwise, it would be impossible for such and amendent to be ratified as it takes 3/4 of state legislations to vote for it, or 3/4 of the states thru a convention (citizens voting for it), and that is after the super majoirty required in both the house and senate to even start the process. That means it would require a lot of democrates to vote for it in Congress, and many blue state to vote for it. Term limits are something most citizens want, and they sure as hell do not want to increase term limits for any office. You are welcome to give some substance of reality, that such an amendment would be possible."Impossible"
LOL
The only way it wouldn't be impossible if the constituion is ripped up and burned, which completely changes what I said, because that means we no longer have a constitution. Otherwise, it would be impossible for such and amendent to be ratified as it takes 3/4 of state legislations to vote for it, or 3/4 of the states thru a convention (citizens voting for it), and that is after the super majoirty required in both the house and senate to even start the process. That means it would require a lot of democrates to vote for it in Congress, and many blue state to vote for it. Term limits are something most citizens want, and they sure as hell do not want to increase term limits for any office. You are welcome to give some substance of reality, that such an amendment would be possible.
Do you have a reading disability, a comprehension disablity, or both? Please go read what I said again, as you "substance of reality" reponse, changes what I said compeletely, which changes the argument that I made. What you are talking about is how a dictatory ship is put in place perminatly, IF that person had full support of the military, aka the same as ripping up and burning the constituion, which is changing the context of what I said, aka a different argument. So again, in the context of what I said, how can an amendment to change term limits, be realistically a possibility within the confines of our constition? (hint: it's not possible.) You can't say it's possible, by taking the constituion out of the argument, which is the very document I am talking about being impossible to amend with such an amendment, as it is what sets term limits.Again, your mindset is still stuck on the old rules and norms.
What if he says it's a national emergency, I have emergency powers, and I am until further notice suspending the Constitution?
Who's going to say, "No, you can't do that." Who's even left anymore?
“But..but..but, you ran ads promising we wouldn’t have to pay taxes on overtime pay!”Hey all you average Joes who voted for Trump and were told Project 2025 won't happen. Trump judge just killed overtime for 4 million workers.
Trump Judge Just Blocked A Biden Rule That Helps Millions Of Workers
The overtime rule is one of the most far-reaching economic reforms that President Joe Biden has fought for.www.huffpost.com
Cool. Just don't put in the work. The so-called boss can eat a bag of dicks.“But..but..but, you ran ads promising we wouldn’t have to pay taxes on overtime pay!”
Exactly…because there is NO overtime pay!!!
“But..but..but, you ran ads promising we wouldn’t have to pay taxes on overtime pay!”
Exactly…because there is NO overtime pay!!!
Do you have a reading disability, a comprehension disablity, or both? Please go read what I said again, as you "substance of reality" reponse, changes what I said compeletely, which changes the argument that I made. What you are talking about is how a dictatory ship is put in place perminatly, IF that person had full support of the military, aka the same as ripping up and burning the constituion, which is changing the context of what I said, aka a different argument. So again, in the context of what I said, how can an amendment to change term limits, be realistically a possibility within the confines of our constition? (hint: it's not possible.) You can't say it's possible, by taking the constituion out of the argument, which is the very document I am talking about being impossible to amend with such an amendment, as it is what sets term limits.
edit: BTW, if the consitution, the very document that created the office of POTUS, and gives the President his/her authority, was suspended, that person would no longer be the POTUS, essentially quilivilent to resigning. Meaning he no longer has the authority to give orders to the military, or any authority at all, as all of his authority comes from the constitution.
Now you’re starting to get it
Trump creating "MAGA Military" with purge of generals, veterans group warns
Trump's transition team is considering a draft executive order that would establish a "warrior board" to review top generals.www.newsweek.com
Traditionally, the German military had sworn an oath of allegiance to the Kaiser. This changed after Germany's defeat in World War I and the establishment of a democratic government, the Weimar Republic, in Germany.
The political leaders of the new Weimar Republic sought to democratize the military by changing its social makeup and by changing the oath of allegiance. The new oath required soldiers to swear loyalty to the Weimar Constitution and its institutions, including the office of the Reich President, rather than to any individual.
The Weimar government also viewed the military as a potential threat. Much of the military's conservative leadership did not support the new Republic, and Weimar officials hoped that the oath would help provide legitimacy and security.
For many career soldiers, however, the idea of swearing an oath to a constitution was disconcerting.
Following Hitler's appointment as Chancellor in 1933, the military oath changed again, although soldiers were required to swear loyalty to their people and country (“Volk und Vaterland”), rather to individual leaders. All this changed with the death of German President Paul von Hindenburg on August 2, 1934. At this time, Adolf Hitler began to solidify his control over Germany. That same day, all military personnel in Germany swore a new oath of allegiance. The oath was no longer one of allegiance to the Constitution or its institutions, but one of binding loyalty to Hitler himself:
German Military Oaths
In Nazi Germany, German military personnel swore an oath directly to Adolf Hitler. Learn about the oath and its impact.encyclopedia.ushmm.org
The generals don't matter, it's the actual soldiers who have to be willing to be loyal to Trump, which is where the his problem lies, as most won't just follow orders to go after US citizens blindly, and hopefully that is our saving grace. My son is in the US armed forces, so I know that such loyaltiy in that regards, isn't highly present thru out the ranks. Our solders gave an oath to the constitution, not Trump or any other person. as for "starting to get it" I already got it long ago. The constitution is the only thing that dictates term limits, and the only way to change that is thru an amendment. To imply anything else, means we are no longer governed by the constitution, and term limits would't exist for Trump to have a third one.Now you’re starting to get it
Trump creating "MAGA Military" with purge of generals, veterans group warns
Trump's transition team is considering a draft executive order that would establish a "warrior board" to review top generals.www.newsweek.com
The generals don't matter, it's the actual soldiers who have to be willing to be loyal to Trump, which is where the his problem lies, as most won't just follow orders to go after US citizens blindly, and hopefully that is our saving grace. My son is in the US armed forces, so I know that such loyaltiy in that regards, isn't highly present thru out the ranks. Our solders gave an oath to the constitution, not Trump or any other person. as for "starting to get it" I already got it long ago. The constitution is the only thing that dictates term limits, and the only way to change that is thru an amendment. To imply anything else, means we are no longer governed by the constitution, and term limits would't exist for Trump to have a third one.
Constitution only matters if it's enforced. The presumption is that anything 'illegal' done by trump won't be enforced, as he's intending on getting rid of everyone that would enforce it.The only way it wouldn't be impossible if the constituion is ripped up and burned, which completely changes what I said, because that means we no longer have a constitution. Otherwise, it would be impossible for such and amendent to be ratified as it takes 3/4 of state legislations to vote for it, or 3/4 of the states thru a convention (citizens voting for it), and that is after the super majoirty required in both the house and senate to even start the process. That means it would require a lot of democrates to vote for it in Congress, and many blue state to vote for it. Term limits are something most citizens want, and they sure as hell do not want to increase term limits for any office. You are welcome to give some substance of reality, that such an amendment would be possible.
Do you have a reading disability, a comprehension disablity, or both? Please go read what I said again, as you "substance of reality" reponse, changes what I said compeletely, which changes the argument that I made. What you are talking about is how a dictatory ship is put in place perminatly, IF that person had full support of the military, aka the same as ripping up and burning the constituion, which is changing the context of what I said, aka a different argument. So again, in the context of what I said, how can an amendment to change term limits, be realistically a possibility within the confines of our constition? (hint: it's not possible.) You can't say it's possible, by taking the constituion out of the argument, which is the very document I am talking about being impossible to amend with such an amendment, as it is what sets term limits.
edit: BTW, if the consitution, the very document that created the office of POTUS, and gives the President his/her authority, was suspended, that person would no longer be the POTUS, essentially quilivilent to resigning. Meaning he no longer has the authority to give orders to the military, or any authority at all, as all of his authority comes from the constitution.
edit: BTW, if the consitution, the very document that created the office of POTUS, and gives the President his/her authority, was suspended, that person would no longer be the POTUS, essentially quilivilent to resigning. Meaning he no longer has the authority to give orders to the military, or any authority at all, as all of his authority comes from the constitution.
C'mon man.. you're not that naive.
Your stuff is perfectly 100% logical which is why it won't fly in the army of illogical Trumpers hell bent on "The Constitution is what Trump says it is".
Remember Pol Pot.. and how he tried to rid his country of any trace of logic, reason, foreign viewpoints?? We might be in that scenario and I don't see Mexico and Canada invading us like Vietnam did to "rescue" us anytime soon.
And don't count on big tech to help save you or be on your side:
Tech CEOs sell out Democrats in rush to curry favor with Trump
Trump’s victory marks the end of Democrats’ alliance with Big Techwww.salon.com
Lol fuck around and get fucked