This is the thing, all these arguments against a third term begin from a rule of law / “The Constitution says” POV. If, instead, you go with “L’État, c’est moi” authoritarian POV, there are no barriers. “The law is what I say it is” is part and parcel of authoritarian rule. We are amazingly far gone down that road for only 2 months into Il Douche’s lawless regime.
It’s still vitally important that people point out that any idea to allow Trump a third term is explicitly unconstitutional. Trump’s “legal experts” keep claiming there are loopholes that would allow it. There are not.
21 Likes
His stance on a third term alone should be enough for an impeachment.
20 Likes
Yep, they are making up excuses in order to justify their unlawful attempt to take over.
In normal times, it would be.
14 Likes
A past filibuster, can’t remember who or for what, involved an enema beforehand and a catheter during, as I recall.
10 Likes
In any normal time, J6 would have been a conviction.
Any single item he’s done, besides the golf, in this term would be impeachment for anyone else. Go ahead, think of Obama, Biden, or even your favorite flavor of Bush doing it. All of them, gone.
More evidence that Trump is the antichrist, I guess.
16 Likes
10 Likes
16 Likes
Yeeeaaahh, not a book anyone needs right now. Yuk.
13 Likes
Yes, but you see he likes money.
Edit - just noticed in the article it says Biden is planning his own book on the election. NO, JUST NO. He needs to do a GW Bush and disappear for a while. The more he’s visible, the easier it is for smooth brains to blame him.
12 Likes
8 Likes
An interesting take, especially so long after his candidacy ended. I guess the deference ended rather abruptly:
One name missing from this piece is Pelosi, but I’m sure the analysis of her influence will be coming soon. IMO, it’s less about Biden and more about an unwillingness to let go of traditional norms now that the opposition is busy violating as many of them as possible. When he was first elected, people were desperate to get those norms back. 
I get the feeling some of those on the side of normalcy fear change means adopting truly unethical tactics to regain power - because it can be a dangerous, slippery slope. They’ve seen a lot of their colleagues go down that path in the past 10 years. There are folks who like to claim both sides are equally bad, but I don’t think any of us really wants to see that come true. Where would the people turn if neither party respected the rule of law and all pols treated our founding documents as things to be ignored?
We need a progressive agenda that outlines a new normal - one that closes all the loopholes and unenforced rules or regulations that have been exploited since 2016.
2 Likes