0:00
/
15:28
Transcript
0:00
SPEAKER 4
Hey guys, welcome back to the Bullwark. I'm Sam Stein. I'm joined by James Ramoser, who is, what is your fearless title now these days? Legal editor? Is that it?
0:09
SPEAKER 3
Legal editor, yes.
0:10
SPEAKER 4
Legal editor, that's it? You do so much more.

Sam Stein is joined by James Romoser, legal editor at Politico, to discuss Donald Trump's continued claims that he will run for a third term, as well as the technicalities in the constitution and legal loop holes that would make it not impossible.

Leave a comment

As always: Watch, listen, and leave a comment. Bulwark+ Takes is home to short videos, livestreams, and event archives exclusively for Bulwark+ members.

Don’t care for video? Use the controls on the left side of the player to toggle to audio.

Add Bulwark+ Takes feed to your player of choice, here.

Discussion about this video

User's avatar
Michael Brooks's avatar

I’m sorry but this is the one thing I’m never going to be concerned about. Everyone is operating on the base assumption he could actually win an incumbency election.

Regardless of all the gamesmanship, this would be the American version of the French Revolution. He will be the most unpopular president by the end of this year. There’s a real chance we’ll be in a recession too.

There longer he says this stuff, the better it serves our cause, and preserve the current order. JD a whimpering sycophant, never a president. Little Marco. Lying Ted. They’re all pathetic and remain so in voter’s eyes

Expand full comment
Fightin Mad's avatar

hey The Bulwark, a leadership as steeped in corruption as Trump‘s has no intention of leaving power ever. If you don’t believe me, just go find that clip where he told his mega supporters just come out and vote for me one more time, that’s all we need. Or worse, find out what was behind Trump’s pronouncement before the election that he already had enough votes? this American nightmare has to be fought with everything we have. And then the Republican party has to be disbanded and it’s a leaders prohibited from holding any public office again ever.

Expand full comment
Just Me's avatar

Could Trump be elected speaker of the House on Jan. 3, 2029 and then both POTUS and VPOTUS resign, making the speaker president.

Expand full comment
Scott Smith's avatar

Can a simple majority of Congress, not subject to presidential veto, declare Trump an insurrectionist and therefore ineligible to serve as president under SCOTUS's ruling about Amendment XIV, Section 3?

Expand full comment
Adam J Schmidt's avatar

What are the odds someone does it and then stops taking Trump's calls? Who gives up the Presidency?

Expand full comment
Jon's avatar
Apr 1Edited

There is an additional massive loophole people seem to be missing.

What if Trump just does what Elon currently is doing. If Elon continues to act in his quasi-official capacity for four more years the American public will be used to essentially having a “co-president”.

JD runs as the principal and makes it explicitly clear to everyone he will just defer to Trump in every way and aspect. Trump is given a role similar to special advisor and maintains his grip on the GOP house/senate to make sure JD stays loyal.

This is no way violates anything in the constitution and allows Trump to act as president in every meaningful way. Honestly he might enjoy this more, leaving JD have to deal with the “boring” parts of the job.

Expand full comment
Don Sadowsky's avatar

That's it in a nutshell. So long as Trump can command people, he will effectively be the president if a Republican is elected. And even if he isn't able to command, any future Republican president will likely be as awful as Trump.

Therefore focus less on whether Trump can legally serve a third term, and more on making sure no damn Republican is elected to the office in 2028.

Expand full comment
Ellen Ensey's avatar

So, if the language in the 22nd Amendment is “elected”, isn’t he already disqualified from this term per his claim that he was “elected” in 2020?!?!

Expand full comment
Aviva Patt's avatar

The candidate is not going to be Vance because he’s a snake and Trump won’t trust him to give up the presidency. It would be one of his dopey kids.

Expand full comment
Rich Willson's avatar

He is not going to leave, the only way he leaves is either by being dragged kicking and screaming or carried out feet first in a body bag

Expand full comment
Don Gates's avatar

Let’s dispense with the idea Trump is joking about this. He is not, and if not dead, he will try to stay in office past 2029.

On the VP loophole, SCOTUS will side with Trump. Think of it this way: if a Vice President were to become President due to the President’s death, then after concluding that truncated term he could still be elected president twice. The VP loophole is the same principle, just in reverse order. Who thinks this SCOTUS wouldn’t buy that argument, at least where Trump is concerned?

Expand full comment
Carol E Smith's avatar

Not even 100 days in and we are talking about this ad nauseum. I can't even.

Expand full comment
Cynthia Kramer's avatar

For F’s sake, I wish everyone would just stop talking about this. The media is creating a Gollum!

Expand full comment
SandyG's avatar

Agree. Whether he does or not is years away. And he's only talking about this to distract from the Signal leak story. And he's succeeding.

Expand full comment
Chantal Rabey's avatar

Her tone delivering this story is so ridiculous?!

Welker sounds like she's delivering the latest in celebrity gossip, this is yet another actual threat to the constitution? The most ridiculous thing to me is that the legacy media continually underestimates the harm this man is doing to the US?!

Expand full comment
Annie B.'s avatar

Yeah, and if you hear the actual interview it's like she's spit-balling ideas with him. Like, STOP ENCOURAGING HIM ALREADY! Welker used to be a real journalist!

Expand full comment
Chantal Rabey's avatar

I saw that! I can’t even be surprised anymore, just disappointed.

Expand full comment
Colleen C Conwell's avatar

This is horrifying - he's joked about this since his 1st campaign. Now after everything that has happened in his first 9 weeks of his 2nd term him running for a 3rd term is seriously being discussed? It's more likely that he will refuse to leave office - that I can absolutely see happening, since he has tried it before. And unless Im reading the 12th amendment wrong he can't run as VP.

Expand full comment
David Randall's avatar

If so, Obama should run against him!🧢

Expand full comment
Whats Going On Brandi Dawn's avatar

That’s exactly what Putin did- picked out a deputy and gave him the presidency for one term while he pretended to be the “prime minister “ but everyone knew Putin was the head of government. Everyone has kept saying he wants to be a dictator; he has no respect for norms or laws; people keep trying to act as if he is normal, and if they just keep acting like he is normal it will all somehow be ok. This is the thinking that besets people in an abusive relationship with a violent partner: if we all keep going and looking at the bright side, the times you get beaten are not THAT often… only a few times a year… then it’s every month… then it’s every week. Soon she finally says “enough, I’m not staying here to have my jaw broken because I was talking to my sister on the phone…” then he kills her.

Everyone needs to wake up and understand that it is very likely he will need to be removed by force. Prepare for it. Gird up your courage. You will be required.

Expand full comment
Amy Haynes's avatar

But here is the last line in the 12th amendment: But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.

Seems to me Trump is ineligible then to run for VP,

Expand full comment
Truknolip's avatar

When it reaches the SC you would think the self described originalists/textualists on the bench would accept this interpretation of the sentence. I wouldn't count on Alito, Thomas, Kavanaugh or Gorsuch doing so. It's worth noting that when Trump's buddy Putin reached the end of his constitutionally mandated number of terms he nominated Medvedev to run for president. Once his pick won he served as Prime Minister while still maintaining power. Then ran for president again and won. He's still president today. Of course elections in Russia aren't exactly free. I find this a strange sentence to type but we'll need to work to make sure that ours remain so.

Expand full comment
Annie B.'s avatar

I came here to say the same thing, so thank you!

Besides, if the tech bros actually had JD Vance to run the country on their behalf, I think an ancient and crusty Trump would look far less appealing to them.

Expand full comment
Amy Haynes's avatar

Sigh. You're both totally right.

But once elected would the arrogant power hungry JD give up that much power?

Expand full comment
Annie B.'s avatar

No, and all the broligarch backers would be far more thrilled to have a slick Ivy-leauge version of autocracy. Peter Thiel and others among that group have already stated that "democracy is dead." Nobody needs Trump to keep the terror going now.

Expand full comment
Adrian  Foca's avatar

and the loophole is straight dictatorship

Expand full comment
Adrian  Foca's avatar

the focus groups cant wait to rationalize a Trump 3rd term-its about prosperity cant stop the fun now

Expand full comment