Sunday School

[TheEncogitationer]

PopeBeanie:

This is my wild guess. Seems to me that Bannon’s stirring the pot ahead of time, expecting MAGA (or some future evolution of MAGA) to own the presidency.

Bannon and his “Team” can stir the pot all they want, but if they can’t amend the Constitution to give Trump more time in office, it means nothing. And the amendment process is deliberately difficult under Article Five of the Constitution.

Article Five of the United States Constitution–Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_Five_of_the_United_States_Constitution

It wouldn’t surprise me if Trump gets sick enough to be unelectable, or could die before his term is up, but maybe there’s enough new deep state in place to act as a proxy in Trump’s name. Maybe even bypass any election process? Project 2025 still fruiting.

If Trump can only serve two terms, his electability is irrelevant. Mortality, of course is the ultimate veto, and J.D. Vance would constitutionally be next in line in that event.

A real, honest to God conspiracy may have been in the works and in the cards for a while, no? You know, if the Epstein Class is powerful enough, and fearful of being procecuted when they lose power… Mabye even Maher hasn’t thought of this possibility, in his bafflement?

The Epstein Class can be prosecuted regardless of the status of the Presidency…and hopefully will be.

• This reply was modified 2 months ago by TheEncogitationer. Reason: Addendum

[Reg the Fronkey Farmer]

Yes, the US Constitution is very strong on this point.  To amend Article V would require 2/3 of both the House and Senate to propose an amendment to change it. But even then it would need to be ratified by 38  out of 50 states.

Trump cannot use an executive order, Supreme Court reinterpretation, or congressional workaround that can bypass that requirement. The language of the 22nd Amendment is straightforward and the bar to amend it is very high by design. Rhetoric and agitation don’t equal constitutional change and given current political polarization, reaching that threshold would be extraordinarily unlikely.

Bannon’s “blunderbuss” or “flood the zone” approach where MAGA overwhelms the information environment, so people feel destabilized and fatigued is the communication strategy. But that is not a constitutional mechanism, and it has no legal authority.

So, there is no legal shortcut to a third term or any hidden procedural loophole that overrides the 22nd Amendment. Term limits cannot be undone by chaos, messaging, or executive manoeuvring. And as I reminded my Republican friend in Texas yesterday, the military swears an oath to the US Constitution, not the current US President.

Looking back after MAGA are gone, I think people will appreciate and value the US Constitution even more. OK, that does depend on how the current chapter ends and how responsibly leaders (and voters) behave during it. If we zoom out historically, the U.S. constitutional framework has endured far more existential challenges than that inflicted by modern social media turbulence. (Yes, it is more than that). The interesting question is whether this era strengthens civic commitment  or simply normalizes permanent tribalism. But I think the Constitution (as I look from the outside) will survive this stress testing too. When people see it work under pressure and survive, it will increase institutional legitimacy and political cynicism  will weaken. I would be very optimistic for that.

[PopeBeanie]

TheEncogitationer wrote:

Bannon and his “Team” can stir the pot all they want, but if they can’t amend the Constitution to give Trump more time in office, it means nothing. And the amendment process is deliberately difficult under Article Five of the Constitution.

Reg the Fronkey Farmer wrote:

Yes, the US Constitution is very strong on this point.  To amend Article V would require 2/3 of both the House and Senate to propose an amendment to change it. But even then it would need to be ratified by 38  out of 50 states.

LOL, both of you are stating the obvious, and wrote good summaries for polisci newbies to learn and recite. Maybe I’m on a different planet right now, where dysotopia is written into the Constitution. A sacred Constitution written as if it were unviolatable, natural law.

One question: Is a dystopia possible, where attacks on other countries and “managing” their aftermath could intentionally be designed to cause them to sponsor terrorism so widespread in USA that the powers that be here could declare insurrections, and marshal law, with longer term manifestations than you’ve declared here?

[Reg the Fronkey Farmer]

But there is no constitutional provision that allows a president to suspend the Constitution or cancel elections indefinitely. Even during the Civil War, when Abraham Lincoln suspended habeas corpus in limited areas, elections still occurred in 1864. There is no built-in “emergency extension of presidency” clause.

[jakelafort]

Hardball!

They’re playing with rocks. You want to counter with paper airplanes?

Look it is pretty obvious Trump and his cabal have no intention of ceding power. To that end and considering the decomposition of our institutions and norms it is time to be proactive and machiavellian.

Dems should be prepared for every contingency. Go to Federal Court now and get a declaratory judgment regarding the two terms amendment. Once the court affirms the plain meaning broadcast that declaratory judgment and announce to America that this is America and not even Trump is above the law.

Get whatever dirt on that presumed cabal in anticipation of impeachment.

Get whatever technological protections, safeguards are available to confirm the vote count.

Be prepared for Trump’s excuses to wield power that is ultimately intended to overthrow the govenment/election. Confer with the military and if necessary request their assistance since they have a duty to uphold the constitution.

As aforementioned if Trump goes forward as a candidate and Obama is willing to run or Clinton and they poll better than any eligible candidate then that is the democratic nominee.

Ideally in the aftermath with democratic restoration use as a teaching tool to strengthen our democracy. Be merciless in the analysis and disclosure. Here is how the republican party F’d us. Here is how the democratic party F’d us. Now lets get back to being good citizens and stop the ideological puke jobs.

[jakelafort]

Agree Enco,

Obama was a complete fuck up in the middle east.

How many tens of thousand died because of his policy?

And the failure to recognize Islam, what it is, what is its nature, what does it do?Pathetic.

[PopeBeanie]

Reg the Fronkey Farmer wrote:

But there is no constitutional provision that allows a president to suspend the Constitution or cancel elections indefinitely.

I’m not claiming he or his gang can do either of these.

I recommend hearing what Marc Elias has to say. He and his law firm have taken state cases to SCOTUS and made other appeals (if that’s the right term?) to them several times, and has won. Coincidentally, after I offered my ideas here on this topic, he released the following video today on what Trump and Gang want to do, including getting Congress on board with it.

(And actually that’s not the whole story on their plans, but the overall theme still is to interfere with voter access to polls.)

It’s about 35 minutes long, but IMO watching the first 23 or so minutes covers 90% of what’s significant in his presentation. In most of the rest of the video, I think he spends too much time emphasizing the difference between “voting as a right” and “voting as a priveledge”.

[TheEncogitationer]

Jake:

One of these things is not like the others, one of these things does not belong.

Between this:

Go to Federal Court now and get a declaratory judgment regarding the two terms amendment. Once the court affirms the plain meaning broadcast that declaratory judgment and announce to America that this is America and not even Trump is above the law.

Get whatever dirt on that presumed cabal in anticipation of impeachment.

And this:

As aforementioned if Trump goes forward as a candidate and Obama is willing to run or Clinton and they poll better than any eligible candidate then that is the democratic nominee.

If the two term limit is the declaratory judgement and the law of the land–and assuming a declaratory judgement can resolve Constitutional crises–then Bill Clinton and Barack Obama cannot run for President again since they’ve both served two terms.

Their respective wives, Hillary Clinton and Michelle Obama, however, could run, (though I wouldn’t want to give them any ideas. Things are bad enough as is.)

Be prepared for Trump’s excuses to wield power that is ultimately intended to overthrow the govenment/election. Confer with the military and if necessary request their assistance since they have a duty to uphold the constitution.

This is a good idea, though we should also beware of anyone who would use the crisis as a pretext for a coup d’êtat. as well as anyone abroad who would use the crisis as a chance for insurgency or invasion.

[jakelafort]

Enco it occurs to me you are a purist.

You will form principles and are forever beholden no matter the outcome of doing so.

Did you know that the Nazis could have been defeated if the communist party and the social democratic party had formed a coalition. But their antipathy for one another was greater than their fear of Nazism. Purity in action.

If it comes down to it and my little transgression is what it takes then it must be done.

[TheEncogitationer]

Jake:

I strive for ends and means that are consistent. If the goal is getting Trump out of office, Amendments 22 and 25 are the way to go.

As for Nazism and Communism, they were more symbiotic than most suppose. They and their predecessors both shared the same Totalitarian hatred of Classical Liberalism and Capitalism. The Socal Democrats also weren’t anti-Nazi as long as they were fruitful in their goals.

A pro-Fascist Substack cites primary historical sources and actual speeches of Nazis and Communists to demonstrate this symbiosis, which persisted until Hitler invaded Russia in 1941 with Operation Barbarossa:

Nazi and Communist Collaboration: Where East Meets West
By Zoltanous
https://fascio.substack.com/p/nazi-and-communist-collaboration

• This reply was modified 2 months ago by TheEncogitationer. Reason: Spelling
• This reply was modified 2 months ago by TheEncogitationer. Reason: Spelling
• This reply was modified 2 months ago by TheEncogitationer. Reason: Reversal of wording
• This reply was modified 2 months ago by TheEncogitationer. Reason: Reversal of wording and spelling

[Author]

Posts