Robert Beatty-Walters
@pdxlwyr.bsky.social
I’m a Portland medical malpractice lawyer advocating for patients and their families. I’ve been a political junkie since the early 1970s when I had my first paper route and started reading about the Vietnam war everyday.
I don’t see how. Trump has already been elected twice. Three times even, in his mind.
There is no interpretation of that language that can legitimately give Trump a third term.
If he stays after 1/20/29 it will be illegitimate.
There is no interpretation of that language that can legitimately give Trump a third term.
If he stays after 1/20/29 it will be illegitimate.
December 8, 2025 at 4:16 AM
I don’t see how. Trump has already been elected twice. Three times even, in his mind.
There is no interpretation of that language that can legitimately give Trump a third term.
If he stays after 1/20/29 it will be illegitimate.
There is no interpretation of that language that can legitimately give Trump a third term.
If he stays after 1/20/29 it will be illegitimate.
The only way to “serve” but not be elected is by succession. And the 22nd amendment accounts for that contingency.
Other than that, anyone not elected claiming the office would be attempting a coup d’etat.
So you are right. It all means the same thing.
Two terms is all anyone gets.
Other than that, anyone not elected claiming the office would be attempting a coup d’etat.
So you are right. It all means the same thing.
Two terms is all anyone gets.
December 8, 2025 at 1:02 AM
The only way to “serve” but not be elected is by succession. And the 22nd amendment accounts for that contingency.
Other than that, anyone not elected claiming the office would be attempting a coup d’etat.
So you are right. It all means the same thing.
Two terms is all anyone gets.
Other than that, anyone not elected claiming the office would be attempting a coup d’etat.
So you are right. It all means the same thing.
Two terms is all anyone gets.
That’s the only way it could happen. But it wouldn’t be a “third-term” because that does not exist.
It would be a coup d’etat.
It would be a coup d’etat.
December 8, 2025 at 12:41 AM
That’s the only way it could happen. But it wouldn’t be a “third-term” because that does not exist.
It would be a coup d’etat.
It would be a coup d’etat.
The answer is also very clearly in the text of the Constitution:
12th Amendment:
“no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.
See it’s not that hard.
12th Amendment:
“no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.
See it’s not that hard.
December 8, 2025 at 12:39 AM
The answer is also very clearly in the text of the Constitution:
12th Amendment:
“no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.
See it’s not that hard.
12th Amendment:
“no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.
See it’s not that hard.
You’re right. It doesn’t say “served” only “elected.”!!!
December 8, 2025 at 12:35 AM
You’re right. It doesn’t say “served” only “elected.”!!!
All true, which is why I have encouraged journalists not to use “third-term” because it doesn’t exist for the office of the President.
If Trump stays in the office after noon on January 20, 29, it won’t be a “third-term” but instead a coup d’etat.
If Trump stays in the office after noon on January 20, 29, it won’t be a “third-term” but instead a coup d’etat.
December 8, 2025 at 12:20 AM
All true, which is why I have encouraged journalists not to use “third-term” because it doesn’t exist for the office of the President.
If Trump stays in the office after noon on January 20, 29, it won’t be a “third-term” but instead a coup d’etat.
If Trump stays in the office after noon on January 20, 29, it won’t be a “third-term” but instead a coup d’etat.
Part of that it can be attributed to our press.
Seldom is there any citation to the constitutional language. Take the “third-term“ debate.
The 22nd Amd. language is only 14 words and could
not be more clear:
“No person shall be elected to the office of the president more than twice.”
Seldom is there any citation to the constitutional language. Take the “third-term“ debate.
The 22nd Amd. language is only 14 words and could
not be more clear:
“No person shall be elected to the office of the president more than twice.”
December 7, 2025 at 8:43 PM
Part of that it can be attributed to our press.
Seldom is there any citation to the constitutional language. Take the “third-term“ debate.
The 22nd Amd. language is only 14 words and could
not be more clear:
“No person shall be elected to the office of the president more than twice.”
Seldom is there any citation to the constitutional language. Take the “third-term“ debate.
The 22nd Amd. language is only 14 words and could
not be more clear:
“No person shall be elected to the office of the president more than twice.”
Smh. “You people”.
December 7, 2025 at 7:33 PM
Smh. “You people”.
Not sure. But I don’t think I’ve ever heard GN describe anything like you suggest.
December 7, 2025 at 7:18 PM
Not sure. But I don’t think I’ve ever heard GN describe anything like you suggest.
No probably not.
December 7, 2025 at 7:13 PM
No probably not.
Yes! That’s it!
December 6, 2025 at 4:32 PM
Yes! That’s it!
From the Oregonian: “The video with the audio recording was edited.” But the story doesn’t say how or make clear whether the audio was edited.
Anyone have a link to the full audio?
Anyone have a link to the full audio?
December 6, 2025 at 6:03 AM
From the Oregonian: “The video with the audio recording was edited.” But the story doesn’t say how or make clear whether the audio was edited.
Anyone have a link to the full audio?
Anyone have a link to the full audio?
This is an old grudge Trump has for the NFL.
December 6, 2025 at 5:22 AM
This is an old grudge Trump has for the NFL.
I think they are a murder cult. They’re justifying murder. What Republicans let RFK Jr do today is murder.
Ethnic cleansing. “Kill them all.”
Ethnic cleansing. “Kill them all.”
December 6, 2025 at 4:56 AM
I think they are a murder cult. They’re justifying murder. What Republicans let RFK Jr do today is murder.
Ethnic cleansing. “Kill them all.”
Ethnic cleansing. “Kill them all.”
Maybe it’s because it doesn’t cost them anything.
Indeed it’s probably a net positive because of the engagement.
Indeed it’s probably a net positive because of the engagement.
December 6, 2025 at 4:49 AM
Maybe it’s because it doesn’t cost them anything.
Indeed it’s probably a net positive because of the engagement.
Indeed it’s probably a net positive because of the engagement.
You could have stopped at “This SCOTUS is an indelible stain” and still be 100% correct.
December 5, 2025 at 7:01 AM
You could have stopped at “This SCOTUS is an indelible stain” and still be 100% correct.
My favorite part of that play was the pan to the Kansas State fans and the look of despair on their faces right after Thomas scored.
December 5, 2025 at 6:43 AM
My favorite part of that play was the pan to the Kansas State fans and the look of despair on their faces right after Thomas scored.