• If you're having issues logging in, please email me at doczaius69@gmail.com

🤷WTF? New conspiracy theory unlocked

Juggs said:
Political websites say no.
Click to expand...
22nd Amendment says this though..." "But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States."
 
Irish Mike said:
22nd Amendment says this though..." "But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States."
Click to expand...
Like everything, it would be up to an interpretation of SCOTUS. Does "ineligible" really refer due to legal reasons, age, etc.?

In fact, the relevant constitutional provisions, their histories, and their purposes all point to the same conclusion: A twice-before-elected President may become Vice-President either through appointment or through election and — like any other Vice-President — may thereafter succeed from that office to the Presidency
Click to expand...
 
Juggs said:
Like everything, it would be up to an interpretation of SCOTUS. Does "ineligible" really refer due to legal reasons, age, etc.?
Click to expand...
The second part of that is just someone's "conclusion", but like you said until it goes in front of the Supreme Court it will be up for interpretation. I am no legal scholar, but "constitutionally ineligible" said in an Amendment that confirms a 2 term limit on the President, seems pretty clear to me.
 
It's untested, but I agree with @Irish Mike. "Constitutionally ineligible" (this is actually in the 12th Amendment, not the 22nd) likely means that you can't have a VP who has already been elected twice (even though this restriction came later, with the 22nd Amendment).

In looking through the Constitutional Amendments, it's wild to me that the 21st (alcohol prohibition) got ratified.
 
Irish Mike said:
The second part of that is just someone's "conclusion", but like you said until it goes in front of the Supreme Court it will be up for interpretation. I am no legal scholar, but "constitutionally ineligible" said in an Amendment that confirms a 2 term limit on the President, seems pretty clear to me.
Click to expand...
It should seem clear, but if we've seen anything from interpretations.....opinions/assholes cliche. Luckily I think we have a SCOTUS who'd shut that shit down (in a split decision)
 
DocZaius said:
It's untested, but I agree with @Irish Mike. "Constitutionally ineligible" (this is actually in the 12th Amendment, not the 22nd) likely means that you can't have a VP who has already been elected twice (even though this restriction came later, with the 22nd Amendment).

In looking through the Constitutional Amendments, it's wild to me that the 21st (alcohol prohibition) got ratified.
Click to expand...
It was astonishing lobbying, led by women who had a lot of time because they weren’t yet in the workforce with the power of religious leaders (at a time most people were religious). It promised an end to issues like domestic violence and like any new law grew government power and had some terrible shit like organized crime rising that took decades to correct

Americans do drink a lot less now and have a mixed view on alcohol.

It’s fascinating. I think the unintended consequences of it make it nearly impossible to pass another
 
The other part about all this is just how quickly the Democratic machine threw all its support behind Kamala the moment Biden's withdrawal was posted. No infighting, no calls to decide the candidate at the convention, etc.

They were ready. There was a plan, even while Biden was swearing up and down that he wasn't going to quit.

And I don't believe that they raised a bunch of money from small donors that quickly, either. They laundered Biden's campaign chest and gave it all to Kamala (which I'm actually okay with in principle, but I don't know the legalities).
 
DocZaius said:
The other part about all this is just how quickly the Democratic machine threw all its support behind Kamala the moment Biden's withdrawal was posted. No infighting, no calls to decide the candidate at the convention, etc.

They were ready. There was a plan, even while Biden was swearing up and down that he wasn't going to quit.

And I don't believe that they raised a bunch of money from small donors that quickly, either. They laundered Biden's campaign chest and gave it all to Kamala (which I'm actually okay with in principle, but I don't know the legalities).
Click to expand...
I thought POTUS pulling out, the VP was the only person the funds raised for that ticket could go to. Sounded legit to me :beatsme:

But I don't buy that Kamala was the plan all along. She may think it is, but they couldn't appear to look lost, either. I won't be surprised at all if she was a stand in until they put a real candidate in. They'll let Pubs put all their effort to trashing Kamala only for her to be replaced.
 
Shifting gears for a moment….

Nothing is organic. Everything is orchestrated by big companies behind the scenes. I don’t really have a handle on who these e-celebs are, but I always kind of assumed their popularity among the idiot youth was a result of word-of-mouth.

1721784587141.webp

But this actually makes a lot of sense. Another building block of dead internet theory.
 
They do look painted :lol: But the other blacks around them look real....you think they wouldn't have an issue with that?
 
Ok, not technically a conspiracy theory, but this is the weirdest idea I have seen today (so far). Jesus is not a Jew. He's an Israelite. Jews are not Israelites, they are Edomites. Israelites are descended from Jacob; Jews are descended from Jacob's brother, Esau. God favored Jacob an punished Esau, so the Israelites are HisChosen People - everyone else can get fucked.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top