Sensationalism doesn't belong in Journalism, but it is there.

[lees1975]

https://signalpress.blogspot.com/2025/04/sensationalism-doesnt-belong-in.html

In one of his pointless, senseless, rambling, demented monologues, Trump got triggered to make comments about the possibility that he would seek a third term. In a demonstration of the poor quality of education received by some journalists in this country, some reporters picked up on this theme and it was one of multiple Trump news items that popped up for a while. Reporters put the news out there as if it were something of significance, and as if Trump mentioning it makes it a possibility.

Of course, the various deceitful ways that they were talking about a "third term," like having another body in the oval office elected as President who just gives deference to Trump and lets him run the country, is along the lines of what they were talking about. But that's about as realistic as the possibility that he could actually run for, or serve, a third term. That cannot happen unless the Constitution is either amended, or destroyed.

It's an ego booster. In Trump talk, there are "some people," a nebulous group whom he wants us to believe is representative of "the American people," and who are really just his own sycophants, who might have brought this up. Getting around the rules is an obsession with this guy. No one is talking about how to make it possible to get Trump a third term, in fact, well over half of "the American people" are talking about how to shorten his time in this term by a considerable amount.

So why is this popping up in the media everywhere, as if talking about Trump ten times a day is not already a waste of time?

[Karadeniz]

1. But, the constitution forbids an insurrectionist from holding office, yet

SCOTUS had a ballot case before them seeking to keep Trump's name off the ballot since his insurrection efforts prevented his holding office and they said following the constitution would result in confusing ballots, so they opted to ignore the constitution. Here we are.

That's little comfort that SCOTUS would look at something like intent to evade the constitution as a reason to keep Trump off the ballot.

[lees1975]

2. There wouldn't be a Supreme Court case involving an attempted run for a third term.

It's not a case. There's nothing to file.

The problem with the insurrection is that there were never any charges adjudicated with regard to the insurrection. He was impeached, but acquitted by the Senate, and he was indicted, but never tried in the courts. We only needed either a guilty verdict in the Senate or in the federal court, and that would have been bye bye Donnie. We got neither.

That's why I wanted the Senate to blow up the filibuster, to pack the Supreme Court and get the case into the court system long before the mid-terms ever rolled around.

[Karadeniz]

3. I believe that colorado court decided he had committed insurrection before

Ruling he couldn't be on their ballot.