In the run-up to the 2012 Presidential Election, some pundits on the right made the argument that Obama should not be re-elected because if he was, he would stay in office indefinitely. Rush Limbaugh said in 2009:
And I wouldn’t put it past Obama to be plotting right now how to serve beyond 2016.
I wrote about prediction’s of an Obama third term attempt in 2012 and now as we anticipate a change in president on January 20, 2017, it’s time to revisit that topic.
The predicted move to amend the US Constitution and repeal the 22nd Amendment that limits presidents to two terms has clearly not materialized.
Jamie Dech, writing back in March asks the question, “Is Obama Positioning Himself for a 3rd term?” Dech plays on the dark side of our minds invoking the calamity and martial law scenario. (He also claims Obama is a Muslim.) Dech writes:
So, if there is massive unrest by groups like “black lives matter” – enough to cause a need for martial law, with National Guard action and all – then, if he declares himself king of the White House, how would he be stopped?
Obama, of course, has striven to heal racial divisions, taking some if the heat himself for not taking sides, or perhaps more accurately for taking both sides. And how, exactly, does Obama “declare himself king”? I think that if a hypothetical president declared himself king, then Congress would remove him from office either by reason of disability or impeach him.
The martial law scenario, this time triggered by a natural disaster, is graphically portrayed in this YouTube video titled “Time’s Up! Obama’s Third Term FEMA 2016 Martial Law Disaster! Time’s Up! Time’s Up!”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l013ZI3yTtk
The Hill reported in June that 67 percent of Democrats would prefer a third term for Obama over a potential Clinton administration – polling data from a conservative group, with the exact question asked not disclosed. I’ve certainly detected no buzz among Democrats for any 3rd term scenario. Perhaps they believe in the rule of law.
While news outlets such as US News and World Report in their article “Could President Obama Get Four More Years?” thoughtfully discuss the merits of repealing the 22nd Amendment, conspiracy theorists have cooked up some more far-fetched scenarios such as the Obama administration indicting Hillary Clinton after her election but before taking office, put forward by no less than Joseph Farah of WorldNetDaily. Snopes.com covered that story and explained why the indictment scenario doesn’t get Obama an extension of time in office.
According to Captain Dave Bertrand, Ret. writing at Before It’s News, the globalists in charge of the world will decide the next US president. The judicial system, he says, is “instigating a race war,” Obama could start World War III with the Russians, we could be overrun by refugees and terrorists. The election will be rigged, he says, leading to massive civil unrest. It’s pretty scary out there in the picture Bertrand paints.
For me, I think that as long as Trump is not elected, our Constitution will continue just fine. 😳
H/t to Pastor Charmley for the idea for this story
I guess they are realists and know the GOP / red states would never support such change to the Constitution, especially not before the elections.
(And I think the GOP can be p*ssed off much better by nominating Obama to SCOTUS.)
Tongue in cheek? Unless Congress is also flooded with like-minded Tea Party minions, chances are slim a President Trump could do much against a Congress controlled either by Dems or the “establishment” wing of the GOP, let alone something that endangers the Constitution. Or were you thinking about the violent overthrow scenario?
“The Hill reported in June that 67 percent of Democrats would prefer a third term for Obama over a potential Clinton administration – polling data from a conservative group, with the exact question asked not disclosed”
It’s very possible that the question was along the lines of “If President Obama were eligible for a third term, would you vote for him?” In that case the answer wouldn’t be shocking, given that he has a 54% job approval and much higher than that among Democrats.
I find it fascinating that the so-called establishment has actively campaigned against Trump because they don’t trust his conservatism, yet the liberal/progressives view him more to the right than any candidate in history. Then who the heck voted for him in the primaries and who is supporting him now? He should be polling no higher than the 20’s. In other news, Joe Arpaio won the primary. I would add to Scientist’s comment that the idea of a third Obama term would poll well the Republicans who are actively supporting Clinton.
I don’t believe Obama would serve a 3rd term and he will finish out his 2nd term. That’s just a wack conspiracy theory. Personally some these wackos out there need to focus on a much more real and devastating scenario such as – Obama being put on the US Supreme Court.
If Hillary is elected, there is a good chance Obama is going on SCOTUS. If the Democrats win the senate, this is possibility nears 100%.
Obama is a perfect candidate for SCOTUS:
1. He’s young for a justice which means he will be on the court for years and years.
2. He’s African American – Hillary would love to put another African American on the court.
3. Obama is or claims to be a constitutional scholar.
4. It would not at all be unprecidented. Look up William Howard Taft.
Mark my words if Hillary wins and Democrats take the Senate, Obama is going on SCOTUS.
Just one more reason to avoid Hillary Clinton like the plague she is and to vote Trump.
I say to people, do you want Barack Obama on SCOTUS?!!!
He would be an EXCELLENT choice. In fact, you gave 4 good reasons why. And he doesn’t claim to be a constitutional scholar, he IS one, having taught Constitutional Law at a top-10 law school (Chicago).
Can you tell me what Trump’s positions are (with the understanding that it is now 9:50 EDT and they may be completely different by noon). I mean seriously, what actual positions has he taken and held consistently? His support is entirely about attitude and not about positions in the least,
How messed up does something messed up have to be for John to think it’s wacky?
Uh yeah. He’d be awesome at it.
Trump has no conservatism to trust. He is not conservative, he is an opportunist. I can’t as if he is right wing because I have no idea what he really believes. Much of his followers, on the ther hand, are most definitely right wing and Trump has found it advantageous to stir that pot.
Actual conservatism has not been seen in the GOP for some time.
I get a feeling a Barack Obama nomination wouldn’t go over well. Not saying that it’s a bad idea in practice, but it seems politically toxic.
The other thing about the indictment scenario, there was supposedly a golden opportunity for that in July and yet James Comey did not recommend indictment.
If that was Obama’s plan, it sort of begs the question of why it didn’t happen then.
Just about everyone on the right (and some on the left) thinks there was a strong enough case against her for the FBI to recommend indictment but for some reason known only to Comey, he decided it wasn’t a good idea.
Unless, of course, the case wasn’t really that strong.
Steve, it wouldn’t have worked for Obama’s supposed evil plan for Hillary to be indicted in July. That would have ruined her presidential campaign. Remember, this whole thing hinges on her being elected first, then indicted before the inauguration.
Oh, OK Not to get too far off in the weeds here but the FBI could not prove the level of intent necessary to prove she broke the applicable law, correct?
To my knowledge, no one has ever been charged with a criminal offense for accidentally allowing the release of classified information. There has to be intent to damage the interests or security of the United States.
Not only did Clinton not have the intent, there is no evidence that any of her e-mails were even compromised.That is why Comey said that no prosecutor would file charges in her case.
Thank you. What amuses me about a lot of this is that the scenarios about martial law people are trotting out are almost exactly the same as scenarios that people were bandying around eight years ago with Bush as the evil would-be dictator.
The reality is that if a President wanted to make himself dictator, he wouldn’t wait until the end of his second term to grab power for an illegal third term. No, he’d make the power grab within two years of taking office, when he could appeal most strongly to his democratic mandate. Look at Hitler, appointed Chancellor in January 1933, the Reichstag fire happened less than a month later, allowing him to assume, legally, emergency powers. By the end of August 1934, Hitler had been declared Führer, following a national referendum. Or a current example, Recep Erdogan of Turkey, elected 2014, less than two years later, a failed coup attempt allows him to assume emergency powers and elminiate opposition. The would-be dictator is after all driven by the aim to make himself dictator, so will do so as soon as possible, not at the last possible moment.
Whether it’s Obama or Bush (or indeed the next US President), the idea that the President will at the last moment refuse to relinquish power and instead use underhand means to stay in office is an expression of the fear of the one entertaining it, not of any truth about the one about whom the fear is entertained.
That’s what I thought, but so many people say “The FBI said she broke the law.”
Doctor, you ducked the big question: Does a third term for Obama mean you’ll put off your plan to end his blog until 2021?
The world needs to know.
If that’s what he wants to do I would support his appointment, but Barack Obama may be the one person in America for whom SCOTUS justice would be a waste of talent. Where he really shines is out in the world engaging with people.
Show them the statement by FBI Director Comey and ask them to point out where he says she she broke any laws.
https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press-releases/statement-by-fbi-director-james-b-comey-on-the-investigation-of-secretary-hillary-clinton2019s-use-of-a-personal-e-mail-system
He might make a great mediator in international conflicts, maybe even in the much needed collaboration of Islamic countries.
But we might also see a push for SCOTUS to be more open (televising hearings) to counter RW attempts to paint it as “unelected partisan lawyers in their ivory tower”.
I’ve noticed that the E-Mail scandal ballooned into several things people WISH they could pin on Hillary because they are things that could have happened. So because it COULD have been hacked by Russians or Chinese, it WAS hacked. Because Clinton was careless with classified information, she DEFINITELY gave state secrets to Russians and Chinese.
The blog continues as long as Obama is is in the Oval Office.
Of course, the conspiracy theories will go on long after.
I think George Lucas (or whoever wrote the script for Star Wars, Episode II) must have been one of those people.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aBHLvNrZh9Q
Yes. I’ve often pointed out that there have been eight different investigations into the Benghazi attacks. At least the last two were led by Republicans who certainly did not have a vested interest in clearing Hillary Clinton’s name (in fact, quite the opposite is true). How could eight different investigations all get it wrong, I ask them. They often say that somewhere in the deleted emails is the proof that her actions or inaction were responsible for the four deaths or they say that she lied to Congress.
For the sake of argument, let’s say those things are true (they’re not, I’m sure, but let’s just say they are). Why would anyone think the entire case against her would hinge on those two things? During the course of those investigations, nobody looked at other evidence or talked to other people who were telling the truth? If she was responsible for those four deaths, wouldn’t the other evidence point in that direction and be enough?
The various scenarios of how the current President will usurp a third term is all well and good, but pretty far fetched. I’ve found another plot that has possibilities though.
Deep-State Doppelgängers
I demand proof that Hillary isn’t just Obama in a meatsuit!
Which bears all the hallmarks of a conspiracy theory, too. It’s always “if we just could see that one more piece of evidence, we’d finally know the truth” along with “all the evidence proving us right was destroyed and all the witnesses are lying”.
OK, that settles it. We have to find a way to get a third term for Obama.
Reality Check
OK, that settles it. We have to find a way to get a third term for Obama.
Ditto!
Well, it is out there. I do not support this, and see less than zero evidence that President Obama wants anything to do with it, but, well, as I said, it is out there. And without amending the Constitution…
The one and only constitutional provision suggesting Obama has to go is in The Twenty-Second Amendment, passed by Congress in 1947 and ratified into the Constitution in 1951. What we call “term limits” for the president were not in the Constitution as originally established, and the Twenty-Second Amendment does not use the Article II language of, “eligible to the Office of President”. The 22’nd Amendment commands, “No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice”. The Amendment also limits the election, to just once, of a president one who has previously held the office for more than two years of a term of which another was elected.
Obama is still eligible, as long as his path to a third term is not being, “elected to the office of the President”. The Twenty-Second Amendment recognizes succession, but limits only election.
Eight U.S. Presidents died if office — natural causes and assassination tie at four-to-four — and one resigned. Nine times a president arrived by succession, all of them a Vice President accepting the unfortunate promotion. Five U.S. presidents were never elected, and four more got there by succession and were later elected.
Seven of our nine presidencies by succession happened before the 22’nd Amendment. The authors, adopters, and ratifiers of the Amendment knew that a significant portion of presidents got there by succession, and chose not to limit it.
I hereby declare my candidacy. Elect me President of the United States. I name my running mate, my choice for Vice President, to be Barack Hussein Obama II, whether he likes it or not. My entire platform is the promise that my inauguration speech will be two words long: “I resign.”
Except that the qualifications for the Vice President are identical to those for President, and the Vice President is elected.
You better pick another VP running mate who will also resign and make sure Obama is elected to Congress. Then you can both resign once Obama is elected Speaker of the House.