Posted on 09/04/2007 4:50:47 PM PDT by COUNTrecount
Bill Clinton ruled out running as HRC's VP tonight during a taping of the CBS's LATE SHOW WITH DAVID LETTERMAN, sources tell the DRUDGE REPORT.
MORE
Dave: “Now there was a discussion last week, and there is I guess a greater discussion, and there’s some confusion, and maybe I’m the only one confused about the eligibility of a man who has been elected twice as President to possibly be named later on the ticket as Vice President. Constitutionally speaking, can that happen?”
Clinton: “I don’t believe so. There are some people who believe it can, and they have contorted readings of the amendment, the 22nd Amendment. But I believe as a matter of general interpretation, you’re supposed to read all the Constitution including all the Amendments as if they were written almost on the same day at the same moment, so they’re consistent with one another. And the Constitution says the qualifications for Vice President are the same as those for President. Now you can read that to mean ‘to serve,’ not ‘to run for.’ But I just don’t believe it’s consistent with the spirit of the Constitution for someone who’s been President twice to be elected Vice President. I just don’t think it’s Constitutional. I don’t think it’s right and I wouldn’t want to do that. I’d want to do whatever I could do to be of highest and best use for her, but there are lots of wonderful people out there, including all the people that are running this time would be good Vice Presidents. And, that’s just not in the cards.”
Developing...
Now you want to talk about a Constitutional Crisis - try a Clinton/Clinton presidency - if something happens to her, then Bill would be ineligible to take over - thus it would default to the Speaker of the House, correct???
The main point of a VP is to have someone as a “back-up”.
“Vetting interns” will be BJ’s new career.
I’m surprised he doesn’t want to split hairs about the interpretation of the 22nd amendment. He’s the one who wants to sit around and define the word “is”.
Frankly, his opinion on this matter is worthless. He doesn’t even have a license to practice, so him trying to come off as an authority on constitutional law leaves me shaking my head. Hey Bill, why don’t you have a license to practice law? Why were you barred from appearing before the Supreme Court? Those are the questions US Citizens would like to hear answers to.
No way in hell!
wdnt it be simpler to do as hugo chavez
and name the clintons el presidente for life?
So when is Chelsea going to appear on Letterman?
ROLMAO!!!!!!!!! So when did he start doing what is right? Monica comes to mind.
For once, I think he might be telling the truth. It would be humiliating for him to have to play “second fiddle” to Hillary.
It is unconstitutional for me to be Hill's VP!!
Instead he gives a long winded convoluted BS answer to impress the ignorant and supply the MSM with awe struck press coverage.
Since when do the Clintons care about the Constitution?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.