Posted on 11/27/2007 7:56:27 AM PST by LetsRok
I heard on the news this morning on WMAL in Washington that Hillary has NOT ruled out putting her impeached husband on the ballot as her VP.
Is this legal?? The Constitution says candidates for VP MUST be eligible to be President. Bubba is not eligible since he has served his two terms.
So much for the smartest woman in the world, standing on her own accomplishments! The Heinous Harridan knows she is nothing without Bubba, and she will have to fly her broom on his coattails to get anywhere in this campaign.
I would imagine that she is just showing how much she loves her dear, dear husband. Then she will regretfully add, “But my legal advisers tell me it’s not possible! What a shame!”
“They’ll have to legally seperate as you can’t have a Presidential ticket, both from the same state.”
Is that in the Constitution somewhere? I confess ignorance on this. Interesting if you are right. I didn’t know this was the case.
This raises an interesting question. Obviously, Der Schlickmeister can’t serve as VP as he’s ineligible to become President; he’s already served two terms in that office. But the real question is: Can Hillary serve as President? After all, she has already served two terms as “co-President”, has she not?
Didn’t Cheney move to WY from TX before the 2000 race?
Why not a Bill, Monica, Web Hubbell and Chelsea tag team Vice Presidency? Mud wrestling every Saturday night in the oval office. Much more entertaining than that Cheney guy.
Section 1. No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term [a term is four years] to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once...
Actualy it says electors for a state cannot vote for both President and VP if they are both from that state. It could produce a weird result of President Hillary Clinton and VP Duncan Hunter.
If the Dims go into Convention w/o a nominee, it will be a brokered convention, and if they can’t agree by the 3rd or 4th ballot, Gore will be offered the run. He will accept, albeit ‘reluctantly’.
Well, it’s as conceivable as Edwards getting the nod. Come on now. And Richardson is capable of generating as much enthusiasm as a liverwurst sandwich.
“I stand corrected.”
Well, people with “NRA” in their tagline get a free pass. ;)
From the 22nd ammendment:
"1. No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once".
Well Bill was elected twice! So Bill is inelligable for the office of President unless you say "oh, he's eligible to BE president, just not to be ELECTED president." What would the supreme court say to that argument?
1. No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President, when this Article was proposed by the Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term within which this Article becomes operative from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such term.
So what I get there is Billy cannot be elected to the presidency but could be elected Vice President and become president if Hillary vacated the office.
Then we have this from the 12th Amendment
But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.
On the surface the argument can be made that this means Billy is not eligible for the VP spot. However, he is not constitutionally ineligible to the office of President, he is just ineligible to be elected to that office again.
Really?...and then they can fly his underwear from the Capitol flag pole....
It becomes a somewhat gray area between the two amendments. Clearly, the INTENT is that a two term president could not be vice president; however, it never actually states that they couldn't because of the wording of the 22nd Amendment. For certain, he would not be allowed to run again if he succeeded in someone else's term.
That's my reading as well.
Clearly, the intent was as you say - no President may serve more than two terms (unless he became President very early in his predecessor's term, in which case he gets two terms and a year or two).
But according to the way the Amendment is actually written, I don't see why BJ couldn't become President again in such a circumstance as described.
Strange that such a loophole should exist - a VP being elevated to President isn't exactly an unheard-of situation.
They'd say that is exactly what the 22nd Amendment says. The language is as plain as day. It's not even a close call.
You have it right.
If this were ever attempted, I would more envision a Coup d’etat by the Pentagon to take them both out.
If true, it appears the hildebeast is becoming concerned about her electibility and considering adding bubba to help insure a victory for her.
There doesn’t seem to be a lot of “Two-for-One” talk with her as president the way there was with hisn’s.
We could hope for that.
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.