Presidential Immunity

@LamontCranston No, most people don't and that's a big problem.

@LamontCranston I think the problem is no one has faith that requirements matter any more.

@Handfull1 👍

@Handfull1 Intemperate, exaggerated statements don't help either.

@LamontCranston neither do arrogant dismissive ones! ✌🏼☮️

@LamontCranston That's true depending on how you're implying it?

@Handfull1 Those are mostly in the eyes of the beholder.

@LamontCranston of course. Just like your comment was!

@LamontCranston Very true.

@Handfull1 Oh, my bad. It seems like I cut in on someone else's conversation. oops!

@LamontCranston I know what is required

@dominateofyou yes, but the original poster seemed to grossly underestimate the process necessary.

@LamontCranston

No the original poster did not grossly underestimate the process. The post simply states what could occur.......... Trump has the majority of Congress and states and he has the majority of the Supreme Court and possibly time........
Just like every communist country that once practiced democracy and had laws in place, a democracy can be overthrown and was overthrown by one man....... Trump is a man that disregards even the court systems. How many executive orders did he initiate to have his way - 220. One should not underestimate Trump and what he himself has said he should have another term, two terms, 15 / 20 years in office. and if there's a way to speed up the process he will hurrily change the 22nd Amendment. there are those that have wanted to change it since it was initiated in 1951 but never tried.

@SDavis Besides my noting your expression of undue hysteria about a Trump reelection, it seems that you too underestimate the difficulty of amending the Constitution.
Here is the Copilot version:
The United States Constitution can be amended through two methods:

Congressional Proposal Method:
Two-thirds of both the House of Representatives and the Senate must propose an amendment.
The proposed amendment is then ratified by three-fourths of state conventions or state legislatures, as chosen by Congress.
Convention Method:
If two-thirds of the States request it, a constitutional convention can be called.
The proposed amendment must still be ratified by three-fourths of the State legislatures or conventions.

By the way, wasn't Obama the premier "I have a phone and a pen" guy?

@LamontCranston
Undue Hysteria - that's in your mind. If you read some of my other comments written days ago on this post I have already written concerning 2/3 of Congress - concerning three quarters of the states -and the Supreme Court and posted the information. You wasted your time, to quick to open your mouth in a negative fashion before you research.

The post is a conversational piece PERSON - and it has done its job. ..... Like I told another on this post as old as I am I don't give a hoot or toot whether Trump wins - if he has his way it's going to affect the younger people more & longer than me.

con artist - thief - liar- womanizer - who sited an insurrection - who has made the statement several times about remaining in office, which I also posted the YouTube videos, and he wasn't joking - writes letters to Kim Jong - looks up to Putin - he just loves himself some dictators and has made the statements about him remaining in office.

You can talk about former President Obama all you want - you will never reach the status he has or acquire it in any fashion and he doesn't give a hoot or toot about what you say and neither do I.

@SDavis you go girl! 👍🏻

@LamontCranston I thought you appreciated humility?

@Handfull1 If you have a substantive comment, make it. Nothing you've said on this thread has been helpful.
Ms Davis apparently abhors Trump and believes he will bring an end to the Republic. While I consider that hysterical, it is not the main point of the discussion. Constitutional change is not simple or easy.

@LamontCranston you can think what you want as others can also. You fail to see that what you call hysterical is a definite possibility. Other countries have fallen to fascist regimes. Now it most likely will not happen but your dismissal is being arrogant. I find that substantive!

@Handfull1 You don't consider the current administration-with its administrative agency and executive order overreach- undemocratic? I do.
Please avoid the "arrogant" slur; it is a cheap shot.

@LamontCranston then stop acting that way. I have no doubt you’re incredibly intelligent but you dismiss often. Calling someone’s opinions hysterical is equally cheap.

@Handfull1 I am going to say one last thing---and then you can go on as long as you wish. When an opinion is extreme and hysterical, as I concluded the OP's was, that is an appropriate response.