In a recent episode of "Real Time," Steve Bannon, a steadfast ally of President Donald Trump, made a bold assertion regarding Trump's political future.
Bannon declared to host Bill Maher that Trump is "going to run for a third term," a statement that sparked a lively exchange between the two.
The conversation unfolded against the backdrop of Bannon's recent release from prison and his refusal to testify before the January 6th committee. Bannon emphasized that his decision was not about shielding Trump but rather about defending the Constitution. Maher, in response, presented Bannon with a copy of the Constitution, specifically highlighting the 22nd Amendment. "Amendment 22. No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice," Maher read, suggesting that Bannon might need a refresher on the constitutional limits.
As reported by Fox News, Bannon clarified that the notion of a third term was not initiated by Trump himself but by Bannon and others. "President Trump is going to run for a third term, and President Trump is going to be elected again on the afternoon of January 20, 2029. He's going to be President of the United States," Bannon confidently stated. Maher, however, remained skeptical, pointing out the clear language of the amendment, which he believed left no room for reinterpretation.
Bannon countered by revealing that a "team of people" is currently examining the amendment, suggesting that its interpretation is not as straightforward as it seems. Maher, incredulous, questioned how any team, regardless of its size, could alter the explicit wording of the Constitution. Bannon responded by highlighting the existence of "120 lawsuits on what President Trump is doing for his Article II rights," arguing that these legal challenges are based on varying interpretations of the Constitution.
The exchange took a humorous turn as Maher, with the audience's laughter as a backdrop, meticulously read through every word of the 22nd Amendment with Bannon. Despite Bannon's insistence on the potential for reinterpretation, Maher remained unconvinced, ultimately suggesting that they would have to "disagree" on the matter.
This discussion underscores the ongoing debate surrounding constitutional interpretation and the limits of presidential terms. While Bannon's remarks may seem far-fetched to some, they reflect a broader conversation about the flexibility of constitutional language and the role of legal challenges in shaping political realities. As the nation continues to grapple with these issues, the question of how constitutional provisions are interpreted and enforced remains a pivotal topic in American political discourse.
Login