Video yükleniyor...

Video Yüklenemedi

Bu video yüklenirken bir sorun oluştu. Bu geçici bir ağ sorunundan kaynaklanıyor olabilir veya video kullanılamıyor olabilir.

Ana Sayfaya Dön

Should Congress and the States make a Constitutional Amendment using Article V of Constitution to make an exclusive one time exception to Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 (only natural born citizens), so #ElonMusk can run for President in #election2028? #election2024#WhiteHouse

PoliticAllUS

1,010 subscribers

108,991 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce •via X (Twitter)

Haberler & Politika #ElonMusk #election2028

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

10 Yorum

Ϩϣɛɛӷ_Ӈυϩӈɑʚʯɛ 🔞🏳️‍⚧️ profil fotoğrafı

Ϩϣɛɛӷ_Ӈυϩӈɑʚʯɛ 🔞🏳️‍⚧️1 yıl önce

No, end of discussion.

PoliticAllUS profil fotoğrafı

PoliticAllUS1 yıl önce

Good point! Start debate on to share more thoughts like this!

Dik Wood profil fotoğrafı

Dik Wood1 yıl önce

Not only no, but hell fucking no under no circumstances.

PoliticAllUS profil fotoğrafı

PoliticAllUS1 yıl önce

Good point! Rules like these are definitely there for a reason. 👏 Start debate on to share more thoughts like this!

Calm Like a Bomb 💣 profil fotoğrafı

Calm Like a Bomb 💣1 yıl önce

Absolutely not

PoliticAllUS profil fotoğrafı

PoliticAllUS1 yıl önce

Good point! Rules like these are definitely there for a reason. 👏 Start debate on to share more thoughts like this!

Robert Phillips profil fotoğrafı

Robert Phillips1 yıl önce

No. I like Elon, but that rule is there for a reason.

PoliticAllUS profil fotoğrafı

PoliticAllUS1 yıl önce

Good point! Start debate on to share more thoughts like this!

ecruimcp profil fotoğrafı

ecruimcp1 yıl önce

No. Simple answer, no. He's great, I love what he is and does. But, no. As soon as an exception to that is made, our next president will be a BRICS funded and aligned foreigner. If you don't think that's the case, you're ignorance speaks volumes.

PoliticAllUS profil fotoğrafı

PoliticAllUS1 yıl önce

Good point! Rules like these are definitely there for a reason. 👏 Start debate on to share more thoughts like this!

Benzer Videolar

Rep. Nancy Mace just proposed a constitutional amendment requiring Members of Congress, federal judges, and Senate-confirmed officers to be natural-born U.S. citizens — the same standard already required for President and Vice President. Mace posted: “We just introduced a long overdue joint resolution proposing a constitutional amendment to require Members of Congress, federal judges, and Senate-confirmed officers to be natural born citizens. This is the very same standard the President and Vice President are already required to meet.” She points to Reps. Ilhan Omar (born in Somalia), Pramila Jayapal (born in India), and Shri Thanedar (born in India) as examples of divided loyalties. Passing a constitutional amendment requires 2/3 of Congress + 3/4 of states — a very high bar. Should only natural-born Americans write our laws and judge our cases? (Video: AI)

Rep. Nancy Mace just proposed a constitutional amendment requiring Members of Congress, federal judges, and Senate-confirmed officers to be natural-born U.S. citizens — the same standard already required for President and Vice President. Mace posted: “We just introduced a long overdue joint resolution proposing a constitutional amendment to require Members of Congress, federal judges, and Senate-confirmed officers to be natural born citizens. This is the very same standard the President and Vice President are already required to meet.” She points to Reps. Ilhan Omar (born in Somalia), Pramila Jayapal (born in India), and Shri Thanedar (born in India) as examples of divided loyalties. Passing a constitutional amendment requires 2/3 of Congress + 3/4 of states — a very high bar. Should only natural-born Americans write our laws and judge our cases? (Video: AI)

Paul A. Szypula 🇺🇸

321,322 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

I am proud to introduce a constitutional amendment requiring federal judges to be natural-born citizens. Judges should have lifelong allegiance to the United States, and the United States only. End of story.

I am proud to introduce a constitutional amendment requiring federal judges to be natural-born citizens. Judges should have lifelong allegiance to the United States, and the United States only. End of story.

Rep. Clay Fuller

327,547 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

I spoke with Wealthion on the SOLUTION to the US DEBT PROBLEM: “The only way to escape America’s debt crisis is to invoke Article V of the US Constitution and call a limited Constitutional Convention. This would allow for a debt brake amendment to the US Constitution."

I spoke with Wealthion on the SOLUTION to the US DEBT PROBLEM: “The only way to escape America’s debt crisis is to invoke Article V of the US Constitution and call a limited Constitutional Convention. This would allow for a debt brake amendment to the US Constitution."

Steve Hanke

36,875 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution gives President Trump authority to convene Congress on “extraordinary occasions.” With drone incursions and bombs at American military bases and an ongoing conflict with Iran, this is just such an occasion.

Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution gives President Trump authority to convene Congress on “extraordinary occasions.” With drone incursions and bombs at American military bases and an ongoing conflict with Iran, this is just such an occasion.

Mike Lee

49,909 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce

At no point do the Articles of the Constitution state that the first lady may sit in for the President when he cannot fulfill his duties. In fact, article II section 1 explicitly states the vice president has that responsibility.

At no point do the Articles of the Constitution state that the first lady may sit in for the President when he cannot fulfill his duties. In fact, article II section 1 explicitly states the vice president has that responsibility.

The Redheaded libertarian

4,530,507 görüntüleme • 2 yıl önce

Just me being naughty here as usual and this time interfering in ZANU PF internal matters; in this latest move by Mnangagwa’s sidekick Ziyambi Ziyambi hosting meetings this weekend in Zvimba to launch an attempt bid to postpone ZANU PF party congress scheduled for 2027 to kicked to 2030. In my binder that is a legal minefield that is set for a new internal war of attrition. According to the ZANU-PF constitution, and its amendments adopted at the 7th Congress in 2022, on examination with my “limited” understanding of the law of meetings, there is an important distinction between what the constitution expressly permits and what the party might be able to achieve through a constitutional amendment. The key clause here is: Article 5, Section 25: I am saying the most important provision is Article 5, Section 25 of the ZANU-PF Constitution. “The Party shall convene an ordinary Congress once every five years.” Section 25(2) then provides that: “The Secretary for Administration shall, at least three months before the due date, send a notice of convening Congress to all members, which notice shall state the date and the venue.” This is significant because the language is mandatory: “shall convene” rather than “may convene”. The party itself relied on this provision when it convened the 2022 Congress. The 2022 Congress was the seventh ordinary National People’s Congress, and the party’s own subsequent statements have consistently treated 2027 as the next Congress. What does that mean for 2027? The 7th Congress was held in October 2022. Therefore, the five-year constitutional cycle takes the next ordinary Congress into 2027. Importantly, I have not found a provision in the current publicly available material that expressly gives the Politburo, President and First Secretary, National Consultative Assembly or Central Committee a general power to postpone an ordinary Congress beyond the five-year period. That is the crucial point. Article 5, Section 23 — Congress is the supreme organ is massive. Article 5, Section 23 establishes the National People’s Congress as the supreme organ of the party. Article 5, Section 24 then gives Congress extensive powers, including electing the President and First Secretary, electing Central Committee members, determining party policy and, importantly, exercising the power to amend the party constitution. This creates an interesting constitutional problem. The body that has the supreme constitutional authority is Congress itself, while the ordinary Congress is constitutionally required to meet every five years. So the argument being advanced by Ziyambi and his acolytes that a subordinate organ, provincial organs or structures appointed by the President could simply say: “We are proposing the postponement of Congress for another two or three years”is not obviously supported by Article 5. There is only One Me!! 🤪 Huya tibike nyaya dzezvemabumbiro Thabani Mpofu kana wabva kuKereke 😂😂

Just me being naughty here as usual and this time interfering in ZANU PF internal matters; in this latest move by Mnangagwa’s sidekick Ziyambi Ziyambi hosting meetings this weekend in Zvimba to launch an attempt bid to postpone ZANU PF party congress scheduled for 2027 to kicked to 2030. In my binder that is a legal minefield that is set for a new internal war of attrition. According to the ZANU-PF constitution, and its amendments adopted at the 7th Congress in 2022, on examination with my “limited” understanding of the law of meetings, there is an important distinction between what the constitution expressly permits and what the party might be able to achieve through a constitutional amendment. The key clause here is: Article 5, Section 25: I am saying the most important provision is Article 5, Section 25 of the ZANU-PF Constitution. “The Party shall convene an ordinary Congress once every five years.” Section 25(2) then provides that: “The Secretary for Administration shall, at least three months before the due date, send a notice of convening Congress to all members, which notice shall state the date and the venue.” This is significant because the language is mandatory: “shall convene” rather than “may convene”. The party itself relied on this provision when it convened the 2022 Congress. The 2022 Congress was the seventh ordinary National People’s Congress, and the party’s own subsequent statements have consistently treated 2027 as the next Congress. What does that mean for 2027? The 7th Congress was held in October 2022. Therefore, the five-year constitutional cycle takes the next ordinary Congress into 2027. Importantly, I have not found a provision in the current publicly available material that expressly gives the Politburo, President and First Secretary, National Consultative Assembly or Central Committee a general power to postpone an ordinary Congress beyond the five-year period. That is the crucial point. Article 5, Section 23 — Congress is the supreme organ is massive. Article 5, Section 23 establishes the National People’s Congress as the supreme organ of the party. Article 5, Section 24 then gives Congress extensive powers, including electing the President and First Secretary, electing Central Committee members, determining party policy and, importantly, exercising the power to amend the party constitution. This creates an interesting constitutional problem. The body that has the supreme constitutional authority is Congress itself, while the ordinary Congress is constitutionally required to meet every five years. So the argument being advanced by Ziyambi and his acolytes that a subordinate organ, provincial organs or structures appointed by the President could simply say: “We are proposing the postponement of Congress for another two or three years”is not obviously supported by Article 5. There is only One Me!! 🤪 Huya tibike nyaya dzezvemabumbiro Thabani Mpofu kana wabva kuKereke 😂😂

Bla B

17,347 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

JUST IN 🇺🇸🇮🇷: Secretary of War Pete Hegseth Admits the Operation Epic Fury is a WAR So much for Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution, that Congress holds the exclusive power to formally declare war.

JUST IN 🇺🇸🇮🇷: Secretary of War Pete Hegseth Admits the Operation Epic Fury is a WAR So much for Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution, that Congress holds the exclusive power to formally declare war.

Ryan Rozbiani

44,516 görüntüleme • 6 ay önce

Article III, Section 1 of the Constitution gives Congress the authority to limit jurisdiction of federal courts. My Injunctive Authority Clarification Act does exactly that. Woke activist judges must be not allowed to make sweeping legislative decisions for all Americans.

Article III, Section 1 of the Constitution gives Congress the authority to limit jurisdiction of federal courts. My Injunctive Authority Clarification Act does exactly that. Woke activist judges must be not allowed to make sweeping legislative decisions for all Americans.

Rep Andy Biggs

414,438 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

Article I, Section 5 of the Constitution, prohibits one chamber of Congress to adjourn for more than three days without the consent of the other. To meet this constitutional requirement we hold pro forma sessions. Today, I had the honor of standing in the Speaker's Chair, serving as Speaker Pro Tempore.

Article I, Section 5 of the Constitution, prohibits one chamber of Congress to adjourn for more than three days without the consent of the other. To meet this constitutional requirement we hold pro forma sessions. Today, I had the honor of standing in the Speaker's Chair, serving as Speaker Pro Tempore.

Congressman Jim Baird

60,468 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

Raskin: I heard one of our colleagues across the aisle just say, “Well, yes, Article I, Section 8, Clause 11 does give Congress the exclusive, plenary, comprehensive power to declare war and not the president. And we could be debating it, but the president has already taken us to war, so it’s too late. It would undermine the cause for us to debate it.” What a humiliating, self-defeating argument for a member of the Article I branch of Congress to be making. Don’t you understand? That destroys our power to declare war if any president can plunge us into a war and thereby defeat our exclusive, plenary power over it—

Raskin: I heard one of our colleagues across the aisle just say, “Well, yes, Article I, Section 8, Clause 11 does give Congress the exclusive, plenary, comprehensive power to declare war and not the president. And we could be debating it, but the president has already taken us to war, so it’s too late. It would undermine the cause for us to debate it.” What a humiliating, self-defeating argument for a member of the Article I branch of Congress to be making. Don’t you understand? That destroys our power to declare war if any president can plunge us into a war and thereby defeat our exclusive, plenary power over it—

Acyn

406,195 görüntüleme • 6 ay önce

MURKOWSKI: Has the administration considered seeking an authorization for use of military force from Congress? HEGSETH: Our view is that should the president make the decision to recommence, we would have all the authorities to do so under Article 2

MURKOWSKI: Has the administration considered seeking an authorization for use of military force from Congress? HEGSETH: Our view is that should the president make the decision to recommence, we would have all the authorities to do so under Article 2

Aaron Rupar

91,536 görüntüleme • 4 ay önce

In 2023, I opposed an outrageous amendment that barred any president from unilaterally withdrawing the U.S. from NATO. I voted against handcuffing the President & for preserving his Article II authority to terminate treaties. The Founders placed this power in the executive, unlike a divided Congress, because only the President can speak with one voice & act with the speed needed to negotiate or exit treaties.

In 2023, I opposed an outrageous amendment that barred any president from unilaterally withdrawing the U.S. from NATO. I voted against handcuffing the President & for preserving his Article II authority to terminate treaties. The Founders placed this power in the executive, unlike a divided Congress, because only the President can speak with one voice & act with the speed needed to negotiate or exit treaties.

Senator Rand Paul

217,129 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce

ABC’s Jonathan Karl more radical than Zohran Kwame Mamdani? Mamdani rejects Karl’s idea of amending U.S. Constitution so the socialist could become President: Karl: “I got to ask you, I noticed that you’re turning 35 soon, right?...So you now hit one of the constitutional requirements to run for President. But there’s another one that says you have to be a natural born citizen. You were not born here. Do you think that’s something that should be changed in the constitution. It would take an amendment. But do you think that we should change that?” Mamdani: “No, the constitution looks good the way it is.”

ABC’s Jonathan Karl more radical than Zohran Kwame Mamdani? Mamdani rejects Karl’s idea of amending U.S. Constitution so the socialist could become President: Karl: “I got to ask you, I noticed that you’re turning 35 soon, right?...So you now hit one of the constitutional requirements to run for President. But there’s another one that says you have to be a natural born citizen. You were not born here. Do you think that’s something that should be changed in the constitution. It would take an amendment. But do you think that we should change that?” Mamdani: “No, the constitution looks good the way it is.”

Brent Baker 🇺🇲🇺🇦 🇮🇱

18,876 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

We have 535 Members of Congress but just one President. That's why we need a bipartisan independent commission under the 25th Amendment to make sure this president—and all future presidents—are fit to discharge the duties of their office. Congress should pass H.R. 8275 to fill this constitutional void.

We have 535 Members of Congress but just one President. That's why we need a bipartisan independent commission under the 25th Amendment to make sure this president—and all future presidents—are fit to discharge the duties of their office. Congress should pass H.R. 8275 to fill this constitutional void.

Rep. Jamie Raskin

173,336 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce

The solution to a rogue judiciary isn’t to just complain about the Court, or even to wait around for a do-nothing Congress. The Founders provided the solution in Article V of the Constitution: giving STATES the authority to propose amendments and rein in the federal government. ➡️ for more

The solution to a rogue judiciary isn’t to just complain about the Court, or even to wait around for a do-nothing Congress. The Founders provided the solution in Article V of the Constitution: giving STATES the authority to propose amendments and rein in the federal government. ➡️ for more

Jenna Ellis 🐊

48,828 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

The Provincial Assembly of the Punjab has unanimously approved a Constitutional Resolution under Article 144(1) for consideration by the National Assembly and Senate. The resolution demands a Constitutional Amendment in Article 140-A to strengthen Local Governments and introduce a separate Chapter titled “Local Governments” in the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. Co-sponsored with Ali Haider Gilani (H.I.) (PP-211) under the umbrella of the Punjab Local Government Caucus.

The Provincial Assembly of the Punjab has unanimously approved a Constitutional Resolution under Article 144(1) for consideration by the National Assembly and Senate. The resolution demands a Constitutional Amendment in Article 140-A to strengthen Local Governments and introduce a separate Chapter titled “Local Governments” in the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. Co-sponsored with Ali Haider Gilani (H.I.) (PP-211) under the umbrella of the Punjab Local Government Caucus.

Ahmad Iqbal ۰ احمد اقبال 🇵🇰

16,375 görüntüleme • 10 ay önce