I don't think he can legally run as VP, mainly because he isn't allowed to serve again as President under the term limits. I'm not a constitutional scholar, but I overheard this conversation at a Holiday Inn Express last night.that would be a historic pair as President and Vice President.
I don't think he can legally run as VP, mainly because he isn't allowed to serve again as President under the term limits. I'm not a constitutional scholar, but I overheard this conversation at a Holiday Inn Express last night.
Yep, 22nd Amendment.
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.
i've not researched this, because i don't think it will happen (who knows, though? It is a strange year in politics!), but just from the above quote, that quote does not appear to prohibit a former President from being elected as Vice-President in a subsequent administration. It says he cannot be "elected to the office of the President more than twice."
It's all depends on how you interpret the word "elect". Sort of ironic that this would turn into a question about how a fairly simple word is defined.Sorry, I forgot to post the rest. The 12th Amendment requires the Vice President to meet all of the same qualifications as the President to hold the respective office. Article 2, Clause 5 lists those qualifications (along with the 22nd Amendment posted).
Well played.Sort of ironic that this would turn into a question about how a fairly simple word is defined.
It's all depends on how you interpret the word "elect". Sort of ironic that this would turn into a question about how a fairly simple word is defined.
You do realize he was being deposed concerning a lawsuit resulting from an assault of another female? Paula Jones?Yep. If memory serves me, during the $50 million, year-long investigation by Ken Starr to find out whether Bill Clinton was a horndog (which we all knew already before we elected him the second time), in a deposition Clinton asked a question of the interrogator along the lines of "What do you mean by "is"?" Parenthetically, i'm not sure i could come up with a good definition of "is" off-the-cuff!
You do realize he was being deposed concerning a lawsuit resulting from an assault of another female? Paula Jones?
I always said he should have told the SC that you can not compel me to testify, only congress can. He could have fought it and let congress compel, impeach him, and then he could have testified. He might have run out the clock wwithout ever having to lie in a deposition. I thought he got bad legal advice from his team on that one. He was impeached for lying anyway. I never voted for him but he could have held off on the separation of powers.well, you got me on that one! in any event, that was his testimony. even though I voted for him twice, I thought that was a pretty disingenuous response on his part to a question.
So, Monica Lewinski is eligible.:sunglasses:Sorry, I forgot to post the rest. The 12th Amendment requires the Vice President to meet all of the same qualifications as the President to hold the respective office. Article 2, Clause 5 lists those qualifications (along with the 22nd Amendment posted).