Connect with us

News

Trump Says He’s ‘Not Joking’ About Seeking a Third Term in Defiance of Constitution

Published

on

Trump Says He’s ‘Not Joking’ About Seeking a Third Term in Defiance of Constitution

President Trump did not rule out seeking a third term in office on Sunday, telling NBC News that he was “not joking” about the possibility and suggesting there were “methods” to circumvent the two-term limit laid out in the Constitution.

In wide-ranging remarks to “Meet the Press,” Mr. Trump said “a lot of people” wanted him to serve a third term, described himself as “pissed off” at President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia and vowed to impose tariffs on global rivals, according to a transcript of the interview provided by the network.

“A lot of people want me to do it,” he said to the program’s host, Kristen Welker, about the possibility of a third term. “But we have — my thinking is, we have a long way to go. I’m focused on the current.”

Any attempt to seek a third term would run afoul of the 22nd Amendment, which begins, “No person shall be elected to the office of the president more than twice.”

On Sunday, after the release of the interview, the White House reiterated Mr. Trump’s point that he was focused on his current term, and added that it was “far too early to think about” the idea.

Advertisement

“Americans overwhelmingly approve and support President Trump and his America First policies,” Steven Cheung, the White House communications director, said in a statement. He added that Mr. Trump was focused on “undoing all the hurt” done by the Biden administration and “Making America Great Again.”

Mr. Trump has often mused about the idea of a third term, particularly in rallies and speeches that have delighted his supporters, though he has often treated it more as a humorous aside. The interview was the first time that Mr. Trump indicated that he was seriously considering the idea, which his allies have continued to amplify. Already he has likened himself to a king, shown an affinity for autocratic leaders and displayed governance tactics constitutional experts and historians have compared to authoritarianism.

Three days after Mr. Trump was sworn in for the second time, Representative Andy Ogles of Tennessee proposed an amendment to the Constitution that would make Mr. Trump eligible for a third term. Such a measure would be extraordinarily difficult: Constitutional amendments require approval by a two-thirds vote of Congress and then the ratification of three-fourths of the states.

In the interview, Ms. Welker noted that she had heard him joke about serving a third term a number of times. Mr. Trump made it clear he considered it a real possibility.

“No, no I’m not joking,” he said. “I’m not joking.”

Advertisement

Ms. Welker asked Mr. Trump whether he had been presented with plans, and he said that he had not — but added that there were “methods which you could do it.”

Ms. Welker suggested one possibility: having Vice President JD Vance at the top of the ticket in 2028, only to pass the office on to Mr. Trump after winning. Mr. Trump acknowledged “that’s one” way it could happen.

“But there are others too,” he said. “There are others.”

Mr. Trump declined to say what those could be.

Derek T. Muller, a law professor at the University of Notre Dame and a scholar in election law, said there has been a dissenting view about the provision of the 22nd Amendment — which focuses on being “elected” president without addressing the idea of ascending to the office. However, he said, such a route would be complicated by the 12th Amendment.

Advertisement

Mr. Muller pointed out that the 12th Amendment states that “no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of president shall be eligible to that of vice-president of the United States.”

Mr. Muller said he very much doubted that would provide a path to a third term for Mr. Trump.

“You’d have to have so many pieces fall into place for this even to be practically viable, on top of this complicated legal theory,” he said.

In his remarks to Ms. Welker, the president also leveled his strongest criticism to date against Mr. Putin, threatening to impose “secondary tariffs” on Russia’s oil if the country thwarted negotiations on a cease-fire deal with Ukraine that would stop the fighting.

The comments signaled growing impatience with the negotiations. Mr. Trump said that tariffs of 25 to 50 percent on Russian oil could be imposed at “any moment” and that he planned to speak with his Russian counterpart this week.

Advertisement

“If Russia and I are unable to make a deal on stopping the bloodshed in Ukraine, and if I think it was Russia’s fault — which it might not be — but if I think it was Russia’s fault, I am going to put secondary tariffs on oil, on all oil coming out of Russia,” Mr. Trump said.

Mr. Trump has previously referred to secondary tariffs as levies on imports from countries that purchase products from a nation he’s targeted in his foreign policy. The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The comments were notable given the steps that Mr. Trump has taken to align himself with Mr. Putin, despite the United States’ support for Ukraine since Russia’s full-scale invasion more than three years ago. Since taking office, Mr. Trump has declined to acknowledge that it was Russia who started the war, falsely declared President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine a “dictator,” but not Mr. Putin, and accused Mr. Zelensky of not wanting peace.

Mr. Trump’s remarks also underscored his increasing promise to use tariffs to compel countries to bend to his domestic and foreign policy goals. In the same phone call, he said he would consider secondary tariffs on Iran if it did not reach a deal with the United States to ensure it did not develop a nuclear weapon, Ms. Welker said.

Mr. Trump told Ms. Welker that he was “very angry, pissed off” at Mr. Putin for questioning the credibility of Mr. Zelensky, and for discussing the prospect of new leadership in that country. Mr. Trump suggested that such comments could set negotiations back, and that they were ”not going in the right location.”

Advertisement

“New leadership means you’re not going to have a deal for a long time, right?” Mr. Trump said.

Russia and Ukraine have agreed to a limited truce, but that has fallen short of the complete pause in combat that Trump administration officials have sought, with Ukraine’s support. The limited cease-fire remains tenuous as Russia seeks more concessions and Ukraine has expressed doubt that a truce would be upheld.

On negotiations about Iran’s nuclear capabilities, Mr. Trump said officials from both countries were “talking,” according to NBC’s account of Ms. Welker’s call with the president, although he raised the prospect of military action if economic and other measures do not succeed.

“If they don’t make a deal,” Mr. Trump said about Iran, “there will be bombing. It will be bombing the likes of which they have never seen before.”

Earlier this month, Mr. Trump sent a letter to Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, urging direct negotiations with the government in Tehran on a deal to curb the country’s advancing nuclear program. The letter said Mr. Trump preferred diplomacy over military action.

Advertisement

Mr. Trump’s raising of secondary tariffs on oil from Russia and Iran was the latest example of the president’s interest in using the prospect of economic pressure on third-party nations.

Last week, he issued an executive order on Monday to crack down on countries that buy Venezuelan oil by imposing tariffs on the goods those nations send into the United States, claiming that Venezuela has “purposefully and deceitfully” sent criminals and murderers into America.

Mr. Trump called the new levies he threatened on buyers of Venezuelan oil “secondary tariffs,” a label that echoed “secondary sanctions” — penalties imposed on other countries or parties that trade with nations under sanctions.

Some trade and sanctions experts said existing secondary sanctions associated with countries such as Russia and Iran already were not well enforced, and questioned whether the United States would have the capacity to pull off new tariff-based penalties.

Advertisement

News

Donald Trump has no ‘phase two’ plan for Iran war, says US senator

Published

on

Donald Trump has no ‘phase two’ plan for Iran war, says US senator

To read this article for free

Register now

Once registered, you can:

• Read free articles
• Get our Editor’s Digest and other newsletters
• Follow topics and set up personalised events
• Access Alphaville: our popular markets and finance blog

Continue Reading

News

Man accused of plot to assassinate Trump testifies Iran pressured him, says Biden and Haley were other possible targets

Published

on

Man accused of plot to assassinate Trump testifies Iran pressured him, says Biden and Haley were other possible targets

The allegation sounded like the stuff of spy movies: A Pakistani businessman trying to hire hit men, even handing them $5,000 in cash, to kill a U.S. politician on behalf of Iran ‘s powerful paramilitary Revolutionary Guard.

It was true, and potential targets of the 2024 scheme included now-President Donald Trump, then-President Joe Biden and former presidential candidate and ex-U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley, the man told jurors at his attempted terrorism trial in New York on Wednesday. But he insisted his actions were driven by fear for loved ones in Iran, and he figured he’d be apprehended before anything came of the scheme.

“My family was under threat, and I had to do this,” the defendant, Asif Merchant, testified through an Urdu interpreter. “I was not wanting to do this so willingly.”

Merchant said he had anticipated getting arrested before anyone was killed, intended to cooperate with the U.S. government and had hoped that would help him get a green card.

U.S. authorities were, indeed, on to him – the supposed hit men he paid were actually undercover FBI agents – and he was arrested on July 12, 2024, a day before an unrelated attempt on Trump’s life in Butler, Pennsylvania.  During a search, investigators said they found a handwritten note that contained the codewords for the various aspects of the plot, CBS News previously reported

Advertisement

Merchant did sit for voluntary FBI interviews, but he ultimately ended up with a trial, not a cooperation deal.

“You traveled to the United States for the purpose of hiring Mafia members to kill a politician, correct?” Assistant U.S. Attorney Nina Gupta asked during her turn questioning Merchant Wednesday in a Brooklyn federal court.

“That’s right,” Merchant replied, his demeanor as matter-of-fact as his testimony was unusual.

The trial is unfolding amid the less than week-old Iran war, which killed Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in a strike that Trump summed up as “I got him before he got me.” Jurors are instructed to ignore news pertaining to the case.

The Iranian government has denied plotting to kill Trump or other U.S. officials.

Advertisement

Merchant, 47, had a roughly 20-year banking career in Pakistan before getting involved in an array of businesses: clothing, car sales, banana exports, insulation imports. He openly has two families, one in Pakistan and the other in Iran – where, he said, he was introduced around the end of 2022 to a Revolutionary Guard intelligence operative. They initially spoke about getting involved in a hawala, an informal money transfer system, Merchant said.

Merchant testified that his periodic visits to the U.S. for his garment business piqued the interest of his Revolutionary Guard contact, who trained him on countersurveillance techniques.

The U.S. deems the Revolutionary Guard a “foreign terrorist organization.” Formally called the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, the force has been prominent in Iran under Khamenei.

Merchant said the handler told him to seek U.S. residents interested in working for Iran. Then came another assignment: Look for a criminal to arrange protests, steal things, do some money laundering, “and maybe have somebody murdered,” Merchant recalled.

“He did not tell me exactly who it is, but he told me – he named three people: Donald Trump, Joe Biden and Nikki Haley,” he added.

Advertisement

In 2024, multiple sources familiar with the investigation told CBS News Merchant planned to assassinate current and former government officials across the political spectrum.

Merchant allegedly sketched out the plot on a napkin inside his New York hotel room, prosecutors said, and told the individual “that there would be ‘security all around’ the person” they were planning to kill.

“No other option”

After U.S. immigration agents pulled Merchant aside at the Houston airport in April 2024, searched his possessions and asked about his travels to Iran, he concluded that he was under surveillance. But still he researched Trump rally locations, sketched out a plot for a shooting at a political rally, lined up the supposed hit men and scrambled together $5,000 from a cousin to pay them a “token of appreciation.”

This image provided by the Justice Department, contained in the complaint supporting the arrest warrant, shows Asif Merchant. 

Advertisement

AP


He even reported back to his Revolutionary Guard contact, sending observations – fake, Merchant said – tucked into a book that he shipped to Iran through a series of intermediaries.

Merchant said he “had no other option” than to play along because the handler had indicated that he knew who Merchant’s Iranian relatives were and where they lived.

In a court filing this week, prosecutors noted that Merchant didn’t seek out law enforcement to help with his purported predicament before he was arrested. He testified that he couldn’t turn to authorities because his handler had people watching him.

Prosecutors also said that in his FBI interviews, Merchant “neglected to mention any facts that could have supported” an argument that he acted under duress.

Advertisement

Merchant told jurors Wednesday that he didn’t think agents would believe his story, because their questions suggested “they think that I’m some type of super-spy.”

“And are you a super-spy?” defense lawyer Avraham Moskowitz asked.

“No,” Merchant said. “Absolutely not.”

Continue Reading

News

Satellite images show Iran school strike hit more buildings than earlier reported

Published

on

Satellite images show Iran school strike hit more buildings than earlier reported

The bombing of an Iranian elementary school that killed some 165 people, many of them schoolgirls, included more targets near the school than has been initially reported, a review of commercial satellite imagery by NPR has found.

The images suggest that the school was hit on Saturday as part of a precision airstrike on a neighboring Iranian military complex — and that it may have been struck as a result of outdated targeting information.

The new images come from the company Planet and are of the city of Minab, located in southeastern Iran. They show that a health clinic and other buildings near the school were also struck. Three independent experts confirmed NPR’s analysis of the additional strike points.

Advertisement

The strike points “look like pretty clean detonation centroids,” said Corey Scher, a postdoctoral researcher at the Conflict Ecology laboratory at Oregon State University.

“These certainly appear like detonation sites,” agreed Scher’s colleague, Oregon State associate professor Jamon Van Den Hoek.

Jeffrey Lewis, a professor at Middlebury College who specializes in satellite imagery, said the imagery was consistent with a precision airstrike.

The images show “very precise targeting,” Lewis told NPR. “Almost all the buildings [in the compound] are hit.”

A satellite image of an Iranian Revolutionary Guard compound taken on March 4.

A satellite image of an Iranian Revolutionary Guard compound taken on March 4, several days after an airstrike destroyed a school on the edge of the compound. The image reveals that half a dozen other buildings in addition to the school were struck.

Planet Labs PBC

Advertisement


hide caption

toggle caption

Planet Labs PBC

Advertisement

Iranian state media said 165 people died in the bombing, which struck a girls’ school. The school was located within less than 100 yards of the perimeter of an Iranian Revolutionary Guard naval base, according to satellite images and publicly available information. The clinic was also located within the base perimeter, although both facilities had been walled off from the base.

Israel has denied involvement. “We are not aware at the moment of any IDF operation in that area,” Israel Defense Forces spokesperson Nadav Shoshani told NPR on Monday. “I don’t know who’s responsible for the bombing.”

At a press conference Wednesday morning, U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said that the U.S. is looking into what happened at the school. “All I know, all I can say, is that we’re investigating that,” Hegseth said. “We, of course, never target civilian targets.”

Given Minab’s location in the southeastern part of Iran, Lewis believes it’s more likely the U.S. would have conducted the strike than Israel. As one gets farther south and east in Iran, “a strike is much more likely to be a U.S. strike than an Israeli strike because of the type of munitions and the geographic location,” he said.

Esmail Baghaei, the spokesman for Iran’s Foreign Ministry, called the strike “deliberate” and said that the U.S. and Israel bombed the school in part to tie up Iranian forces in the region with rescue efforts. “To call the attack on the girls school merely a ‘war crime’ does not capture the sheer evil and depravity of such a crime,” he said.

Advertisement

But Lewis said it’s more likely that the strike was the result of an error. Satellite images show that the school and clinic buildings were both once part of the base. The school was separated from the base by a wall between 2013 and 2016. The clinic was walled off between 2022 and 2024.

Lewis believes it’s possible American military planners had not updated their target sets.

“There are thousands of targets across Iran, and so there will be teams in the United States and Israel that are responsible for tracking those targets and updating them,” he said. “It’s possible that the target didn’t get updated.”

The Pentagon did not immediately respond to NPR’s request for additional information about the strike.

NPR’s Arezou Rezvani and NPR’s RAD team contributed to this report.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending