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

Argentina is back in the World Cup final after a thrilling semifinal win over England

Published

on

Argentina is back in the World Cup final after a thrilling semifinal win over England

Argentina’s Lionel Messi celebrates the team’s second goal by Lautaro Martínez during their World Cup semifinal against England on Wednesday in Atlanta. Argentina defeated the English 2-1 to advance to Sunday’s final against Spain.

Shaun Botterill/Getty Images


hide caption



toggle caption

Advertisement

Shaun Botterill/Getty Images

ATLANTA — Argentina, the death-defying defending World Cup champion, will play for a second consecutive title after scoring two late goals to beat England in the semifinal, 2-1.

For a fourth straight knockout game, Argentina survived a heart-stoppingly close call. First was Cape Verde, the African island nation underdog, who took the champions to extra time. Then was the furious miracle comeback after Egypt took a 2-0 lead. Then, in the quarterfinal, a shorthanded Switzerland squad forced extra time despite a 72nd-minute red card.

This gutsy Argentina squad prevailed in all three games, and Wednesday, they pulled it off yet again. In the 55th minute, England took a 1-0 lead when forward Anthony Gordon tapped in a cross.

Advertisement

But, as the clock ticked up, Argentina turned up the intensity. A relentless onslaught yielded near miss after near miss before finally midfielder Enzo Fernández scored off a rocket from outside the penalty area to equalize the game at 1-1 in the 85th minute.

Then, in stoppage time, forward Lautaro Martínez sent the Argentina crowd into delirium with a header off a cross from 39-year-old superstar Lionel Messi, who assisted on both goals.

“I think that this team plays the best when we are facing a difficult situation, with adversity, ” said Argentina coach Lionel Scaloni afterward. “We had a challenging game, a challenging situation. There was blood in the water, and we went for it.”

In Sunday’s final they will face Spain, which defeated France on Tuesday 2-0 to contend for their second-ever title.

England's Anthony Gordon celebrates scoring his team's first goal during the World Cup semifinal against Argentina on Wednesday in Atlanta.

England’s Anthony Gordon celebrates scoring his team’s first goal during the World Cup semifinal against Argentina on Wednesday in Atlanta.

Justin Setterfield/Getty Images

Advertisement


hide caption



toggle caption

Justin Setterfield/Getty Images

Advertisement

Wednesday’s game, the sixth meeting between these two teams at the men’s World Cup, was the newest chapter in their storied rivalry. That history includes the infamous “Hand of God” goal scored by Diego Maradona in the 1986 World Cup, four years after a war between the two countries over the Falkland Islands. The British won the war, but the sovereignty of the territory is still under dispute.

Continue Reading

News

ICE should do traffic stops despite recent shootings, Trump says, seeming to oppose new suspension

Published

on

ICE should do traffic stops despite recent shootings, Trump says, seeming to oppose new suspension

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency should continue vehicle stops after recent fatal shootings, President Donald Trump said on Wednesday, seeming to oppose a new suspension of the practice used as part of his immigration crackdown.

ICE is “doing a GREAT job, one that has to be done,” Trump wrote on his social media site.

The Republican president said that to remove criminals he claims were let into the country under the previous Democratic administration “we must be strong, tough, and smart, and we CANNOT give up one of ICE’s most important and effective Crime Fighting tools, THE TRAFFIC STOP!” Trump said, “Once we do, we are playing right into the criminal’s hands.”

Trump administration officials have told Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers to suspend most vehicle stops after two deadly shootings within a week, people familiar with the decision said Tuesday.

The suspension was ordered after an ICE officer shot and killed a Colombian driver Monday in Maine and a week after another officer shot and killed a motorist in Houston, renewing criticism of the agency’s enforcement tactics that were widely condemned last winter after the killings of Alex Pretti and Renee Good in Minnesota.

Advertisement

In Florida on Tuesday, a third man in roughly a week died during an encounter with immigration officers. This time, a 28-year-old man was killed after he was hit by a tractor trailer while running from immigration and other federal officers, authorities said.

It’s a narrative that has been repeated again and again since the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown began, with federal officers confronting drivers and then saying they opened fire when the drivers’ vehicles became a danger. That’s despite decades of warnings from policing experts that shooting into moving cars presents a danger of its own and should almost always be avoided.

There have been at least 10 deaths involving encounters with immigration agents since Trump launched his deportation campaign. At least four of those deaths involved people in vehicles, including the one last week in Houston, a trend so troubling that U.S. Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, said Tuesday that she had urged Department of Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin “to cease all non-urgent vehicle stops.”

John Sandweg, who was acting director at ICE, which is part of DHS, during President Barack Obama’s Democratic administration, estimated recently that there have been roughly 18 traffic stop shootings during the Trump immigration crackdown.

The office of Maine Sen. Angus King, an independent who caucuses with Democrats, was told by DHS that ICE was suspending traffic stops, office spokesperson Matthew Felling said.

Advertisement

ICE, which has been under pressure to beef up arrest and deportation numbers, often says people it’s trying to arrest are increasingly resistant to leaving their homes. ICE officers blame immigration advocates who advise immigrants to stay in their homes unless ICE produces a warrant signed by an independent judge instead of the administrative warrants the agency generally uses that are signed by another ICE officer. So, ICE officers say, they’re forced to find other areas in which to make arrests.

Shooting angers Maine

Hundreds of people in Maine protested Tuesday over the fatal shooting of Johan Sebastián Durán Guerrero, a 25-year-old Colombian national. Advocacy groups said Guerrero, who had a wife and a young daughter, was authorized to work in the United States.

DHS said Monday that an officer, “fearing for public safety,” shot and killed Durán Guerrero while officers were watching the home of someone they believed was in the U.S. illegally and facing a final order of removal from the country. It said in a post on X that when ICE tried to stop a car driven by someone who came from the home, the person attempted to flee in the vehicle and the officer fired.

That was a shift from how King earlier described the encounter, when he said Mullin told him the officer opened fire after the man tried to use his vehicle as a weapon. King said Mullin told him the officers were trying to serve an arrest warrant but not for the man who was shot.

In a scathing post on X, outgoing Colombian President Gustavo Petro called the shooting a targeted killing “at the hands of the U.S. government.”

Advertisement

Petro, who has openly quarreled with Trump, urged Trump to provide an explanation and accused ICE officers of treating Durán Guerrero as “an inferior being without rights.”

In Wednesday’s social media post, Trump told ICE to be “judicious, fair and smart, and go back and do your very important job.”

Maine’s congressional delegation on Tuesday demanded a “comprehensive, transparent, and expedited investigation.”

Questions surround the shooting

Photos showed bullet holes in Durán Guerrero’s car windshield, but the officers involved in the shooting didn’t have body cameras, leaving many questions. Among them are how close the officer was to the vehicle when shooting, whether officers told Durán Guerrero to stop and why ICE believes he had put the public in danger.

Border czar Tom Homan told reporters Tuesday that the investigation needs to play out and that officers will be held accountable if they are found to have acted inappropriately or illegally.

Advertisement

Maine’s attorney general’s office, which said it is working with federal agencies to investigate, said initial statements suggest the driver was trying to flee in the direction of the officer, whose name hasn’t been released and who was placed on leave.

Collins said Mullin told her the DHS inspector general is investigating in cooperation with the FBI.

Democrats seeking to unseat Collins in November have sought to connect her with ICE’s methods, which have drawn public scrutiny and derision. Collins later said in a statement that although ICE needs to improve, eliminating the agency would make the nation less safe.

Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows, a Democrat who is vying for Collins’ seat, called the ICE officers at the shooting “thugs” during a vigil Tuesday in Lewiston.

___

Advertisement

Whittle contributed from Biddeford, Maine; Brook from New Orleans; and Sisak from New York.

Continue Reading

News

Supreme Court Justices give chilling accounts of threats to their safety

Published

on

Supreme Court Justices give chilling accounts of threats to their safety

Supreme Court Justices Elena Kagan and Amy Coney Barrett testify before the House Appropriations Committee on Capitol Hill on July 14, 2026 in Washington, D.C.

Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images


hide caption



toggle caption

Advertisement

Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images

The Supreme Court did something Tuesday that it has not done in seven years. It sent two of the justices to Capitol Hill to testify about the court’s budget request for the coming year. The budget has grown dramatically in recent years because of the equally dramatic rise in the number and intensity of threats to the justices’ safety.

Designated as the court’s representatives were Justice Elena Kagan, appointed by President Obama, and Justice Amy Coney Barrett, appointed by President Trump.

As Kagan pointed out in her testimony, it was Republican Darrell Issa and Democrat Elijah Cummings who insisted that the court beef up its security ten years ago after Justice Antonin Scalia died in his sleep on a hunting trip, with no security anywhere nearby to respond quickly.  

Advertisement

“They said, kind of like, we think you’re crazy, you know, that that you have less security than director of the Office of Personnel Management does,” she recounted the Congressmen as telling the Court, “and we think that you have to do better.”

Before that, the justices basically had little to no security. They drove their own cars to work; went to the movies and shopped at supermarkets unaccompanied, and did their private travel on their own. And frankly, they liked it that way, because having security is personally invasive.

In recent years, however, the court has undertaken major changes, including continually expanding the court police force to protect the justices and their homes at all times, and funding additional cybersecurity measures.

And yet, as Justice Kagan pointed out, the Court’s $207 million budget request is less than one tenth of one percent of the entire federal budget.

The justices spoke at length Tuesday about how rising threats impacted their lives. Justice Barrett came prepared with two harrowing stories. First was the day she brought home a bullet-proof vest. 

Advertisement

“My 12-year-old son was standing in the doorway of my bedroom and he wanted to know what it was,” she testified, “and I didn’t know how to respond. I didn’t expect that performing this service was going to put me in the position of explaining to my children what a bulletproof vest was and why I had to wear one.”

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending