The Third Term Project, a new organization seeking to amend the Constitution to allow President Donald Trump the chance to serve a third term, held its first press conference outlining its priorities at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Maryland this week.
Speaking to the press on Thursday, Shane Trejo, the campaign lead for the Third Term Project, explained that the group’s stated goal is to ensure that Trump can get the third term they state “the public demands that he receive.” Trejo pointed to recent efforts by Republican Congressman Andy Ogles of Tennessee, who introduced a joint resolution last month that would amend the U.S. Constitution to allow a president to be elected for up to, but no more than, three terms as indicative of public support for the idea.
“We believe that the public needs a third term from President Trump,” Trejo said, before praising Trump for such efforts as Operation Warp Speed, the Department of Government Efficiency, and “going to battle with the permanent bureaucracy of Washington, D.C., that has lorded over us and strangled the economy for so long.”
Trejo added that opponents of Trump, which he described as “forces of evil,” would likely move to reverse policies implemented under his second administration as soon as Trump leaves office. He argued that with the option of a third term, Trump would potentially be able to “remake the government” before such changes could take place.
“We believe that with a third term, [Trump] will be able to remake the government. He’ll be able to take a wrecking ball to the bureaucracy [and] to the networks that operate behind the bureaucracy,” Trejo explained. “And for generations to come, it will make the necessary change to stop the Deep State, stop the institutional bureaucracy, stop the Administrative State, and restore freedom to the people.”
Joining Trejo was Mark Ivanyo, the organization’s legal expert and Executive Director of Republicans for National Renewal, who explained that the organization isn’t asking for “a huge modification” to the amendment. Ivanyo acknowledged that the effort has received criticism but reiterated that the proposed constitutional amendment would still only allow for “two consecutive terms and no more.” He added that Trump’s second term was “interrupted”—referencing his 2020 defeat, so he should be allowed to “effectuate his agenda with a second term.”
“We’re not even saying that President Trump will be president again, so if he does run in 2028, it could be that he does not [get] elected. We’re just saying that he should have the opportunity to get elected,” Ivanyo added.
When asked if the movement has found support among other House Republicans, Ivanyo said no, stating that “they’ve sadly been silent on it.” However, he said the movement has received a “groundswell” of grassroots support, which they hope will be used to pressure lawmakers—starting with those who are more conservative and then working toward moderate members.
Ivanyo also noted that Trump himself has not officially addressed the project, although Trump has remarked on the general idea in recent days.
The 22nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which states “No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice,” was ratified in 1951 following President Franklin Roosevelt’s unprecedented four-term presidency. It limits a person to serving two terms as president, whether consecutive or non-consecutive.
To amend the Constitution as the Third Term Project proposes, Congress would need to pass a joint resolution by a two-thirds majority in both the House and Senate, or two-thirds of state legislatures would need to call for a constitutional convention. The amendment would then require ratification by three-fourths of the states to become law—a process that has historically taken years, if not decades, to accomplish.
Editorial note: The video in this article was publicly produced by Ford Fischer of News2Share. Fischer is a member of the Outsider Media Foundation Board of Directors. He was not consulted for nor specifically contributed to this article.
@Gordon Knight
The US is very unusual for a republic in that it unifies the head of state and the head of government into a single person. The responsibilities of cabinet and the competencies of parliament are clearly different, leading to a different balance of power.
The norms and values of American and Russian/Belarussian culture are more different today than at any point in history where the latter was not occupied by bolsheviks, leading to radically different norms and values, and even to different morals and ethics.
Contemporary and recent Russian and Belarussian leadership have demonstrated that they can handle staying in power, whereas their western counterparts in general and US counterparts in particular have shown that they very much cannot.
And then there’s the aforementioned difference in tradition: it is an American tradition that presidents only serve two terms. Whether serving more than two terms would be inherently bad or not, is irrelevant to it being an affront to tradition and an insult to Washington – not to mention to every subsequent US president except FDR.
—
@Roman-wannabibi-Shukhevich, the valor stealing, banderite nazi; the boastfully self-proclaimed pedophile and zoophile; the idolizer and threatener of rape and torture; and the idolator who previously claimed to worship some false god called “Perun”, but now has decided to pretend – very unconvincingly – to be both a Arabic muslim woman and her son, yet who does not even know that “habibi” is in the masculine form…
Gr8 b8 m8 I r8 8/8
Monarchy is one thing. President for life is another. President for unlimited terms but with a real chance of removal at regular scheduled elections another still. The actual proposal in question here is none of those.
Dictatorship is yet another thing still – any of those scenarios could be a dictatorship, or not. Even a president for life could have limited powers, or even be a figurehead. A dictatorship could be short lived.
The two terms tradition has limited relationship to the potential of dictatorship. There could be a tyranny where the president is term limited, and there could be a popular president who would not be term limited – either with potential unlimited number of terms, or for life – but with divided government, separation of powers, civil liberties, local authority, etc.
I don’t think anyone here has so far made, or really even tried to make , any case that term limits are either necessary or sufficient to prevent tyranny. All you have so far only hung your arguments on American tradition.
Do you have any more universal arguments that apply beyond only the USA?
In what ways do the differences between Belarus and Russia vs the US make it more important/justified to limit American voter choices as to whether to keep a popular president in office longer? Sure, Russia and Belarus were part of the Russian Empire. The US was part of the British, French, Spanish, Russian, Dutch, and Hawaiian monarchies, in addition to American Indian ones (I may have forgotten some). Belarus as an independent country has been a Republic since its start.
@Darcy G. Richardson
I do sincerely and earnestly believe that Trump was elected in 2020, and thus has been elected three times – you can think me a moron and a fool for that though I disagree, but not a mindless or principle-less MAGAt though.
Since Trump never took office during his second term, I feel like that justifies the exception of his getting a third. But given that he is in office right now, a de jure fourth, de facto third term would clearly not be inline with American tradition or the 22nd amendment.
As you say, God save our Republic. Cheers!
——
@Roman-wannabibi-Shukhevich, the valor stealing, banderite nazi; the boastfully self-proclaimed pedophile and zoophile; the idolizer and threatener of rape and torture; and the idolator who previously claimed to worship some false god called “Perun”, but now has decided to pretend – very unconvincingly – to be both a Arabic muslim woman and her son, yet who does not even know that “habibi” is in the masculine form…
Gr8 b8 m8 I r8 8/8
Just as low effort as your February 22nd bait, in fact. U+1F644 If you want people to bite, at least try and make them believe that you are neither trolling them, nor too ignorant and lazy to waste words on you…
A president for life is one that can’t be removed through elections. Unlimited terms with real elections each time is different. You have people in your congress that have been there for decades but they can be removed and sometimes are. On your supreme court they are there for life unless resigned or removed after being impeached. So a president with unlimited terms, which is different from this proposal, is still different from president for life.
It’s too bad none of you are actually addressing the real question, only taking things for granted and throwing out insults. You may have unfulfilled lives. But why should it be taken for granted that a president would become a dictator without term limits but it’s ok for your congress to have unlimited terms and your supreme court to not even have terms at all?
“Well, I’m glad we managed to find at least some common ground – no matter how small – when it comes to presidential term limits and honoring tradition. Cheers!” — Nuna
Well, that’s a positive development. Thanks, Nuna. There’s hope yet. Most of the MAGA morons supporting the Third Term Project foolishly believe that Trump has already been elected three times, so what they’re really supporting is a President for life. Tradition be damned. God save our Republic. Cheers!
@Darcy G. Richardson
Well, I’m glad we managed to find at least some common ground – no matter how small – when it comes to presidential term limits and honoring tradition. Cheers!
—
@Roman-wannabibi-Shukhevich, the valor stealing, banderite nazi; the boastfully self-proclaimed pedophile and zoophile; the idolizer and threatener of rape and torture; and the idolator who previously claimed to worship some false god called “Perun”, but now has decided to pretend – very unconvincingly – to be both a Arabic muslim woman and her son, yet who does not even know that “habibi” is in the masculine form…
Yup, that’s ole dungfly alright U+1F60F But even he – unlike you – isn’t retarded enough to go around pretending to possess some kind of gnosis regarding my sex.
Nor did I say that you “got the idea that she sounds like an aggressive young female parrot from” him. You really do need to start learning how to read, Romashka:
https://independentpoliticalreport.com/2025/01/lnc-chair-announces-inauguration-celebration-in-d-c/#comments
Perhaps given your “drunk” boasting on BAN of raping children and animals – not to mention threatening to rape and torture myself and my family – you also shouldn’t be doubling down on continuing to call me both an animal and an infant. Yet here we are.
Now stop trying to goad people – and dungflies – into engaging with your February 22 bait, you lazy nazi troll.
—
@Solipsistic Dungfly
Are you still suffering from TDS? Or can you just not get over any successful business tycoon and best selling author winning three presidential elections back-to-back? U+1F601
You must remember the banderite “Roman [wannabe Shukhevich] Salute” from BAN. As you can see, it’s trying to get in touch with its “feminine side” on IPR through a bit of cross-dressing, so to speak. Now fancies itself a child rapist-worshiping goat-fucker – two of them even – instead of a “Perun”-worshiping self-proclaimed animal- and child-rapist… Truly pathetic stuff, in an entirely different league from your own.
—
@Walter Ziobro
Yes, I have a similar impression. And it wasn’t just Hamilton either: John Adams and a bunch of the Federalist Party’s founders seem to have held similar views, although perhaps not quite as autocratic – I believe their idea was more of a British-style monarchy, which balanced a presumably elected monarch against a fully secular parliament.
Im all for preserving traditions, but logically term limits aren’t either effective or necessary towards their alleged purpose, as explained on 22 February. As for the birdbrained baby girl Nuna, I don’t know why Mr. Richardson or anyone else would give her the time of day. For a parrot, she’s very cuckoo!
While I strongly disagree with Nuna that FDR was “one of the three worst presidents” and totally reject the notion that Barack Obama was ineligible and that Joe Biden’s presidency was the result of a stolen election, I agree that the sacred two-term tradition should be honored.
Most people don’t realize that in 1944, shortly before being elected to a fourth term, Roosevelt was already planning a fifth bid for the White House and was quietly talking to Wendell Willkie — the 1940 Republican presidential nominee — about running on a joint ticket under the newly-formed Liberal Party ticket in New York in 1948. The two men wanted to take the party national. I touched on it briefly in my book, “The Lowest Ebb,” published in 2020. Willkie’s sudden death in October of 1944 and FDR’s own failing health early in his fourth term, of course, ended that dream.
A more complete account of this intriguing episode in third-party politics will appear in one of my forthcoming books, tentatively titled “FDR Forever.”
Are you the person that baby girl Nuna calls solipsistic dungfly? She seems to think that I got the idea that she sounds like an aggressive young female parrot from you, although I think this is the first time I actually saw you comment.
While you are here (open to others as well)
Do you have any thoughts on my comment from February 22?
The wingnut commenter who shall remain nameless probably supported #StartTheSteal in 2020. After all, Trump himself DID write “The Art of the Steal.”
As for the named wingnut, Trejo? Thinks Trump is Caesar: https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2025/02/third-term-trump-neo-nazi-white-nationalist-cpac-shane-trejo/
And is a white supremacist: https://www.rawstory.com/shane-trejo/
I believe that it was Hamilton’s intention for the Presidency to be an elective monarchy, like the Roman Empire had from Augustus to Diocletian, which was called the “Principate” Augustus’ principle title was Princeps of Senate, for which he was given a 5 year term. His unchallenged re-election every 5 years by the Senate became to precedent for all subsequent Emperors.
But, Washington thwarted Hamilton’s plan by stepping down after two terms, which became the American precedent until FDR.
@Curious
“The Russian constitution was amended to extend term limits for the President. […] Why wouldn’t the same work out well for the USA?”
Entirely skipping over all the differences between contemporary Russia and the contemporary US, their respective structures of government and their presidents’ authority, which must necessarily form the crux of any proper attempt at answering your question as posed, let me point a “flaw” of sorts in the question.
It isn’t a matter of whether it would or wouldn’t work out well, but that it is un- perhaps even anti-American. Russia, like most other countries, use to have a monarch (though their precise role and power changed over time), whereas the US was founded as a republic from its very beginning. So even if it would work out well (this time), it would still be improper to the core values upon which the nation was founded.
—
@Gordon Knight
Lukashenko is a very benevolent dictator, if he can be called one at all. (Yes, I know he prides himself on being the last dictator of Europe, but if you look at how much stock he takes of popular opinion and advice from even his opposition, can he really be considered one?)
He has not let himself get bullied into joining the wrong side of the war, and his covid response was better than that of any other (widely recognized) head of state in the world, even that of Bolsonaro who was tied down by his opponents – namely, turning down globalist bribes to destroy the Belarusian economy and health, and telling the nation to “get plenty of exercise, eat healthy, drink enough alcohol and continue having sex”.
But unlike many other leaders and policians, Lukashenko is not power hungry. He had announced in his fifth term that he intended to step down and not seek re-election, and in response to accusations of dynasty building barred his sons from running for president.
However, in 2020 (as always) western globalists tried on a regime change (cf. euromaidan), just as they had during the jeans revolution in 2006 (cf. orange revolution). The evil west tried to install its unelected puppet, Tikhanovskaya, an actual wannabe dictator, just as they had successfully installed the unelected nazi dictators Yushenko and Poroshenko in neighboring “ukraine” in 2004 and 2014.
It is the west and the west alone, with its incessant attempts to subvert the will of the local electorate, which is responsible for Lukashenko’s sixth and seventh terms! If the globalists had left well enough alone, he would have stepped down and retired long since.
And thus the question arises: would whoever replaced him be equally benevolent and wise?
—
@Roman-wannabibi-Shukhevich, the valor stealing, banderite nazi; the boastfully self-proclaimed pedophile and zoophile; the idolizer and threatener of rape and torture; and the idolator who previously claimed to worship some false god called “Perun”, but now has decided to pretend – very unconvincingly – to be both a Arabic muslim woman and her son, yet who does not even know that “habibi” is in the masculine form…
Gr8 b8 m8 I r8 8/8
A “man”, albeit in terms of chromosomes only, pretending to be a woman, claims that I am a woman pretending to be a man… How droll.
It really is nuña business whether I am a man or a woman, but I can’t resist pointing out that not even Solipsistic Dung-fly was delusional enough to pretend knowing that I am any more a woman than you are… U+1F60F
Keep doubling down on your new child rapist-worshiping goat-fucker who doesn’t know Arabic shtick, though. It’s no more convincing than your old “Perun”-worshiping “veteran” from Luhansk who doesn’t know Russian shtick, but it is considerably more amusing to watch.
Mr. Whitfield, “agree with his statement…”
Even if Nuna didn’t literally mean baby girl, I don’t see how you or anyone can possibly mistake her for a man, a boy, or for that matter even a grown woman.
Every poisonous word that drips from her mouth or fingers is extremely shrill, childish, bratty, immature, and a few other words that unlike her I would not use. Unlike baby girl Nuna, I was properly disclipined as a child, and continue to be disciplined by my husband as an adult. Obscene language leads to being beaten, deprived of meals, etc.
Unfortunately for baby girl Nuna, she quite obviously was raised by parents who neglected their duties to discipline her, so the unfortunate mentally ill child or immature young woman acts out constantly and ever more extremely in ever increasingly desperate search for the parental tough love, or perhaps attention of any kind, that she never has had. Or, perhaps she was beaten regardless of behaviour all the time and never shown kindness or forgiveness, which is equally bad.
As further result of this, no man wants to have her. To retrain a young woman who was never properly raised is harder than raising a child since she has developed these patterns of behaviour for years. The poor man would have to have the patience to beat her over and over until she can’t move, especially her mouth or fingers, which would make her less useful as a wife until she would recover, then be good to her, and then do it again and again. Otherwise, she would shrilly nag and henpeck him to insanity, suicide, murder, or at least divorce in short order.
But in all likelihood she is not wealthy or good looking or from a prominent family – in short, she has no redeeming quality to make any man take on such a sisyphean task. So, she either remains a virgin or is used like street trash for meaningless sex and quickly discarded as soon as it is over each and every time. And she only gets more and more bitter, shrill, and intolerable as time goes on.
She acts tough to overcompensate, but no doubt is deathly scared – not just to submit to a husband as a woman should, not just to submit to Allah as we should all, but even of a broom and dustpan (she must imagine the dust and clumps of dirt will attack her), a washtub for dirty clothes and linens (she worries they will jump out of the tub, bind her hands and feet, and choke her neck), or a knife to chop food with lest she chop herself. Well, that last one might have some basis.
This attitude is so unmistakable and obvious in her posts, I’m truly surprised anyone could possibly miss it.
There were, incidentally, not insignificant numbers of those pushing for term limits for president to be removed, as they have been now for governors, but Putin did not support that idea.
The 2020 amendments actually tightened term limits going forward from two consecutive terms to two terms, period. They did exclude prior terms from the count, so President Putin can serve from 2012 to 2030 and likely to 2036 as President. Medvedev also remains eligible for two more terms. Since no one else has any prior terms who is still alive, unless there are future amendments, Presidents going forward can only serve two six year terms regardless of whether they are consecutive.
The 2008 amendment did increase the term from 4 years to 6. Thus Putin was also acting President starting in 1999 and elected President 2000-2008.
Belarus abolished presidential term limits in 2004. Lukashenko is now in lucky term #7 if I’m not mistaken. Does anyone here seriously have a problem with how Belarus is governed? I should hope not!
The Russian constitution was amended to extend term limits for the President. If anyone think that’s a problem for Russia, why? Why wouldn’t the same work out well for the USA?
I don’t particularly know or care about the US legal specifics, or about their current President Trump per se. But on the general topic of term limits, aren’t elections (at least when conducted fairly) the best term limits? It seems term limits can only remove a politician who is popular, and thus likely doing a relatively good job.
I’ve not seen term limits prevent dictatorship. Dictators either seize power through a coup, or else come to power through elections and then do away with them or make a mockery of pretending to hold them. How do term limits prevent any of this?
Hi Curious, I agree with his statement: “It has always been a sacred American tradition not to serve more than two presidential terms, in honor of George Washington.” That is what resonated with me. The other comments I have not considered in detail.
@ George Whitfield
About everything in the comment, or which parts?
Third term, or no third term, US Presidents today have WAY too much power. Checks and balances have been weakened to the point that Trump is attempting to ignore them altogether.
We need to give serious consideration to abolishing the sole Presidency altogether, and adopting a Swiss style joint Presidency. They elect a seven member executive council, who rotate the largely ceremonial title of President among themselves once each year.
I agree with you, Nuna.
MAGAts trolling those with TDS is funny and all, but the constitution is (supposed to be) serious business.
Trump is already in his de jure third elected term, the second having been stolen and denied him. And giving him a de jure fourth would not be good optics (even if that is all you care about).
Franklin Roosevelt is one of the three worst presidents the US ever had (the other two being Andrew Jackson and Woodrow Wilson – Barack Obama being ineligible and Joe Biden unelected, and neither thus having been US presidents): a man on par with his contemporaries Hitler and Stalin, but fortunately slightly
more weighed down due to opposing senators, congressmen and governors. (Even FDR managed to hold elections during wartime – take note Zelenskyites!)
It has always been a sacred American tradition not to serve more than two presidential terms, in honor of George Washington. And it took someone as evil as FDR to disrespect George Washington and break that tradition, necessitating its codification as the 22nd amendment. Is that really who you want Trump to go down in the history books next to?