ADVERTISEMENT

House Speaker Mike Johnson says Trump isn’t ‘expected’ to uphold the Constitution he’d swear to defend

cigaretteman

HB King
May 29, 2001
80,532
64,590
113
What a POS:

If you thought the job of a U.S. president was to at least have a passing familiarity with the Constitution they swear to defend, well, you clearly didn’t get the memo from the Trump-Johnson School of Leadership .


Over the weekend, President Donald Trump casually shrugged off the idea that he might be obligated to uphold the very document that defines our nation, because, as he put it, “I’m not a lawyer.” And then, in what can only be described as a masterclass in dodging accountability, House Speaker Mike Johnson—who is a constitutional lawyer, by the way—leapt to Trump’s defense with a shrug of his own and a whole lot of “I don’t think”s.


Trump, while speaking with NBC’s Kristen Welker on Meet the Press, was asked whether he believes in upholding the Constitution when it comes to due process for migrants. Seems like a pretty straightforward question, right? Not for Trump. His response? A resounding “I don’t know,” followed by a vague deferral to his “brilliant lawyers.” Brilliant lawyers whose job, apparently, is to serve as human shields whenever Trump doesn’t feel like answering a question .


When Speaker Johnson was later asked about this glaring moment of constitutional indifference, he basically said, “Meh, no big deal.” According to Johnson, the President of the United States isn’t “expected” to be an expert on the Constituion. The deepest irony in this constitutional comedy of errors is that both Trump and Johnson have routinely positioned themselves as the last defenders of the Constitution against liberal overreach.

They’ve wrapped themselves in constitutional reverence when it suits their purposes , only to plead constitutional ignorance when basic rights for vulnerable populations come into question. Johnson concluded his hallway constitutional seminar with the assurance that Trump would uphold the Constitution “as he’s demonstrated earlier.” Which earlier demonstrations might those be? His careful respect for congressional oversight? His peaceful acceptance of election results as outlined in the Constitution?

 
According to Johnson, the President of the United States isn’t “expected” to be an expert on the Constituion.

Who can spot the difference?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hans81
According to Johnson, the President of the United States isn’t “expected” to be an expert on the Constituion.

Who can spot the difference?

Granted the president doesn't have to be an EXPERT but the president does have to uphold the constitution. . . it's in the freaking oath of office. The current POTUS said he wasn't sure if he was suppose to uphold the constitution or not.

F*** man I took an oath to uphold the constitution just to become a public notary. Not sure what powers a public notary has to uphold the constitution but I took the oath anyways.

Any governmental official has a duty to uphold the constitution. The higher the official the greater the duty.
 
Imagine my shock to see that you're incapable of understanding what was actually said here.
 
What a POS:

If you thought the job of a U.S. president was to at least have a passing familiarity with the Constitution they swear to defend, well, you clearly didn’t get the memo from the Trump-Johnson School of Leadership .


Over the weekend, President Donald Trump casually shrugged off the idea that he might be obligated to uphold the very document that defines our nation, because, as he put it, “I’m not a lawyer.” And then, in what can only be described as a masterclass in dodging accountability, House Speaker Mike Johnson—who is a constitutional lawyer, by the way—leapt to Trump’s defense with a shrug of his own and a whole lot of “I don’t think”s.


Trump, while speaking with NBC’s Kristen Welker on Meet the Press, was asked whether he believes in upholding the Constitution when it comes to due process for migrants. Seems like a pretty straightforward question, right? Not for Trump. His response? A resounding “I don’t know,” followed by a vague deferral to his “brilliant lawyers.” Brilliant lawyers whose job, apparently, is to serve as human shields whenever Trump doesn’t feel like answering a question .


When Speaker Johnson was later asked about this glaring moment of constitutional indifference, he basically said, “Meh, no big deal.” According to Johnson, the President of the United States isn’t “expected” to be an expert on the Constituion. The deepest irony in this constitutional comedy of errors is that both Trump and Johnson have routinely positioned themselves as the last defenders of the Constitution against liberal overreach.

They’ve wrapped themselves in constitutional reverence when it suits their purposes , only to plead constitutional ignorance when basic rights for vulnerable populations come into question. Johnson concluded his hallway constitutional seminar with the assurance that Trump would uphold the Constitution “as he’s demonstrated earlier.” Which earlier demonstrations might those be? His careful respect for congressional oversight? His peaceful acceptance of election results as outlined in the Constitution?

 
Last edited:
We have an entire thread about Trump saying he didn't know if he would uphold the constitution. Every news site carried this story. It's not debatable he said it. And Johnson just excused this bullshit.

Not sure what point you think you're making with your stupid post? But that point sucks.
 
We have an entire thread about Trump saying he didn't know if he would uphold the constitution. Every news site carried this story. It's not debatable he said it. And Johnson just excused this bullshit.

Not sure what point you think you're making with your stupid post? But that point sucks.
The point is the headline doesn’t match Johnson’s statement and newsbreak is an unreliable news source.
 
The point is the headline doesn’t match Johnson’s statement and newsbreak is an unreliable news source.
Trump: "I don't know about upholding the Constitution."

Johnson: "Well he's no legal expert. So he can't be expected to know that it's his job to uphold the Constitution"

I agree that Newsweek isn't great but every news outlet covered this story. And Johnson just excused it. So your Newsweek post isn't applicable.
 
Imagine my shock to see that you're incapable of understanding what was actually said here.
Yes, of course. What was said is Trump is a fat ass, Tangerine Twat who is a total ****ing idiot and can’t possibly be expected to have the slightest clue about the document he swore an oath to uphold and therefore has plausible deniability for every Constitutional failure or violation on his part, so why are all the fuddy duddy uppitys questioning anything as it relates to Trump and the US Constitution? Did they not get the memo that Trump shits bricks of gold each morning and can do no wrong?

Yes, we understand Mikey Johnson loud and clear.
 
The point is don’t use crap “news” sources.
I know what your point is. I reaffirmed it’s a garbage one.

This story is not a back-page, only on a liberal rag, obscure nothingburger. It clearly speaks to extreme hypocrisy and the continual intellectually dishonest dismissal of something that is obvious to everyone who isn’t full of shit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hawky42
The point is don’t use crap “news” sources.
Again. Newsweek sucks. But other sites reported this exact thing.

The point is that both Trump and Johnson need to go. Upholding the Constitution is the most important job of the president. Saying you won't disqualifies you from the job. And excusing it disqualifies you from being Speaker.
 
Again. Newsweek sucks. But other sites reported this exact thing.

The point is that both Trump and Johnson need to go. Upholding the Constitution is the most important job of the president. Saying you won't disqualifies you from the job. And excusing it disqualifies you from being Speaker.
It’s newsbreak fwiw
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hawky42
Both him and the orange shitstain should be removed. This isn't even debatable.
Yep, there is a reason Potus hires a bunch of white house and admin lawyers so that they can tell him how the constitution works. Mike Johnson is a turd, says he is so religious but he wants to break all the rules and he lies all the time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: franklinman
What a POS:

If you thought the job of a U.S. president was to at least have a passing familiarity with the Constitution they swear to defend, well, you clearly didn’t get the memo from the Trump-Johnson School of Leadership .


Over the weekend, President Donald Trump casually shrugged off the idea that he might be obligated to uphold the very document that defines our nation, because, as he put it, “I’m not a lawyer.” And then, in what can only be described as a masterclass in dodging accountability, House Speaker Mike Johnson—who is a constitutional lawyer, by the way—leapt to Trump’s defense with a shrug of his own and a whole lot of “I don’t think”s.


Trump, while speaking with NBC’s Kristen Welker on Meet the Press, was asked whether he believes in upholding the Constitution when it comes to due process for migrants. Seems like a pretty straightforward question, right? Not for Trump. His response? A resounding “I don’t know,” followed by a vague deferral to his “brilliant lawyers.” Brilliant lawyers whose job, apparently, is to serve as human shields whenever Trump doesn’t feel like answering a question .


When Speaker Johnson was later asked about this glaring moment of constitutional indifference, he basically said, “Meh, no big deal.” According to Johnson, the President of the United States isn’t “expected” to be an expert on the Constituion. The deepest irony in this constitutional comedy of errors is that both Trump and Johnson have routinely positioned themselves as the last defenders of the Constitution against liberal overreach.

They’ve wrapped themselves in constitutional reverence when it suits their purposes , only to plead constitutional ignorance when basic rights for vulnerable populations come into question. Johnson concluded his hallway constitutional seminar with the assurance that Trump would uphold the Constitution “as he’s demonstrated earlier.” Which earlier demonstrations might those be? His careful respect for congressional oversight? His peaceful acceptance of election results as outlined in the Constitution?

They won’t give up conservatism. They will give up democracy.
 
The point is the headline doesn’t match Johnson’s statement and newsbreak is an unreliable news source.
fun and games pool fail GIF
 
Yes, of course. What was said is Trump is a fat ass, Tangerine Twat who is a total ****ing idiot and can’t possibly be expected to have the slightest clue about the document he swore an oath to uphold and therefore has plausible deniability for every Constitutional failure or violation on his part, so why are all the fuddy duddy uppitys questioning anything as it relates to Trump and the US Constitution? Did they not get the memo that Trump shits bricks of gold each morning and can do no wrong?

Yes, we understand Mikey Johnson loud and clear.
Tl;dr
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hawky42
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT