It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Sookiechacha
originally posted by: underpass61
a reply to: Connector
There would be no point in choosing a VP if he was unable to fulfill his duties as president. Don't be stupid
At least you'd know that your VP wasn't looking for an opportunity to knife you in the back and/or 25th Amendment your ass just so they'd could be president. It would go to Speaker of House, I think.
I don't think Johnson even had a VP after Kennedy was assassinated.
originally posted by: wAnchorofCarp
originally posted by: Sookiechacha
originally posted by: underpass61
a reply to: Connector
There would be no point in choosing a VP if he was unable to fulfill his duties as president. Don't be stupid
At least you'd know that your VP wasn't looking for an opportunity to knife you in the back and/or 25th Amendment your ass just so they'd could be president. It would go to Speaker of House, I think.
I don't think Johnson even had a VP after Kennedy was assassinated.
Ummm...didn't that literally just happen?
originally posted by: wAnchorofCarp
originally posted by: Sookiechacha
originally posted by: underpass61
a reply to: Connector
There would be no point in choosing a VP if he was unable to fulfill his duties as president. Don't be stupid
At least you'd know that your VP wasn't looking for an opportunity to knife you in the back and/or 25th Amendment your ass just so they'd could be president. It would go to Speaker of House, I think.
I don't think Johnson even had a VP after Kennedy was assassinated.
Ummm...didn't that literally just happen?
originally posted by: wAnchorofCarp
a reply to: Connector
Your point was that Kamala and the D's were forcing Joe to not run or face the 25th?
I must have missed it........
originally posted by: Connector
originally posted by: wAnchorofCarp
a reply to: Connector
Your point was that Kamala and the D's were forcing Joe to not run or face the 25th?
I must have missed it........
You really are that obtuse.
originally posted by: wAnchorofCarp
originally posted by: Connector
originally posted by: wAnchorofCarp
a reply to: Connector
Your point was that Kamala and the D's were forcing Joe to not run or face the 25th?
I must have missed it........
You really are that obtuse.
Yes, I do have that capacity.
But not when it comes to succession of the executive branch and if a VP needs to be a US citizen....
originally posted by: wAnchorofCarp
a reply to: Sookiechacha
No.
originally posted by: wAnchorofCarp
a reply to: Connector
It is not.
The point that I assumed you were competent enough to gather is that a POTUS needs to be a US born citizen.
So....if something should happen to the POTUS, the non US born VP would not be able to fulfill the role.
originally posted by: wAnchorofCarp
a reply to: Connector
Hope you have better luck tomorrow.
originally posted by: Connector
originally posted by: wAnchorofCarp
originally posted by: Connector
originally posted by: wAnchorofCarp
a reply to: Connector
Your point was that Kamala and the D's were forcing Joe to not run or face the 25th?
I must have missed it........
You really are that obtuse.
Yes, I do have that capacity.
But not when it comes to succession of the executive branch and if a VP needs to be a US citizen....
Then you can provide me, where in the constitution it is written, for the requirements to be VP?
No $hit, I want to be learn.
Although the U.S. Constitution does not spell out specific qualifications to be Vice President of the United States, most Constitutional experts believe that the Vice President must meet the same requirements as those to become President: 35 years of age, a natural-born US citizen and a resident of the United States for at least 14 years. Since all Vice Presidents to date have met these requirements, there has never been a challenge to this.