By John Q. Hosedrinker 
During a White House Hanukkah reception, Donald Trump claimed that Israeli-American donor Miriam Adelson offered him $250 million to run for an unconstitutional third term in 2028. This announcement came after Adelson, who was married to billionaire Sheldon Adelson until his death in 2021, spoke with Alan Dershowitz about the possibility of Trump serving another term, prompting chants of “Four more years.” Trump has repeatedly teased the idea of running again, despite the 22nd Amendment, and has received support from the Adelsons, who have long encouraged pro-Israel policies. While Trump has given mixed signals about the possibility, the meeting sparked further speculation on his future political aspirations.
Read the original article here
Trump claims he has been offered $250M for run for unconstitutional third term in office: The White House crowd then broke into chants of “Four more years!” This whole situation is just… well, it’s a lot to unpack, isn’t it? It’s like a political pretzel, twisted into all sorts of unlikely shapes. The core of it seems to be Trump’s claim, delivered at a White House Hanukkah reception, that he’s been offered a quarter of a billion dollars by Miriam Adelson to run for a third term in 2028. And the crowd’s reaction? Chants of “Four more years!” It’s quite the spectacle, to say the least.
The very idea of a third term, of course, is a direct violation of the 22nd Amendment of the Constitution. So, right off the bat, we’re dealing with something fundamentally illegal. But beyond the legalities, there’s the sheer audacity of the claim. It’s almost as if he’s openly admitting to being offered a bribe, or at least suggesting such a thing. And the source of this alleged offer? A major political donor. This raises all sorts of questions about the influence of money in politics and whether this is a bribe for something else, disguised as support.
What’s even more striking is the context in which this claim was made. Trump has been dropping hints about a potential third term for a while now. He seems to enjoy teasing the possibility, knowing full well it would send shockwaves through the political landscape. The fact that he’s bringing this up so openly, in front of a crowd and in the midst of all other serious allegations, is something that’s raising eyebrows. It’s a blatant disregard for established norms, and it could be that he is so disconnected from reality.
Then there’s the crowd’s response. The “Four more years!” chants are a stark illustration of the unwavering support he still commands. The question is, how does this support translate into actual political power? And more importantly, can this momentum overcome the legal and logistical hurdles, not to mention concerns about his health, of a third presidential run? And the question as to why are Republicans so quick to follow what he does.
Beyond the immediate headlines, this entire episode also serves as a reminder of the fragility of democratic institutions. It highlights the influence of money in politics, the erosion of respect for constitutional principles, and the dangers of unchecked power. It has the distinct feel of a corrupt regime, where laws are more suggestions than mandates, and the pursuit of power outweighs all else. It’s a disturbing picture, and the longer it goes on the more things that come to light.
There are many thoughts to consider about the financial aspect. Is this actually an attempt to buy influence? Is it a way for Adelson to get some kind of return on her investment, through policy favors or other means? Is this about something bigger and more sinister than we know? The questions surrounding the money are as significant as the prospect of a third term itself. Some are asking, what Adelson gets in return, or if she has expectations to be met.
And let’s not forget the health factor. Some comments bring up concerns about Trump’s current health. Even if he could run, could he actually endure the rigors of another campaign, and then another four years in the White House? At his age, and with all we know, the prospect seems highly unlikely. These concerns underscore the broader issue of age and fitness for office, a topic that deserves serious consideration.
Some comments also suggest that this whole situation is a sign of a deeper crisis within the American political system. It might be the end of Democracy. It also might be a sign of how easily principles can be compromised in the pursuit of power. The more we reflect on it, the more we realize this is a problem much larger than one man. This situation seems to be revealing that.
In the end, this episode is a mixture of the absurd and the alarming. It’s a story of money, power, and the potential erosion of democratic norms. And it’s a reminder that even the most established rules can be challenged and that the future of the American political landscape is far from secure.