Donald Trump claims he could be handed $250 million to pursue a virtually impossible third term, sparking controversy over constitutional boundaries and political ethics.
Story Overview
- Miriam Adelson reportedly offered Trump $250 million to run for a third term.
- The offer challenges the 22nd Amendment’s two-term limit for U.S. presidents.
- Adelson consulted attorney Alan Dershowitz about legal pathways for this run.
- The event raises serious questions about democratic norms and donor influence.
Trump’s Third Term Tease
At a White House Hanukkah reception on December 16, 2025, Donald Trump made a startling claim: Miriam Adelson, a billionaire Republican donor, had offered him $250 million to consider a third presidential run. This claim, which he made publicly to an audience that responded with chants of “four more years,” raises eyebrows not just for its audacity but for its implications. The U.S. Constitution’s 22nd Amendment limits presidents to two terms, making the notion of a third term constitutionally questionable.
Adelson, whose financial backing has been significant in Trump’s previous campaigns, allegedly consulted with attorney Alan Dershowitz to explore possible legal routes for Trump to take this unprecedented step. While the idea of circumventing the Constitution might seem far-fetched, the mere discussion of such an endeavor at an official White House event is both provocative and unsettling. It challenges not only the legal framework but also the ethical standards of American politics.
Trump claims he has been offered $250M for run for unconstitutional third term in office https://t.co/nygXBWD9Mz via @@Yahoo
Happy Americans where are you.?— Biagio Alfano (@BiagioAlfano11) December 17, 2025
Legal Loopholes and Political Strategy
The involvement of Alan Dershowitz, a prominent legal mind known for his pro-Israel advocacy, underscores the seriousness with which this issue is being entertained. Adelson reportedly told the audience that Dershowitz’s input suggested there could be a way forward, fueling speculation about potential legal arguments that might be used to justify a third term. Whether these discussions delve into the realm of non-consecutive terms or other constitutional interpretations, they point to a strategic maneuvering that relies heavily on legal acumen and financial clout.
For Trump, this public hint at a third term is not entirely new. He has previously alluded to the idea, often couching it in humor. However, the explicit mention of a $250 million incentive marks a new level of seriousness and raises questions about the integrity of democratic processes. It also highlights the influence of major donors in shaping political discourse and potentially bending the rules to suit their agendas.
The Implications for Democracy
The potential impact of this development cannot be overstated. On a short-term scale, it injects a new layer of complexity into political discourse, especially within the Republican Party. There’s a risk of deepening divisions between Trump loyalists who might entertain the idea of a third term and institutionalists who adhere to constitutional constraints. The broader concern, however, lies in the long-term implications for democratic norms. The mere suggestion of bypassing the 22nd Amendment could erode public confidence in the rule of law and set a precedent for future leaders to test other constitutional boundaries.
This situation also calls attention to the role of donor influence in American politics. The promise of $250 million, a staggering sum, underscores the power of money in political campaigns and raises ethical questions about how far donors might go to achieve their objectives. It forces a reconsideration of the balance between financial support and political accountability.
Cultural and International Repercussions
The cultural ramifications of this story are profound. It intertwines with pro-Israel politics given the Adelsons’ strong advocacy for Israel, potentially politicizing Jewish communal events. For the international community, such discussions could be perceived as a sign of democratic backsliding in the United States, impacting its standing as a global leader in democratic values.
Ultimately, the prospect of a third Trump term, buoyed by significant financial backing and legal strategizing, serves as a litmus test for America’s commitment to its constitutional principles. As the narrative unfolds, it is crucial to monitor not just the legal debates and political maneuvers but also the broader societal response to this challenge to democratic norms.
