• jordanlund@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Counter offer: Pass a law barring people facing felony charges from running for President.

    If it would keep you from owning a gun:

    ATF form 4473, line 21c and d:

    "c. Are you under indictment or information in any court for a felony, or any other crime for which the judge could imprison you for more than one year, or are you a current member of the military who has been charged with violation(s) of the Uniform Code of Military Justice and whose charge(s) have been referred to a general court-martial?

    d. Have you ever been convicted in any court, including a military court, of a felony, or any other crime for which the judge could have imprisoned you for more than one year, even if you received a shorter sentence including probation?"

    Why should you be allowed the button? 🤔

    • Fedizen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      I think we just need something like “can you legally buy a gun? Then you can run for president”

    • ignirtoq@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Super easy for those in power to keep their rivals from being able to run for office. Currently the president and afraid you’ll be unseated by the opposing party’s candidate? Just start an investigation on them! Boom, no more rivals.

      • jordanlund@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Assuming a corrupt system, yes. But in our current system? Not so much. Trump deserves each of his felony indictments and if it would keep him from buying a gun, which it does, it should block him from being Commander in Chief.

        • lemmefixdat4u@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          The problem is not that Trump is under felony indictment. It’s not that he’s a liar, a cheater, a misogynist, narcissist, and elitist. It’s that, knowing this, a lot of people STILL support him for our nation’s top office. That’s how screwed up our populace has become. That’s the problem.

        • nahuse@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          I think it’s important to consider just how… ickily inviolable most (if not all) of the right wing feels about the second amendment. I don’t think this line of logic would carry much weight with that crowd.

          But I agree with what you’re saying. We need much more stringent controls on who is eligible for office.

        • ignirtoq@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          I don’t think our current system is nearly as robust as you think. Trump’s first term laid that bare.

          So many laws dictating what the president can and can’t do don’t have any actual repercussions for breaking them written in them because it was assumed impeachment would be sufficient. Trump showed that with our current system that means if you can’t guarantee you’ll have 67 votes in the Senate, then those laws may as well not exist. And every week the Supreme Court shows how much “settled case law” isn’t anymore, so with a corrupt high court in his league, even the laws that do have teeth may be subverted.

          We absolutely need to make changes to shore up the system and plug the gaps, but we have to do so with care that we don’t end up handing new, more powerful weapons to the very bad actors we’re trying to protect against.

      • AbsentBird@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Wouldn’t it take more than an investigation? A grand jury would need to sign off on the indictments.

        • ignirtoq@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          Totally agree. These systems are critically important for our society. They need to be considered with care, and we need to be mindful of the complexities that come with any changes to them.

          • Billiam@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            The real solution is you need a populace that is civically engaged and capable of enough critical thought to not fall for the right-wing fearmongering propaganda Fox, OAN, Newsmax, Murdoch, et al. spew out.

            • localme@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 month ago

              Bingo. A properly funded and functional public education system, that teaches real critical thinking and let’s include media literacy while we’re at it.

              • Nycto@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 month ago

                Not saying that they were right, because they were wrong, but this was actually a presented logical reason why voting was restricted to male landowners at one point. They were the only part of the population that received a formal education. Regardless of motivation this became a method of oppression.

                To be clear, I agree that public education is a key to a strong democracy, as is removing restrictions on voting.

      • space@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        But how is it fair for so many of his trials and investigations to drag on for 4 years, especially when the accusations are this serious?

  • suction@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Ok but Biden still isn’t in Gaza to act as human shield which means I’m gonna vote for Trump, twice!

  • werefreeatlast@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Can they also pass a law forcing both Stormy Daniels and Hilary to suck him dry?

    Ofcourse once that written in the books, all we gotta do is go find a vampire and get him to bite Hilary and Stormy. Then my master evil plan would probably work.

    But whatever, sure, another trial? Yeah I’m sure we’ll get him this time! What did he do now? Run a red light? That’s 20 shots to the head if you’re a poor Mexican or black. But not previous Trump. He gets yet another trial. That’s what rich assholes get.

    • pyre@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      fascists gonna fash. while you’re right about racial double standards, they go beyond that for the god emperor.

      they were just crying about an fbi raid supposedly being an assassination attempt, after his lawyers literally arguing that a president should be able to assassinate their opposition without repercussions.

      as long as the president is orange, i guess.

  • mojo_raisin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    He’ll be dead after a second term lol. It’s a (evil) miracle he’s made it this far on a cocaine and fast food diet.

  • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    Yeah. Best they can do is… a few bullshit gestures that will go no where.

    unless they win.

  • DMBFFF@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    GOP legislators better do what Trump wants if they know what’s good for them.

    Come on, neo-cons, kneel down and kiss his ring.

  • cultsuperstar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    So it sounds like they’re wording this that it would cover ‘former presidents’ so in theory Biden would also be protected. The GOP wouldn’t be able to go after him for their made up charges. Are they willing to protect Trump and not go after Biden? Probably, if it ensures Trump will be president again.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Thank you. And shame on the people who downvoted you. They’ve clearly never seen a disabled person bullied severely with that word.

        • Gnome Kat@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          Lemmy is going downhill pretty fast… just today there was a transphobic meme that got hundreds of upvotes before getting removed (at least i cant see it anymore from blahaj). Feels like crap like this is getting more and more common every day.

          • OutlierBlue@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            There will always be a certain number of people who are just shitty, bigoted people. Lemmy started out with a very niche community that tended to attract a more progressive type. As it becomes more popular and mainstream we’ll see the rest of the general population join and start commenting.

            There’s not much you can do but report inappropriate comments and to counter them when possible.

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            What I hate is when people vociferously argue for their right to offend disabled people as if I’m forcing them to stop and not telling them that they’re doing something that I think they should feel shame over and stop doing.

            And I heard those same arguments about ‘fag’ 20 years ago.