Except it wouldn’t be, since he was not a political opponent after jan 6th. He also absolutely had a role, the idea the head of the executive branch doesn’t control the doj is and always has been an open lie. The existence of pot shops in legal states is the most obvious proof of that.
The elected leader in a democratic republic like the USA cannot stop candidates from running without becoming a dictator. This is intro level poli sci stuff.
There is a difference between permitting states to decriminalize cannabis and electoral interference.
They actually can, it’s called doing their job and charging the individual with high crimes against the US that they’ve committed. There’s no difference between a presidential candidate and a citizen.
No it isn’t. It is inappropriate for any candidate to utilize their office to prevent opposition. That is how authoritarian societies work not democratic republics. You should have been taught this in secondary/high school (ages 14-18 if you aren’t American).
How would you react if Trump had banned Bernie Sanders ir Biden from running in 2020 over perceived charges? Do you not see how easily misused that power would be?
The DOJ lead by the USAG should handle the prosecution without input from POTUS. That is what happened.
What you are suggesting is the kind of clownish fantasy that would get you laughed out of any courtroom. That’s how failed democracies work. That is not how systems should work. You are literally advocating corruption.
The norms you’re citing are all perfectly correct - but no democracy can survive if these norms are able to protect literal traitors. The fact that a coup was attempted should have resulted in swift and frightfully intense penalties for all involved. Unhung traitors poison republics.
Advocating for suspected criminals to face charges and go to trial in a timely manner is authoritarian.
Well that’s just absolutely ridiculous. I sincerely hope you understand this is why Trump won and why the US won’t exist by the end of the decade. Please don’t fuck up something so simple in your next country.
When the person being tried is a current and former opponent in an election yes it us and anyone suggesting otherwise needs remedial education in the difference between societies with rule of law and those without.
So in order to commit any crime, including murder, which Trump can be charged with as he committed a felony where individuals died, you just need to run for office.
Weird, I’ve heard this line of reasoning on fox news before.
Biden had no role in that investigation as it would be extremely inappropriate for him to do so.
Except it wouldn’t be, since he was not a political opponent after jan 6th. He also absolutely had a role, the idea the head of the executive branch doesn’t control the doj is and always has been an open lie. The existence of pot shops in legal states is the most obvious proof of that.
The elected leader in a democratic republic like the USA cannot stop candidates from running without becoming a dictator. This is intro level poli sci stuff.
There is a difference between permitting states to decriminalize cannabis and electoral interference.
They actually can, it’s called doing their job and charging the individual with high crimes against the US that they’ve committed. There’s no difference between a presidential candidate and a citizen.
No it isn’t. It is inappropriate for any candidate to utilize their office to prevent opposition. That is how authoritarian societies work not democratic republics. You should have been taught this in secondary/high school (ages 14-18 if you aren’t American).
How would you react if Trump had banned Bernie Sanders ir Biden from running in 2020 over perceived charges? Do you not see how easily misused that power would be?
The DOJ lead by the USAG should handle the prosecution without input from POTUS. That is what happened.
What you are suggesting is the kind of clownish fantasy that would get you laughed out of any courtroom. That’s how failed democracies work. That is not how systems should work. You are literally advocating corruption.
The norms you’re citing are all perfectly correct - but no democracy can survive if these norms are able to protect literal traitors. The fact that a coup was attempted should have resulted in swift and frightfully intense penalties for all involved. Unhung traitors poison republics.
Yes, and the list of people who dropped the ball on that prosecution does not and cannot include his political opponent.
Advocating for suspected criminals to face charges and go to trial in a timely manner is authoritarian.
Well that’s just absolutely ridiculous. I sincerely hope you understand this is why Trump won and why the US won’t exist by the end of the decade. Please don’t fuck up something so simple in your next country.
When the person being tried is a current and former opponent in an election yes it us and anyone suggesting otherwise needs remedial education in the difference between societies with rule of law and those without.
You’re in a tech job, aren’t you?
So in order to commit any crime, including murder, which Trump can be charged with as he committed a felony where individuals died, you just need to run for office.
Weird, I’ve heard this line of reasoning on fox news before.
You never answered how the tech job is working out.
That’s not what Im saying at all and I have no idea why you would conclude that given how many times I have clearly stated the issue to you.