You stated a falsehood, outright misinformation. I am attempting to let you understand why your incredibly short sided point of view is wrong.
In your world, with the words you have stated, all presidential candidates are immune to prosecution. That’s obviously incorrect, therefore you entire basis of objections is wrong.
No, I did not and you repeatedly demonstrated a complete lack of understanding on how democracy works.
Suggesting Biden should intervene in the electoral process is suggesting an action only seen in authoritarian states.
You have an incredibly flawed understanding of philosophy or how anything works here. Is this because you don’t live in a democracy and only understand how authoritarian states like China works?
If you think you have to let murderers free because of democracy, you don’t support democracy, you support murder.
An investigation ending in a jury trial is not, by any standard, despotic nor authoritarian.
However refusing to bring charges against someone in your same political class because they ran against you or might do so in the future absolutely is authoritarian and is the sign of an oligarchy wherein those with enough money are free from consequences.
Neither scotus nor the federal courts can bring charges, only oversee trials for said charges, or in the case of scotus, determine whether laws are constitutional and were followed during trial.*
Therefore the executive, as has always been it’s role would have to bring charges.
Obviously courts can bring contempt charges, but only during and after a trial.
You stated a falsehood, outright misinformation. I am attempting to let you understand why your incredibly short sided point of view is wrong.
In your world, with the words you have stated, all presidential candidates are immune to prosecution. That’s obviously incorrect, therefore you entire basis of objections is wrong.
No, I did not and you repeatedly demonstrated a complete lack of understanding on how democracy works.
Suggesting Biden should intervene in the electoral process is suggesting an action only seen in authoritarian states.
You have an incredibly flawed understanding of philosophy or how anything works here. Is this because you don’t live in a democracy and only understand how authoritarian states like China works?
If you think you have to let murderers free because of democracy, you don’t support democracy, you support murder.
An investigation ending in a jury trial is not, by any standard, despotic nor authoritarian.
However refusing to bring charges against someone in your same political class because they ran against you or might do so in the future absolutely is authoritarian and is the sign of an oligarchy wherein those with enough money are free from consequences.
If in 2020 Trump prevented Biden from running would you support that?
If Biden was convicted of a high crime, absolutely. That’s only be constitutional.
So if the courts who are the actual constitutional check said Biden could run you would support Trump stopping him?
The courts aren’t the check in the case we’re talking about, the jury is.
Im talking about SCOTUS and the federal courts. Those Courts are the check on the executive branch. The executive branch is not the check on itself.
Even if we were talking about a jury that would still ge part of the courts
Neither scotus nor the federal courts can bring charges, only oversee trials for said charges, or in the case of scotus, determine whether laws are constitutional and were followed during trial.*
Therefore the executive, as has always been it’s role would have to bring charges.