• clutchmatic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Amazing that the founding fathers didn’t contemplate the possibility of a felon under active lawsuits becoming speaker

    • nxdefiant@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      30
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      In defense of the founding fathers, they were all traitors to the crown and enemies of the state when they wrote that.

    • Varixable@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      They probably didn’t contemplate having an active child Diddler be speaker from 1987-2007 either, but Republicans sure love their historic firsts.

    • merc
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      The founding fathers were amazingly shit at game theory.

      • hglman@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Considering no one would formalize game theory for 150 years it’s not particularly surprising.

        • merc
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          You don’t need to necessarily formalize game theory to consider things like: hey, we just gave the president the authority to pardon. Couldn’t they abuse that? What if they pardon someone who was doing something illegal that they ordered? What if they commit a crime and pardon themselves?

          I mean, that’s the most obvious one that you don’t really need formal game theory to know could be a problem. Then there are all the other problems. Checks and balances are good, but when a powerful faction uses its power to put loyalists into the thing that’s supposed to balance them, the system seems to unravel.

    • frezik@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      They didn’t even contemplate the House Speaker being in the Presidential line of succession. Which is the reason they want to put Trump there. Not that it would work; they’d have to remove both the President and Vice President at the same time, and the Senate ain’t going to do that.

      • clutchmatic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        An angry mob with strong will to unalive certain people before the #3 in the line of succession would be a major concern