• 3 Posts
  • 267 Comments
Joined 10 months ago
cake
Cake day: January 22nd, 2024

help-circle









  • You’re misunderstanding me. It doesn’t blow my mind that a Democrat should go to jail if they break the law, of course they should.

    Great.

    I wholeheartedly agree that everyone should be subject to the rule of law and that both republicans and democrats should be tried for their crimes.

    Yeah. This.

    A few months ago I would have agreed with you that Trump ought to be locked up.

    Aw, shoot. (Not literally, of course.) And we were getting along so well.

    If he had been locked up 18 months ago, that would have been fantastic.

    Hooray!

    However, after much thought I’ve come to the conclusion that the only way forward is for him to be beaten in the election.

    Dangit. He should still be locked up. Republicans will be outraged. Outraged, I tell you, every time Republican felons go to jail for crimes they did commit, but that doesn’t mean it shouldn’t happen.


  • I keep answering the question again and again and it keeps blowing your mind and you think I mustn’t mean it.

    I want the courts to decide who is guilty and apply the law. No matter who. I don’t think ex presidents should be above the law, and very very very much neither did the founding fathers.

    What I don’t want the courts to do is ignore the law just because someone is a Republican, and you think I can’t possibly mean it and that there’s a massive gotcha for me because there’s a theoretical possibility that a Democrat candidate would go to jail, but the crazy thing is that I really do think that that’s how the law should work.

    It’s called the rule of law, and republicans think it means they can put people they don’t like in jail, but actually it just means following the rules irrespective of who the person is.

    I don’t know why you think someone should escape punishment just because they might be elected, particularly if they’re guilty of crimes that are supposed preclude them from being president.


  • If the electorate is stupid enough to elect an insurrectionist and serial bankruptee then public institutions including courts must allow them to do so. That’s a fundamental inescapable component of democracy.

    No, the constitution says he’s ineligible to be president because he’s an insurrectionist. Just the same as Arnold Schwarzenegger is ineligible to be president because he wasn’t born in the USA. It’s not election interference to keep Trump off the ballot paper any more than it is to keep Arnie off the ballot paper, and it doesn’t matter how many people want Arnie or Trump as president, those are the rules of the election. He ought not to be on the ballot paper and the courts should have ruled on this years ago. “BuT DemOCracy” doesn’t overrule the constitution. If you want a different constitution, you need to get it through the process of passing an amendment, but as it stands, he’s ineligible.