Readit NewsNaww, must be someone else’s fault.
Thank you!
Seniors and church-goers? Citation needed.
> He was just trying to convince them that this election matters most.
Sure. And he said he was going to "act as a dictator from day 1" (after saying repeatedly that "America could benefit from a dictatorship" and praising what other dictators "have been able to do for their country") for what reason? He said he'd terminate the constitution. The guy who just got indicted again for his BS on and around Jan 6.
Really, he just means "I'll fix the country so well, and there will be so much love, that people will be happy to keep voting us back in".
I don't think he'll succeed. I don't think he'll be elected. But if you think there's not a part of Trump that wants to be President For Life, and will if he thinks he can get away with it, then ... you haven't been listening to him.
Leaving aside the difference between "bringing charges" and "successfully bringing charges," there's a big gap between "easy" and "impossible." Nobody wants presidents to be criminally liable for the things they do in good faith. But this ruling makes good faith irrelevant; it doesn't matter why they do an official act, it's immune.
The fact is that a former president exerted pressure on government officials in a way that would halt a lawful election and coordinated to subvert its true results by presenting fake results. In determining whether that was an official act, we cannot reference his motivations according to the SC's ruling.
Allow the motivation for official acts to be taken into consideration for prosecution, and a lot of the problems go away.
How realistic is this though? Getting elected to Congress usually means having some other prior government experience, or your opponents attack you with "why would you give this person responsibility at a congressional level if they've never even worked in local politics?" Not to mention you need name recognition, a history in government that people can use to understand your values as acted, relationships in government to accomplish anything.
As I get older it seems that liberal democracy basically requires career bureaucrats to function. I'm very open to discussing other ways of organizing society, but if we're gonna do liberal democracy, seems this is the way.