Trump's eligibility

Submitted ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩ by ⁨innermeerkat@jlai.lu⁩ to ⁨[deleted]⁩

I apologize for the many questions.

I’m still baffled by all the mess surrounding the US elections. Before blaming the people, I’m wondering how it is even possible that Trump could be eligible in the first place. How could the administration allow him to be represented after all the felonies, including those where he clearly sold his country by sharing top secret information with Putin? It seems there is evidence that he has been a puppet for decades. I mean, isn’t that the definition of a traitor? What were the secret services doing? Wasn’t the FBI created to combat the very thing Trump is? Where is all the anti-communist sentiment that the US has become accustomed to?

source

Comments

Sort:hotnew top

radix@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
He is over 35, a natural born citizen, and has lived in the US for 14 years. He was impeached, but not convicted. Accused of insurrection, but the wheels of justice turned too slowly.

That’s the extent of the legal requirements to be eligible to be President. The theory was that any other social disqualifications would be handled at the ballot box.

That theory is now proven to be incorrect, but fixing it takes a constitutional amendment.

source
- oce@jlai.lu ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
  
  The theory was that any other social disqualifications would be handled at the ballot box.
  
  That theory is now proven to be incorrect, but fixing it takes a constitutional amendment.
  
  That could be a slippery slope too. Imagine a constitutional amendment making someone ineligible because of a “social disqualification” such as sexual orientation.
  
  source
  - Flax_vert@feddit.uk ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
    I think Americans need to realise that Trump won by popular vote- anything to prevent this legally would be undemocratic. You’ll need to change social attitudes or maybe put up a better candidate/run a better campaign in opposition.
    
    source
    -> View More Comments
  - scarabic@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
    In what way would barring felons lead to barring gays? People use the words “slippery slope” to make their point, even though it’s literally the name of a logical fallacy. You have to show HOW one will lead to the next, not just say “a little might lead more!” That, exactly, is the fallacy. Textbook.
    
    source
    -> View More Comments
  - SkyeStarfall@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
    As if a queer president could get elected these days
    
    In the end worrying about this hypothetical is what made the situation actually life-threatening to queer people
    
    source
- Ziggurat@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
  Out of curiosity, can a judge strip someone from their election/vote right as part/alternative to a sentence ? It’s a relatively common sentence for French politicians found guilty of corruptions (Which save the cost of keeping them in prison and limit their ability to re-offend) but no idea whether it’s universal or unique
  
  source
FuglyDuck@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
he hasn’t been charged/convicted of any of the relevant felonies that would preclude service, and nobody is going to make an issue of it; simply because all three branches of government are now under christofascist control. any lawsuits will go to SCROTUS, where they’ll just rubber stamp a decision and cite some bullshit.

also the 14th gives enforcement to congress, which won’t do anything either.

source
- llamatron@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
  But why? Why are all these people so happy to protect such a despicable human being who will happily throw any of them under the bus and who has, and will again, sell out their country to anyone who says nice stuff to him and gives him money? It’s absolutely extraordinary.
  
  source
  - halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
    They have been setting the pieces to this eventuality for 60+ years.
    
    Trump just stumbled onto the very carefully set board, and started messing with it, and exposing the plans in the process. Being the narcissist he is, he is incapable of not using anything he wants, so it forced the Republican establishment’s hand. They had to bring him into since the Presidency is necessary to further the plan, and in turn he also became dangerous since he’s 100% the type of person to use that information to extort the outcome that helps him. I don’t think they really understood how bad an idea that was at the times and now they’re stuck.
    
    source
  - mortimer@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
    She wasn’t competent. That was the problem. It was going to be much of the same shit under Harris as it was under Biden. Both parties are two sides of the same coin controlled mainly by Zionist lobbyists. It’s an illusion of democracy. The US is fucked. Now it’ll be fucked faster. If I was a US citizen I don’t know how I would’ve voted. In all conscience I couldn’t vote for Harris because of her continued support of genocide in Gaza, but equally there’s no way Trump would get my vote either (because he’s an egotistical lunatic). I guess I’d go for a third party which is marginally a better option than not voting at all.
    
    source
    -> View More Comments
  - NaibofTabr@infosec.pub ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
    kompromat, comrade
    
    source
- TrickDacy@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
  The question I have is why are felony convictions not considered a disqualification for president but they disqualify everyone else from literally almost any job? I knew someone who got a conviction and was hired by chik fil a then later told whoops we missed that on your application sorry can’t hire you.
  
  source
  - VindictiveJudge@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
    So you can’t weaponize the courts against your political opponents.
    
    source
    -> View More Comments
  - remembergladio@lemmings.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
    Right? If the democrats wanted trump out they could have killed him.
    
    Presidents have immunity now.
    
    source
glitchdx@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
rules don’t matter if no one enforces them. republicans have been consolidating power for decades, partly by never holding their own accountable. dems are always held accountable, but usually for things that either don’t matter or are entirely false.

Trump isn’t held accountable because his supporters control every institution that can, and they want him to be king of america.

source
Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
Biden appointed a conservative Attorney General who refused to investigate Trump for two and a half years. Biden and his conservative AG (Merrick Garland) allowed Trump to get away with everything. So, here we are.

Neoliberals are conservatives. Always have been.

source
Battle_Masker@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
The Supreme Court has the power to say anything against it but 6 of the justices are down bad for it. And at least one of them are being paid specifically NOT to say anything about it

source
nooneescapesthelaw@mander.xyz ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
Trump won the popular vote, trying to suppress him from running is akin to suppressing democracy.

If we (or 51% of voters) want to be fucked in the ass, then there should be no law that prevents it. As a country we have just voted for continuous fucking ass rape for the next 4 years.

1000011954

source
- scarabic@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
  I don’t accept the argument that as long as 51% of people vote for something, it should be good to go. We have a constitution, you realize, and you need more than that to change it. Is the constitution suppressing democracy? You’re talking about a kindergartener’s view of “majority rule,” not American democracy. And thank goodness, because I heartily believe that 51% of people would vote for some ghoulish shit, like boiling immigrant children in oil. And there you’d be, shrugging and saying “ahem - 51%, people.”
  
  Go off and think it through a little better. I’ll be here when you get back.
  
  source
- DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
  Lincoln got 40% of the popular vote.
  
  source
small44@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
Bush crimes against humanity didn’t prevent him from being eligible to a second term

source
- richieadler@lemmy.myserv.one ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
  Because his voters didn’t consider the victims human in the first place.
  
  source
Flax_vert@feddit.uk ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
I don’t think it’s democratic to ban people with a criminal record from voting or running. If the people want to vote someone like that in, then who’s to stop them

source
- PunnyName@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
  The fact that Jan 6 wasn’t the tipping point still boggles the mind.
  
  source
  - Flax_vert@feddit.uk ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
    Americans are weird
    
    source
- babybus@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
  It also means that your opponent can’t stop you from running by prosecuting you like it happens in countries like Russia.
  
  source
  - Flax_vert@feddit.uk ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
    Yeah. I think an example also is the UK- It’s quite controversial, but Bobby Sands MP was elected from prison. Many people do see that as a good thing and a good exercise of democracy.
    
    source
nucleative@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
I think there are two answers to this. First, there is a long standing tradition in the US that the new guy doesn’t put the old guy in jail.

Look at so many other countries and so much of world history to see how that style of governing is problematic to the transfer of power from one regime to the next and why it causes its own set of problems.

The second, and arguably the most important, is that the American people as a whole can elect whoever the fuck they want to be president, no matter what any mid level beurocrat, judge, lawmaker or even current president or other official says about the issue, even if said person is in jail at the time.

The law and its punishments should still apply to all, including the president and former presidents, however.

source
EatATaco@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

I mean, isn’t that the definition of a traitor?

The definition of treason is very clear and very narrowly defined in the COTUS, and this does not meet the definition.

source
- innermeerkat@jlai.lu ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
  Article III, Section 3. The definition states:
  
  “Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.”
  
  Calling for civil war and aiding an authoritarian country such as Russia, which is well known for being a long-time enemy and wants nothing more than the fall and decadence of the US, raises the question: if what Trump is doing is not treason, according to the Constitution, then I don’t know what is.
  
  source
  - WhatsHerBucket@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
    Laws are only for people without money.
    
    source
  - EatATaco@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
    You really can’t think of anything more obviously a case of treason than what you believe trump has done?
    
    The guy is loyal only to himself, no doubt. But, I don’t even see how it would fit this definition at all, and I can easily come up with many things more obviously a violation. Also keep in mind that Russia is not an enemy; we are not at war with them. They are an adversary.
    
    source
jaggedrobotpubes@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
It’s simply a nazi infestation.

And then this weird limp dickness in the Democrats that compromising and doing nothing is the cure for cancer.

Vast numbers of people maliciously paused their duties in a thousand ways to let him through. They installed him, is how he got eligible. Because you’re absolutely right, he was and still is ineligible in a thousand ways.

And then the cockroaches came out of the walls.

source
RobotToaster@mander.xyz ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
Eugene Debs ran for president while in federal prison for sedition, so it’s not really unprecedented.

source
- Flax_vert@feddit.uk ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
  Bobby Sands became a British MP from Prison
  
  source
bear@lemmynsfw.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
We have laws and legal procedures for due process and we presume innocence until proven guilty.

source
bender223@lemmy.today ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
Simple, if you’re a white man with money, you can do whatever you want and get away with it.

🤷‍♂️

source