This is the very essence of the difference that should exist between a President and a King. From Federalist 69:

The President of the United States would be liable to be impeached, tried, and, upon conviction of treason, bribery, or other high crimes or misdemeanors, removed from office; and would afterwards be liable to prosecution and punishment in the ordinary course of law. The person of the king of Great Britain is sacred and inviolable; there is no constitutional tribunal to which he is amenable; no punishment to which he can be subjected without involving the crisis of a national revolution. In this delicate and important circumstance of personal responsibility, the President of Confederated America would stand upon no better ground than a governor of New York, and upon worse ground than the governors of Maryland and Delaware.

The failure of the Republican party to support this kind of check on Presidential power is why we’re having this crisis now.

  • Blackmist@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    35 minutes ago

    “Well, when the president does it, that means that it is not illegal”

    – Richard Nixon, 1977.

    You’ve had 47 years to do something about this, to be able to hold your leaders accountable, and apparently it wasn’t worth the effort.

    I guess the upside is you won’t have to worry about all that wasteful election spending any more. 👍

    • Phoenicianpirate@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 minutes ago

      You don’t understand (or maybe you do but aren’t saying it). The Nixon scandal is what started the modern shitshow as we know it. Nixon’s supporters would be royally pissed that there was no specific media apparatus to fully support Nixon and his shit. They would go on to fight to repeal the fairness doctrine and to start Fox News and the modern propaganda media as we know it.

      BTW, a few years ago (during Trump’s first administration or a bit after) they even SAID ‘when the president does it , it isn’t not illegal’ or some slight word difference as a way of signalling their ultimate victory in trying to do what they wanted to have happened during Nixon’s scandals.

    • Hobbes_Dent@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      19 minutes ago

      Oh, they’ll still allow that spending to show how many votes he gets next time. Like the other dictators do.

  • ERROR: Earth.exe has crashed@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    8 minutes ago

    I mean, the constitution never said the supreme court has the power of judivial review, the supreme court at the time just grabbed the power, and congress at the time just went along with it. The supreme court only held on to the power because of “norms and traditions”. Today’s congress could simply just pass a resolution declaring the supreme court has no such power, and all that 200+ years of “norms and traditions” is gone. And all the law enforcement, national guard, and military people would just be like “seems legit” and go along with everything trump decrees.

  • Jhex@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    3 hours ago

    Once again, to no-one’s surprise. Trump loudly claimed he would do this long ago

    Choose a felon as President, expect him to commit crimes… enjoy

    • djsoren19
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 minutes ago

      Too cold outside for Americans to organize en masse. Gotta wait for the spring and summer for them to seriously work together.

  • mRbLUE@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    6 hours ago

    Groundwork for a coup by the sounds of it. When the next election is supposed to happen I wonder if he’ll declare martial law due to some invented issue.

  • demizerone@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    44
    ·
    edit-2
    10 hours ago

    That fucking Lizard Peter Thiel fucking rebooted when asked about the popular support for Luigi. The mother fucker had not thought about what happens when we the people get tired of their shit and unite against them. They’ve spent so much time and money dividing us so they can take it all it never occurred that it might backfire.

    • b161
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      9 hours ago

      That blubbering little weasel. “Y-y-you have to find another way.” I think was the line he used. We tried other ways. Those who make peaceful change impossible make violent revolution inevitable. Luigi showed how to fight back with some effect.

      • C A B B A G E@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        6 hours ago

        Thiel, Yarvin etc., are all so convinced of their own superiority that any actual challenge to their world view/tactics is completely unexpected. They can only comprehend doing violence to people who won’t do anything about it. They get their rocks off over child murderers, and state sanctioned violence, but cry when the people they want to step on show and ounce of spine. It’s pathetic.

        • Phoenicianpirate@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 minutes ago

          There was a former employee of Elon Musk who said that when he stood up to Elon that one time and actually said that his ideas and style are terrible, he said that he never saw a man’s face turn so white so fast, that Musk became super pale (even compared to his normal ultra-pale complexion) and that Musk’s only response was to yell fuck you.

          He had no concept whatsoever of anyone, much less someone working for him, to dare question him in any way.

  • perestroika@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    edit-2
    9 hours ago

    I add the following as evidence of premeditation / conspiracy:

    https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2022/04/inside-the-new-right-where-peter-thiel-is-placing-his-biggest-bets

    “I think Trump is going to run again in 2024,” he [Vance] said. “I think that what Trump should do, if I was giving him one piece of advice: Fire every single midlevel bureaucrat, every civil servant in the administrative state, replace them with our people.”

    “And when the courts stop you,” he went on, “stand before the country, and say—” he quoted Andrew Jackson, giving a challenge to the entire constitutional order—“the chief justice has made his ruling. Now let him enforce it.”

    This is a description, essentially, of a coup.

    “We are in a late republican period,” Vance said later, evoking the common New Right view of America as Rome awaiting its Caesar. “If we’re going to push back against it, we’re going to have to get pretty wild, and pretty far out there, and go in directions that a lot of conservatives right now are uncomfortable with.”

    “Indeed,” Murphy said. “Among some of my circle, the phrase ‘extra-constitutional’ has come up quite a bit.”

    Historical note: as far as I understand, president Jackson ignored the Supreme Court in a case of Georgia taking Cherokee lands. Since the state also ignored, the court failed to enforce its ruling.

  • Jumi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    59
    ·
    13 hours ago

    Time to use those guns you’ve been hoarding. Wasn’t that the reason you’re even allowed to have them?

  • Furbag@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    12 hours ago

    If Thomas Crooks was two inches to the right all of this could have been prevented.

      • stopdropandprole@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 hours ago

        Crooks happened July 13. Vance was announced running mate July 15. No candidate = no running mate announced.

        Also, when the presidential candidate is removed from a race, it does not automatically fall to the their running mate. there is no 25th amendment for election campaigns 🤦

      • BigBenis@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        10 hours ago

        I don’t think so. He has the charisma of a flat tire and it was early enough that any sympathy wave would have lost its momentum by November.

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          10 hours ago

          Charisma is not relevant. Do you think Lyndon Johnson had charisma? Do you think that’s why he was elected in 1964? Because people liked him?

            • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              9 hours ago

              I admit I was not alive at the time, but I’m pretty sure, what with it being the 1960s, that was not the sort of thing the general public was aware of, so I doubt it.

              Also, like it or not, Vance was already elected to the Senate and had a bestselling book. Even though you (and I) do not understand it, some people think he has a magnetic personality. Just like they think about Trump, which I also do not understand.

                • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  7 hours ago

                  Journalists were not the general public. 99% of the country had never personally interacted with him and those things were not reported in the news. They’re after-the-fact anecdotes in books.

                  I’m also old enough to remember when the press had the collective attitude of “let America think that the president is a good person” regardless of who was in office.

    • rational_lib@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      13 hours ago

      Not yet. Trump saying something horrifying while it not being entirely clear he understands what he’s actually saying or how anything in government is supposed to work is what we call Monday around here.

      • Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        13 hours ago

        You don’t want the military intervening they might decide to run things in a manner efficient for the end user instead of the rich people!

        • rational_lib@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          20
          ·
          12 hours ago

          Historically, this is not usually the result of the military taking over a country. Usually the general who did the coup becomes the new rich person, thanks to all the political power.

          • Maiq@lemy.lol
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            edit-2
            11 hours ago

            Unless they are a person of integrity. Say for instance George Washington, Nicola wanted him to rule, he said nah bro!

            We just need the general who removes tyrant trump to be a man who believes in his oath to defend our nations constitution written by we the people, passed down for generations and defended by the blood of those who came before his tenure. I don’t doubt there is such honor still among those who serve. After all it is their oath to defend our construction from enemy’s both foreign and domestic. Our dictator and chief fits both.

            • Maggoty@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 hour ago

              Let me tell you the story of the best officers I ever followed into combat. These guys were super sharp, and they were literally rewriting the book while we were fighting. The first guy took money meant for reconstruction and gave it to his Iraqi mistress. The second guy left classified intelligence reports out while dating a journalist.

              These guys are human. Expecting super human restraint because of their oath is unrealistic.

              • Maiq@lemy.lol
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                30 minutes ago

                I get it, but all it takes is one general with integrity, im sure thats the same odds as finding one in general population. Is it a long shot, maybe. You can still get people to do the right thing for the wrong reasons. A national hero they would become after the dust settled. Not just a footnote in some dictators playbook. Ambition can be a powerful motivator. Even if they decided to take the rains, i doubt they would be doing a worse job than our current admin. Could be wrong though. Our democracy died 30 years ago and has been a charade puppet show for the rich for far too long. What do we have to loose. I think we all know that our elections are over already.

    • psivchaz@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      14 hours ago

      When I was little, long before I had a reason to want it to be true, I had this theory that the Secret Service, which is obviously not a secret, was called that because they had a secret mandate: If the President ever gets really out of pocket and goes for dictator powers, it’s their job to execute him as a traitor.

      Anyway, I doubt it’s true, but I’ve been thinking about it a lot lately.

      • VindictiveJudge@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        ·
        13 hours ago

        The Praetorian Guard killed some emperors, but that isn’t an official duty of the Secret Service. Of course, it wasn’t an official duty of the Praetorian Guard either.

        • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          13 hours ago

          I feel like the more likely scenario is if someone really wanted to do it, they wouldn’t, but they’d let it happen by inaction if someone else did it.

          Oh shit, I didn’t see that shooter.

      • electric_nan@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        15 hours ago

        There’s no proper channels for this. Either the military leadership is motivated or they’re not.

          • Katana314@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            3 hours ago

            My thought: Point out to them that there is no “permanent winner” here in terms of ending violence unless they stop Trump.

            The people believing in his agenda are often aimless, and very often extremely violent. See the January 6 rioters, who continued to be aggressive after being pardoned, as well as fringe groups going on the attack now that they think Trump will pardon them. Emboldening them any further may mean years and years of continuing to deal with such violent offenders, AND without the support of experienced FBI staff able to track threats on a national level.

          • FordBeeblebrox@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            edit-2
            12 hours ago

            I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic

            It’s the domestic part we have to concern ourselves with, and thankfully the Joint Chiefs seem to still think he’s an idiotic shitbag

            • octopus_ink@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              3 hours ago

              It’s the domestic part we have to concern ourselves with, and thankfully the Joint Chiefs seem to still think he’s an idiotic shitbag

              As a veteran, I remain 100% convinced that the Pentagon has and has always had a plan for “a dictator becomes president.” However, also as a veteran I’m sure there is a very specific checklist of things that must be true for that plan to be activated.

              As a low ranking veteran I don’t have any better guess than anyone else what things are on that checklist, but I feel sure it exists, and that if we aren’t seeing them mobilize it’s only because it’s an extreme event and the conditions required to execute on that plan are many.

            • C A B B A G E@feddit.uk
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              6 hours ago

              They might think he’s a shitbag, but I bet they’re not unhappy with him. Unless he threatens to cut their spending?

              • dustyb0tt0mz@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                48 minutes ago

                i think there are still people in power that actually believe in the merits this country was founded on and would stand up to pieces of shit like trump. it’s the only thing i left i have to believe in.

                i certainly have no reason to believe that the limp-wristed leftists of social media would ever stand up to anyone about anything.

  • Snapz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    146
    ·
    19 hours ago

    This is the step where the cart goes over the top of the hill, you’re not coming back if this starts.

    Hard to hear, but if goes forward, this does signal that it’s breaking windows time. We all have a Luigi line, start really considering where yours is…

    Especially if you’re young, and they are doing this before you have been able to establish your own career or a family of your own, the rest of the world needs your strength and energy in these moments. Make no mistake, they are threatening you directly, they want to sell your future for a small profit added to the pile they are hoarding. Decide how hard you want to fight against that

    • untorquer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      79
      ·
      18 hours ago

      Especially if you’re older and know that everything you’ve worked for is at risk. Especially if you’re middle aged and your hope of a comfortable old age is being destroyed. Especially if you have family, and know your children’s future depends on it.

      I know you mean well but fuck ageism, the youth always fight. They don’t need a pep talk, older people do.

      • Whats_your_reasoning@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        42
        ·
        17 hours ago

        And then there are the rest of us. Not quite young anymore, but we were robbed of the chance to even have anything to anchor us down. We’ve been squeezed out of the housing market nearly our entire adult lives. We never could justify having a child, perhaps because of money, perhaps because our consciences wouldn’t let us, perhaps because of both. We job-hop every few years already, as it’s the only way we’ve ever received a sizable pay raise.

        There is no house, no child, and no job for us to worry about losing. I don’t know about y’all, but I’ve been doing little more than fighting to get by for far too long.

        I’m ready to fight for something else.

      • HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        12 hours ago

        Heh. I’m middle aged and the only hope of comfort I’ve ever had for my elder years is chemical. I’m what you call an optimist.