• Psythik@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    Ah, so you’re on the “willful ignorant” side.

    Trump has already committed several crimes. The classified documents case alone would be enough to put literally anyone else behind bars for several lifetimes. But Trump gets off with stealing literal boxes of the stuff and then selling it to the highest bidder. He got several people killed, but gets to get away with it because it was an “oFfIcIaL aCt”. Give me a fucking break.

    And that’s just one of his many crimes. Wake up and pay attention.

    • EatATaco
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      3 months ago

      Trump’s a fucking criminal twat, and at best you’re a rube if you are voting for him.

      I recognize this, but it’s not a crime to be stupid and fall for his shit.

      • Zeke@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        I also don’t doubt that his voters would pull another Jan 6 if he lost. None of it should be taken lightly. These people are sociopaths and a danger to society.

        • EatATaco
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          3 months ago

          I don’t either, and we should prepare for that and arrest and prosecute those criminals.

      • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        I recognize this, but it’s not a crime to be stupid and fall for his shit.

        unfortunately no, but the fact that you can even push criminals through presidency is, rather funny.

        • EatATaco
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          3 months ago

          Nah, it’s the way it should be; jailing a political opponent should absolutely not be a way for someone in power to stop people from voting for someone. It’s just sad that this is going to protect an actual criminal.

          • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            so you’re saying a political opponent should be immune? Period?

            Because for the entire history of american politics, from the founding until now, that has never been the case. The president is no more immune than any average person, because the president is literally an average person, this is in the federalist papers.

            Like i don’t disagree, jailing someone to prevent them from running is absurd, but there are more nuanced and complete solutions to this problem like, having a functional justice system for example.

            • EatATaco
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              3 months ago

              so you’re saying a political opponent should be immune? Period?

              No, absolutely not. How could one possibly come to this conclusion based on what I said? Are you okay?

              • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                3 months ago

                why would you ever argue for immunity in any other manner? The president already has a form of acting immunity, like most politicians in office currently hold.

                Most official presidential acts are not something a president can be charged for, using the military for example.