Donald Trump's comments at a rally in Minnesota on Saturday led several prominent onlookers to label the former president a "very real threat to democracy" who is preparing another insurrection.
Trump earlier in the day spoke at a Bitcoin conference, where the attendees said his speech was "ramb...
It may have started as falling for a conman. But at a certain point, you have to ask yourself at what point is each individual responsible for his threats to democracy.
You either are a willing and active participant or you are willfully ignorant.
I’ve met people on both sides of that spectrum and I’ll tell you right now, they no longer can claim they fell to his con.
Until someone actually breaks a law, suggesting that people should.be jailed for who they vote for is something I expect out of an idiotic authoritarians mouth, like trump.
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.
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.
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.
I don’t either, and we should prepare for that and arrest and prosecute those criminals.
unfortunately no, but the fact that you can even push criminals through presidency is, rather funny.
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.
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.
No, absolutely not. How could one possibly come to this conclusion based on what I said? Are you okay?
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.