299
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 18 Oct 2024
299 points (99.0% liked)
politics
19240 readers
2234 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Not a good law to pass. The GOP would weaponize that before the ink was dry on the bill.
If your country is in a place where you don't think banning felons from holding elected office is good because you are worried that the legislative branch will weaponize the judicial branch to stop their opposition from running, then I'd suggest that the problem isn't one that laws can fix
It was a forethought, it was intentional. The "founding fathers" may have been super naive and absurd in some situations, but this is one they got correct. You don't want to let the government decide who gets to run in that way because that will almost always be abused no matter what the current society is like.
There are specific situations like what Colorado tried with Trump that makes sense and have a legal history, he was part of an insurrection, but for "standard" felonies it's best that we don't go down that road.
nevermind standard felonies. if it were almost any other federal position with access to classified material he'd never get a clearance, along with many other politicians; strictly based on business deals with foreign powers, debt and erratic behavior. why these people don't have to go through the same minimum, non-political checks for access as other federal workers is beyond me.... at the very least, he just doesn't meet the minimum qualifications for access to material needed to perform his job.
If I understand correctly (however dumb I think it is) "we" give him clearance by voting for him. We are supposed to be that check.
That's one place the founders fucked up, but also their system of elections was much different than it is now. I for one wouldn't even be able to vote since I don't own land... They never expected complete fucking morons and propagandized asshats to be voting. I believe they also expected the electors of the electoral college to override a vote for someone as bat shit crazy as Trump...
i know it's been a while since the og post but I ran across a very good explanation about the clearance stuff and wanted to pay-it-forward for the civil conversation before.
enjoy! 😜
https://theconversation.com/trumps-criminal-conviction-wont-stop-him-from-getting-security-clearance-as-president-243104
Gonna need a supervolcano eruption.