this post was submitted on 07 Nov 2024
43 points (92.2% liked)

No Stupid Questions

35703 readers
4120 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
all 33 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] DarkFuture@lemmy.world 3 points 1 hour ago

Not only did we squarely place ourselves on the path of economic/social decline for the foreseeable future, but we also just guaranteed that Trump will not be held accountable for his crimes.

We have utterly failed as citizens in a democratic society.

Buckle up. It gets much, much worse from here.

[–] grte@lemmy.ca 85 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

You need to stop thinking laws are inviolable writ handed down from God. We're all playing a game of shared make believe where the rules are only strong as the collective will to enforce them. That will doesn't appear to be sufficient so he can likely do what he wants.

[–] oleorun@real.lemmy.fan 16 points 4 hours ago

This is the answer. Clear, concise, and correct,

[–] jaggedrobotpubes@lemmy.world 15 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Trump and his party are nazis. Nazis suck because they bring the law of the jungle into civilization.

The law of civilization is cooperation.

The law of the jungle is, can I physically do it.

Republicans basically exist to shout, burn their own house down (also yours), and celebrate. They're going to burn the checks and balances.

[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 36 points 5 hours ago (1 children)
[–] SHOW_ME_YOUR_ASSHOLE@lemm.ee 14 points 5 hours ago (3 children)

Right? Who is gonna stop him from doing whatever the fuck he wants?

[–] Chozo@fedia.io 11 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Somebody with better aim. I very much doubt we've seen the last attempt on his life. Groups on all sides are inching closer and closer to extremist acts lately, and don't show any signs of slowing down. We're in for chaos now.

[–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 3 points 3 hours ago

I very much doubt we've seen the last attempt on his life.

And it's just as likely to come from a disillusioned historically republican as from someone more to the left.

[–] Jackthelad@lemmy.world 0 points 3 hours ago (2 children)

The American Constitution will stop him doing a lot of things people are scared of.

[–] DarkFuture@lemmy.world 1 points 24 minutes ago

No it won't.

The poster above had it right. The law only works if the will of the people make it work. Same applies to the Constitution.

Public schools in the bible belt have been teaching creationism and putting the ten commandments in their classrooms. Do you think the New Order we just elected are going to go out of their way to enforce the Constitution and make them stop doing things like that?

Be prepared for FLAGRANT violations of the Constitution in the coming years. I mean come on, the guy we just elected illegally attempted to overturn the last election and is a convicted felon.

It's over. America lost.

[–] dhork@lemmy.world 6 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

The American Constitution says that Presidents can't accept gifts from any foreign source, and that has been interpreted in the past as a general prohibition on Presidents operating in any capacity in any private enterprise. Jimmy Carter put his peanut farm in a blind trust.

Not only was Donald Trump allowed to circumvent this during his first term, retaining ownership of his businesses and nominally putting his kids in charge while they pursued foreign deals, but today Trump is waist deep in Crypto, and owns a majority share of a publicly traded company whose ticker is his initials. Foreigners can (and likely do) shovel money into both. Do you think anyone will ask him to divest, like the Constitution requires him to?

The Constitution is useless unless it is enforced. It relies on checks and balances between competing branches, and right now they are broken. The only checks on Presidential power are the military (whose oath is to yhe Constitution, not to any one President) and the individual states (who retain all powers not explicitly given to the Federal government).

[–] Alice@hilariouschaos.com 0 points 3 hours ago

nice username

[–] Aatube@kbin.melroy.org 6 points 4 hours ago

Yes. Constitutionally, the threat of impeachment is supposed to prevent that.

[–] lolola@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 3 hours ago

I don't think so.

But if it's like any other norm-breaking violation we've seen him make, he will do it anyway, there will be legal challenges, they will ultimately be fruitless, he will suffer no consequences, and everyone will go along with it.

[–] Varyk@sh.itjust.works 6 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (1 children)

he doesn't need to since he already has absolute legal immunity according to the Supreme Court.

The president is now absolutely immune from all legal prosecution as long as it pertains to a "official duty".

The constitution is vague enough about official presidential duties that the official duties of the president can literally be anything.

Trump, and future presidents, are functionally immune from any legal consequences for any actions they take.

[–] Aatube@kbin.melroy.org 3 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

At least certain courts may interpret "official duty" differently...

[–] Varyk@sh.itjust.works 5 points 4 hours ago

doesn't really matter while the Supreme Court has a conservative majority, unfortunately.

[–] TootSweet@lemmy.world 15 points 5 hours ago

No president has tried it before. Whether he can get away with pardoning himself has yet to be seen. For him not to get away with it would require someone to bring some sort of court case challenging it. And to bring a case, they have to have "standing." (That is to say, they have to have some credible justification why the self-pardoning action the president took wronged the petitioner in some way.) Which would probably require some legal argument that has never been made before.

I'm guessing Trump probably could get away with it, but given that no president has tried this, we'll just have to see for sure.

[–] Makeshift@sh.itjust.works 3 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Yes, because he can do anything he wants and just declare legal.

There is no punishment for this supervillain. His cult makes sure of that.

[–] dhork@lemmy.world 11 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

The Constitutional text is very broad:

The President ... shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

So it looks rather absolute, for Fedral crimes. However, the real situation is complicated. This is just one clause in the Constitution, while the President is supposed to be bound by all of it. So, presumably, he can't exercise his pardon power in a way that violates something else in the Constitution. If you go deeper into the Federalist papers, it's quite clear that the Founders held that no man should be his own judge, and a self-pardon effectively does just that.

Here is a good write-up, although I do note it was written before the Supreme Court put their thumb on the scale and said he could do whatever the hell he wanted, as long as he doesn't get impeached for it:

https://protectdemocracy.org/work/the-presidential-pardon-power-explained/

I expect him to do it anyway. It will be challenged, but courts will reject it due to "lack of standing" and sidestep the messy business of having to tell the King he went too far.

[–] radix@lemmy.world 10 points 5 hours ago (2 children)

For federal stuff, yes ... probably, it's never been tested, but the current SCOTUS won't stop him.

Not for state crimes. Like the 34 felony counts in NY. But enforcement of any sentence (probably financial) is unclear. Also unprecedented.

[–] whyNotSquirrel@sh.itjust.works 4 points 5 hours ago

I know nothing about anything related to the USA but I predict that Trump will not pay anything

[–] shoulderoforion@fedia.io 3 points 5 hours ago

I'd like to see a Constitutional Crisis, please

[–] NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world 6 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

Theoretically, probably not, practically, and in real life, most probably definitely yes.

[–] Nyciferi@kbin.melroy.org 6 points 5 hours ago (2 children)

Dude, the guy is going to pardon everything and anyone. He's going to make the justice a complete joke.

[–] spankmonkey@lemmy.world 5 points 4 hours ago

Just like he did in his first term.

Well, he pardoned the people he liked that kissed his ass.

[–] Aphelion@lemm.ee 1 points 3 hours ago

He can't pardon himself of state charges, only federal, at least for now.

[–] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 6 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

When he controls the Supreme Court... yes. He can pardon anyone for anything.

Prepare to see everyone involved in the most blatant act of open tyranny since the Civil War pardoned as soon as he takes office.

[–] Aphelion@lemm.ee 1 points 3 hours ago

Not state level offenses, only federal crimes, at least as the law stands now.

[–] ohellidk@sh.itjust.works 4 points 5 hours ago
[–] shoulderoforion@fedia.io 2 points 5 hours ago

Don't know, but we're gonna find out. Exciting times. Oh, and get ready to pay 3x as much for your internet access, and to have all torrent sites nuked from orbit.