576
Presidential Immunity - abbothenderson (slrpnk.net)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/comics@lemmy.blahaj.zone
56 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Via Reddit

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 29 points 2 years ago (5 children)

I'm not saying what they're doing is morally ok. I'm saying they aren't criminals. For that word implys that what they have done

  1. Was illegal

And

  1. They've been convicted of a crime.

Donald Trump is a 34X criminal. Thats factually accurate.

Jeff Bezos is not. Because he hasn't been convicted of anything.

You can't just use words against people you don't like and expect it to mean anything.

A better use of your vernacular would be:

"Billionaires are unempathetic, labor exploiting, psychopaths who are by far the leading cause of climate change, but will never personally feel the effects of their actions.

THAT would all be factually true. But also legal. So, again, they aren't criminals. They've rigged the system so they aren't breaking any laws by doing terrible things. That's by design.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    What’s your take on a billionaire, who, following all applicable laws, has donated to politicians, people, and political action committees or fund lawsuits that result in things that harm the U.S., such as harming its income through irresponsible taxation policies, trade policies that harm the domestic economy, spread socially divisive messaging that may also be anti-government or slow down/inhibit participation in the political system, or use their power to judicially change laws or initiate legislative pushes for laws resulting in laws that are discriminatory/harmful/against the ideals of the constitution (while not necessarily being against the letter of it) and overall harm the U.S. society in favor of their worldview/desired hegemony?

    Are these people criminals if they’ve followed the letter of the law?
    Are they enemies of the state they have sought to undermine/remake in their own image?
    Would being an enemy of the state warrant criminal treatment?

    I don’t believe people have lost their minds here. I think they’re taking this latest ruling, designed to subvert the rule of law to protect one person, to the logical conclusion that ‘the other side’ will take it to when given the ability to exploit it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago

    Our country is broken, and has been long before any of us were born. However in the past 8 years it's become more divided than it ever has been at any point since the civil war.

    When our forefathers designed this country, they did so with the spirit that the people would run the country. They wanted all ideas to be heard, shared,voted on, and adopted or not adopted as decided by the citizens. However in the centuries that followed various interest groups have exploited loopholes to expand their influence and slowly take over the country.

    We're now at a point where most Americans have no central viewpoint, because it's being influenced by so many differing controlling parties.

    The only way for the people to take back this country is to patch those exploits, push back against outside influence, and end donations within politics.

    But until that happens, our country is working as it was designed. Maybe not in spirit, but in practice.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent