3 ms·

Let us assume, for the sake of discussion, that he is guilty of this crime. Should we ignore it? If we further acknowledge that he is a nitwit without an inklin

Let us assume, for the sake of discussion, that he is guilty of this crime. Should we ignore it? If we further acknowledge that he is a nitwit without an inkling of knowledge about history, respect for democracy or the United States unless it aligns with his aggrandizement, then is this not like trying to nail Al Capone for tax fraud? Are their supposedly intelligent people on this forum who truly believe Donald Trump to be a patriotic American, holding the interests of the country above the interests of himself?

pessimizer 4y ago
Most countries immunize declared candidates for parliaments or the presidency, because it's a basic premise of democracy. If the population, by direct referendum, believes this person should be in government, whatever forces that are doing the prosecuting are a minority. Makes sense to have some minor flexibility in this standard, so people aren't continually running for elections in order to stay out of prison. But if (for example) a criminal like K. Fujimori is running for president of Peru, she is obviously a serious candidate and shouldn't be legally threatened.
- sanderjd 4y ago
  > Most countries immunize declared candidates for parliaments or the presidency I don't think this is true factually, and even if it is, I disagree that it's a good policy. But even if I thought it was a good policy, it isn't the policy we have in the US.
- askvictor 4y ago
  Do you have such a list of countries? Australia, for example, does not allow anyone with a criminal record to hold office (and they get kicked out if they are convicted while serving). And how do you feel about convicted felons not having voting rights (as seems to be the case in many US states)?