5 ms·

Not so according to the Justice Department. https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/olc/opinions/1974/08/31/op-olc-supp-v001-p0370_0.pdf https://www.justic

• cyberax 2y ago
  That doesn't really change much. The president can kill the members of the opposing party, and then just pardon the assassins. Who's then going to sue him?
  • aspenmayer 2y ago
    Nation state level threats are kind of a final boss irl and in the cybersecurity realm, so I’m not sure what you want me to say. That’s a problem for Citizen Lab, Google Project Zero, and natsec but if someone individually is at risk of this happening, they need a lawyer and an insurance policy, and possibly private security, but tbh they have bigger problems like being on a naughty list. I honestly don’t think this something you can expect to move the needle on for the >99% of people who don’t have this problem. What do you think a defense against this would even look like? To attempt to do so sounds almost absurd because it’s just such a remote possibility.
    • cyberax 2y ago
      > What do you think a defense against this would even look like? To attempt to do so sounds almost absurd because it’s just such a remote possibility. Stronger constitutional limits. For example, pardons should not be a thing that could be done unilaterally. Ideally, they shouldn't be a thing at all. At the same time, the Constitution needs to be a bit more malleable. The Amendment process is notoriously hard, and the US Senate structure is uniquely unamendable.