5 ms·

It's neat that we've decided laws don't matter and Congress can just be ignored.

whyenot 2y ago
With the president's immunity and expansive pardon powers, unfortunately, that is where we are. Laws don't matter when you can be pre-emtively pardoned for breaking them.
- wongarsu 2y ago
  Congress has spent many decades expanding the power of the president. This is what people have been warning about for a long time. The best part is we already tried impeaching him in his first term. As long as at least 1/3rd of Senators support him there is no way to remove him from office. Well, except a coup maybe. While normal soldiers swear allegiance to the president, officers only swear to protect the constitution. But that seems unlikely.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - kohbo 2y ago
    Normal soldiers also swear to defend the constitution. The enlisted oath also says says they'll obey orders from the President though.
grg0 2y ago
All the more convenient, isn't it? Jokes aside, I always thought the ban/force-sale was ridiculous short of an actual privacy law that regulates all social media. But, regardless of your stance on that front, one should indeed be worried of the ever-growing power of the executive.
ops 2y ago
Wait until you find out that in many states, you can walk into a business and buy a schedule I controlled substance, and the federal government has been ignoring it for over a decade!
- brookst 2y ago
  Also you can go 60 in a 55. Where is the executive order or written letter from the DOJ saying they have voided schedule I or speed limits? Failure to enforce due to prioritization is not at all the same thing as the President saying a law no longer exists.
  - ops 2y ago
    Yeah, there’s a huge difference between not enforcing federal laws and not enforcing federal laws.
    - brookst 2y ago
      Reductionism is so juvenile. Now do fake outrage that muggers go to jail for knifing someone while surgeons get paid: “eiteher it’s ok to cut someone with a knife or it’s not!” Corrupt intent is the crime. We all know this. It’s embarrassing when someone rediscovers reductionism and pretends to believe it’s a magic argument.
- threeseed 2y ago
  Federal Government doesn't intervene because it effectively delegates the decision to the States. In this case we have the Federal Government simply choosing to ignore the law, period.
  - ops 2y ago
    [flagged]
- mschoch 2y ago
  [flagged]

With the president's immunity and expansive pardon powers, unfortunately, that is where we are. Laws don't matter when you can be pre-emtively pardoned for breaking them.

wongarsu 2y ago
Congress has spent many decades expanding the power of the president. This is what people have been warning about for a long time. The best part is we already tried impeaching him in his first term. As long as at least 1/3rd of Senators support him there is no way to remove him from office. Well, except a coup maybe. While normal soldiers swear allegiance to the president, officers only swear to protect the constitution. But that seems unlikely.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- kohbo 2y ago
  Normal soldiers also swear to defend the constitution. The enlisted oath also says says they'll obey orders from the President though.

grg0 2y ago

All the more convenient, isn't it? Jokes aside, I always thought the ban/force-sale was ridiculous short of an actual privacy law that regulates all social media. But, regardless of your stance on that front, one should indeed be worried of the ever-growing power of the executive.

ops 2y ago

Wait until you find out that in many states, you can walk into a business and buy a schedule I controlled substance, and the federal government has been ignoring it for over a decade!

brookst 2y ago
Also you can go 60 in a 55. Where is the executive order or written letter from the DOJ saying they have voided schedule I or speed limits? Failure to enforce due to prioritization is not at all the same thing as the President saying a law no longer exists.
- ops 2y ago
  Yeah, there’s a huge difference between not enforcing federal laws and not enforcing federal laws.
  - brookst 2y ago
    Reductionism is so juvenile. Now do fake outrage that muggers go to jail for knifing someone while surgeons get paid: “eiteher it’s ok to cut someone with a knife or it’s not!” Corrupt intent is the crime. We all know this. It’s embarrassing when someone rediscovers reductionism and pretends to believe it’s a magic argument.
threeseed 2y ago
Federal Government doesn't intervene because it effectively delegates the decision to the States. In this case we have the Federal Government simply choosing to ignore the law, period.
- ops 2y ago
  [flagged]
mschoch 2y ago
[flagged]