I know we’re living in the crapsack timeline, but I didn’t realize it was a crapsack made of little shit people that the Republicans sculpted like they were Play-Doh and then threw them in the sack and made screaming noises, pretending the little shit people were screaming, before declaring that sack to be their new second-in-command after Trump.

    • abff08f4813c@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      49
      ·
      1 year ago

      Also, specific to the role of Speaker, he’s disqualified due to having been indicted of felonies with a term of more than two years.

      • Jimbob0i0@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        1 year ago

        Technically that’s just a GOP rule… and we know what their reaction is to things like that…

    • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      He shoild be, but so far the courts so far have disagreed, and the SCOTUS declined to hear the case until more lower courts have ruled. Until he’s convicted, it’s unlikely that he will be pre-emptively disqualified from holding office.

      • YoBuckStopsHere@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        30
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The Constitution does not state the individual has to be convicted. They only had to aid in any way, shape, or form an insurrection, which he did.

        • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          16
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I agree with you, but so far the courts have not. Remember that the courts consist of judges who may or may not have allegiances or prejudices that influence their reading of the constitution. So while we can agree we both think Trump should be disqualified by the letter of the law, we cannot know for sure that he will be disqualified. If he is convicted of seditious conspiracy, then the pathway becomes much clearer.

        • BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          1 year ago

          A conviction would generally be seen as what establishes the fact that the person has done that act.

          Which is probably for the best. I’d remind you that plenty of Americans right now would say that Biden has committed treason of some kind, so it’s probably a good thing that there’s a formal legal process for this.