Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)OR
originalfrozenbanana @ originalfrozenbanana @lemm.ee
Posts
2
Comments
720
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • You say that but that isn’t how it would happen.

    There would be months or years of prep work, spreading propaganda that Canada was the source of our woes, that they were wronging us. By the time we invaded there’d be just enough “legitimate discourse” about the invasion that the Presidents supporters could claim any effort to stop him was political.

    There was a time not long ago where people said you couldn’t do lots of things or you’d get thrown out - then Trump did many of them, even got impeached (twice!) and stayed in office. In practice, these limits are at best inconvenient for a dedicated lunatic.

  • Technically only Congress can authorize a war. However, the president can and often will undertake “peacekeeping efforts” or “counterinsurgency operations” or “targeted strikes” without congressional approval.

    Whether anyone could stop a president issuing an order is another question. The president is the commander in chief - the military reports to the president, not Congress. If the president tried to order the military to do something unconstitutional (like fight a war that was not authorized by Congress or, idk, overturn an election) then we’d be in a constitutional crisis. In such a crisis, either the military disobeys the president (which is unconstitutional) or the president violates separation of powers (which is unconstitutional)

    The American system of government relies on three branches all participating in good faith. As soon as that stops, it all falls apart. Though government is just a series of rules and norms. Rules and norms won’t stop soldiers all the time.

  • Presuming you’re talking about disenfranchised citizens, that’s mostly felons. And IMO it is abhorrent to take away a citizen’s right to vote unless that citizen committed a specific type of crime against the government (being that it is the representative of the people), like sedition, treason, or insurrection. And even then, disenfranchisement should not be permanent.

    But notably people are disenfranchised by their state and city jurisdictions. The federal government does not determine whether you can vote in any given election, just the rules that apply to all elections. If you want to blame a federal body, there’s plenty to go around - SCOTUS has upheld disenfranchisement as constitutional and Congress has not really passed meaningful laws defining and regulating the practice. But I can’t think of a law that Biden has been instrumental in that contributes here, other than, of course, his 1994 crime bill. That’s not a small deal but it is far more complicated than “Biden took away voter rights”