Trump Signals He Might Ignore the Courts
www.theatlantic.com
Yesterday, the president said that no judge “should be allowed” to rule against the changes his administration is making.

This is the very essence of the difference that should exist between a President and a King. From Federalist 69:

The President of the United States would be liable to be impeached, tried, and, upon conviction of treason, bribery, or other high crimes or misdemeanors, removed from office; and would afterwards be liable to prosecution and punishment in the ordinary course of law. The person of the king of Great Britain is sacred and inviolable; there is no constitutional tribunal to which he is amenable; no punishment to which he can be subjected without involving the crisis of a national revolution. In this delicate and important circumstance of personal responsibility, the President of Confederated America would stand upon no better ground than a governor of New York, and upon worse ground than the governors of Maryland and Delaware.

The failure of the Republican party to support this kind of check on Presidential power is why we’re having this crisis now.

  • Lumiluz@slrpnk.netEnglish
    1·
    6 hours ago

    Oh, I don’t consider it charismatic.

    But it’s definitely a power move that can fall under a type of charisma. It can definitely impress some in the right circumstances from my experience.

    I think because of the time period it was some sort of weird machoism thing. What Trump would want to pull off he didn’t have a micropeen.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      12·
      6 hours ago

      This was about Vance being elected in sympathy after Trump was assassinated. What Trump would want to pull off isn’t relevant.

            • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
              11·
              6 hours ago

              Your argument that it wasn’t relevant is because Lydon Johnson liked showing journalists his large penis and that was in the tabloids which meant he had charisma.

              In other words, it was a completely irrational argument which didn’t say anything about the relevancy of his supposed charisma in the 1964 election.

              So yes, you were saying it was relevant. By way of a long-winded “nuh-uh!”

              • Lumiluz@slrpnk.netEnglish
                1·
                6 hours ago

                I’m confused now. Yes, I’ve been saying Charisma was relevant, not so much sympathy, in his reelection.

                And that Charisma in part was named Jumbo.

                • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
                  1·
                  6 hours ago

                  Yes, I know you keep saying it.

                  Believe it or not, saying it doesn’t make it true.

                  Johnson literally ran on continuing Kennedy’s legacy… but he was also not especially popular before Kennedy was assassinated and Kennedy only even took him on as Vice President while at the 1960 DNC as a compromise. Johnson opposed Kennedy being the Democratic contender and actually planned to finagle his way into the top spot in the election without any popular primary vote through some trickery that failed, but Kennedy realized the value of courting Southern Democrats, so he picked Johnson as VP. You can talk about his penis and its size all you want. Then Johnson got endless negative press for trying to control the Senate as VP and also trying to undermine Kennedy’s agenda. People didn’t like Johnson.

                  Those things do not change.

                  But apparently none of that is relevant since he showed journalists his penis which means he had charisma and that’s why people voted for him, not because Kennedy was murdered.

                  And this is not what happens with charismatic people.