That doesn't change anything except in making it look even MORE partisan.
-
Tämä twiitti ei ole saatavilla.
-
So the issue here is not that every cutpurse will run for high office. The issue here is that if we set the precedent that winning high office renders one immune to prosecution, we've incentivized a **lot** of law-breaking in order to land in high office...
...and effectively infinite law-breaking in order to remain in high office. That's not a great set of norms to set in place. Once someone leaves office, there has to be accountability at some stage.
-
-
Since we're talking incentives ... wouldn't this give people incentives not to leave office?
-
Only if we also conclude that the prosecution of a sitting president is unlawful - even in a state court. Something we've left undecided. But also - that's one really good reason to have firm constitutional term-limits for the presidency.
- Näytä vastaukset
Uusi keskustelu -
Lataaminen näyttää kestävän hetken.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.