He can be president but he can’t be a nurse: The jobs Trump can’t get with felony convictions
He can be president but he can’t be a nurse: The jobs Trump can’t get with felony convictions
Trump’s power and influence will help him avoid major hurdles facing millions of Americans with felony convictions trying to get back to work, Alex Woodward reports
It's insane how we've relied far too long on a sort of gentleman's agreement around presidents and congress and all. I don't think the founding fathers could have EVER anticipated the amount of corruption that could occur.
If the orange turd did one thing, it's to lay bare how truly exploitable and corruptible the ruling class can be. I mean, we all know it was bad but he truly showed by bad (and open) it could get. And how nothing whatsoever would be done about it...
It’s insane how we’ve relied far too long on a sort of gentleman’s agreement around presidents and congress and all. I don’t think the founding fathers could have EVER anticipated the amount of corruption that could occur.
They did. The entire point of the structure of Congress was to ensure that the passions of the people were tempered and "cooled" through the political process. Between competition between the three branches and the structure of government, they did their best to ensure this wouldn't happen.
What they didn't anticipate was that competition would give way to collaboration among so many competing elements. From state legislatures to the federal House and Senate, across to the Supreme Court (intended to be insulated from political generally to focus on the well-being of the nation), and across again to the president. Those stars shouldn't align all that often. But anti-American authoritarians, the underhanded bastards they are, have made it so that those stars align more often than not for their political goals.
So, that's the problem. What do you do when all the elements of the government are working together? Sure, Trump absolutely abused his position, but so what? We're barely holding any of these anti-Constitutional people responsible for the damage they've done to the political process and democracy in general.
Well, they did think of this. George Washington himself wrote about being weary of factions becoming too strong so that exactly this could happen. Madison also wrote about it and so did Jefferson. He actually suggested that this is the entire reason the judiciary needed to not be factionalized.
I think ultimately their interpretation boils down to that the mechanics needed to take over should have the bar as high as possible for the time. And then as time went on, these protections were eroded. The democracy has in fact been able to reign in really bad presidents before and quiet down large factions. So relying on good will and good duty is a recent thing.
Things have only gone off the rails entirely in the last 50 or so years. But I’d argue that George Bush did a ton to result in this. Keep in mind, executive orders were not meant to be used this way. They’re currently being abused to hell and that’s a loophole the same way that pardoning yourself as president is a loophole.
These loopholes are intentional because it’s sort’ve a “if you can’t keep these powers in check as a populace, it’s your fault” type of mechanism.
Exactly!
At the end of World War 2, we gave a free pass to almost any Nazi who had any kind of scientific or tactical expertise because we knew the soviets were doing the same and needed the tactical advantage and knowledge to start ahead in the pending Cold War. Many of those same Nazi scientists went on to hold positions of power in our military, intelligence, and corporations.
Did you know there's no law that says a dog can't be president? You'd have to get it to 35, but technically we could have an Air Bud POTUS.
The Constitution lists only three qualifications for the Presidency — the President must be at least 35 years of age, be a natural born citizen, and must have lived in the United States for at least 14 years. https://www.whitehouse.gov/about-the-white-house/our-government/the-executive-branch/#:~:text=The Constitution lists only three,for at least 14 years.
It's like this in many countries. In the UK we've never had to deal with people being held in contempt of parliament, but in recent years we've seen corruption and a blatant disregard for "rules" that would have made politicians sick a decade ago. It's at a point where the UK has considered a constitution to ensure that anyone caught being openly corrupt or breaking the rules can be arrested.
Many right-wing politicians have shown that the rules have been lax for a very long time, and IMO it's a sign that perhaps we as a society need to seriously look at how we stop the right (and perhaps even the left) from abusing their power without consequence.
One day Conservatism will be remembered for being as backwards as Eugenics and Reagonomics as absurd as the divine right of kings.
Comrade, the USA was founded by rich businessmen, and organized primarily to defend the class interests of that group.
The nation-state has at various points hunted down runaway slaves (Fugitive Slave Act of 1850), used the national guard to put down strikes (the Ludlow Massacre, the Lattimer massacre, the breaking of the Homestead Strike, the West Virginia Coal Wars...), fought violently against peaceful protesters (Kent State shootings, pretty much every protest of the Civil Rights Movement, the DNC protests of 1968, various incidents during the Floyd protests...), arrested and murdered people for ideology rather than proof of actually committing a crime (Sacco and Vanzetti, the Haymarket Martyrs...), drugged and murdered Fred Hampton as he slept next to his pregnant fiance, funded dozens of coups against democratically elected leaders because they were left-leaning, and done countless other things. This is aided by the permanent death grip that capital has on the country.
Even if the process of getting elected was completely untied to wealth (hahaha) and lobbying didn't exist (lol), at the end of the day the economy is controlled by the capitalists and they can bring a country to its knees if it doesn't obey. Capital strikes and the threat of disinvestments and layoffs are powerful.
It's not a bug. It is a feature.
I don't think the founding fathers could have EVER anticipated the amount of corruption that could occur.
"I believe farther that this is likely to be well administred for a Course of Years and can only end in Despotism as other Forms have done before it, when the People shall become so corrupted as to need Despotic Government, being incapable of any other."
Benjamin Franklin.
It makes sense that elected officials can't be banned from serving for crimes, excepting ones like treason and other major ones. Otherwise it would be far too easy for a party in power to simply charge, arrest and convict people over more minor crimes to prevent representation. Also why congress people can't be arrested, excepting felonies, on their way to Congress. It'd be too easy to stop government by simply arresting people frivolously.
But the counter for Trump is already in the Constitution: a speedy trial. Fucker should be in prison already and prevented (via 14th) from being elected.
to be able to run for president even if you're convicted is a good thing.
though in lots of places in the US you can't vote for the president. seems ridiculous that you can be one. both should be allowed.
I get it, a DUI is felony, and shit happens. However, 34 felonies, dealing with attempting to influence an election that got you the presidency, and paying off a porn star that you had sex with while your pregnant wife was at home, should ban you from the presidency. Jan 6th should have done that and put his ass up on the gallows, but here we are.
paying off a porn star that you had sex with while your pregnant wife was at home
Let's focus on the important parts, not play morality police as if Stormy Daniel's profession or Trump's marital status make the crimes worse. Let's not sink to the level of the hypocritical authoritarians of the Christian Right or the equally hypocritical tabloid press.
You're right about everything else, though.
After Jan 6th, he should have been put in front of a damn firing squad
I was hoping for an actual list of jobs he is barred from in the posted link, but it's just another dime-a-dozen article on Trump's conviction and riddled with ads.
Anything requiring a background check:
https://asginvestigations.com/background_checks/5-industries-require-background-check/
He can't get most normal jobs. Every job application has a part where you have to admit if you're a felon and then do background checks. He also can't rent in almost any place owned by a corporation instead of an individual. It's actually a serious problem for non-violent and/or actually reformed ex-cons which don't their time. But the incarceration industrial complex and the government that allows it don't care, it's just punish and forget. Then the rich felons like the Orange scrotum are unaffected and just get gigs in politics, sell books, expensive speaking jobs, become talking news heads, and all kinds of other disruptive, cancerous blights.
Can't trust a person like that around percocet, but nuclear codes are a-ok!
Nuclear Percocet is a maybe. And also a pretty good band name.
Well, humanity NEEDS nurses, clowns not so much.
Trump can’t work for a casino in Illinois or a vet in Indiana, in pest control in North Carolina, he can’t sell a car in Mississippi, or work in any healthcare setting in Virginia.
Even in New York, if he wanted a real estate brokers license, he would need permission from the secretary of state.
In Florida, he can’t be a firefighter or legally tend bar at his Mar-a-Lago compound; Florida law prohibits bars from employing bartenders who have been convicted of a felony within five yea
None of those jobs should exclude ex convicts. The president is a job that should.
That would lead to false charges against political opponents or lead to laws that declare certain things as a felony to prevent certain populations from office.
The voting populace should be smart enough to not vote in a convicted felon in most cases, but it shouldn't exclude you from running. Else felony convictions could be used as a political tool to bar your opponents from running.
The only job for which he’s qualified is fertilizer.
Could you imagine him as your fucking nurse? He’s calling you a loser and stinking up your room while you lay there with a broken leg.
He'd be the guy who abandons his patients to raid the controlled substances closest, then come back to say the guy bleeding out from the clear gunshot wound is faking it and needs to "man up"
This is the best fucking argument for "If you've done your time, no need to punish you further."
It's hard to think of anything more horrifying than getting admitted to the hospital, and then the nurse is Donald Trump
I don’t think someone who has committed and found guilty of any crime should be eligible to be president. I understand that can have consequences related to the broken criminal justice system, but with a country of almost 400mill people we can find some good candidates that aren’t convicted felons.
Who the fuck cares. While liberals are obsessed with Trump, Biden is still helping slaughter Palestinians, we still cant pay our bills or our rent and homelessness is still growing.
Somehow you expect Biden to reverse or ameliorate all these economic situations... or you somehow didn't expect Trump to do all these yet you expect Biden to. Trump said he would accelerate the slaughter.. you still had bills to pay when he was president (you expect the president to help you with your bills?), rent and homelessness is supposed to be fixed with cooperation from state, center, and landlords. The last of them are still greedy as ever regardless of presidents so I don't generally expect that the president can do much. Even in this regard Biden is at least trying to fight the republican controlled congress and SC to pass student debt forgiveness.
When Biden tries you all cry that he isn't doing anything while the republicans block any attempts in each step of the way.
When Trump does anything you all cheer his shitty behavior that hurt you more as a common man than as a conservative.
you expect the president to help you with your bills
A UBI could help here, but yeah obviously the president can't unilaterally implement one, especially with the Republican party controlling the house.
Anyway, agreed with your overall point. People seem to think a president is a dictator that can just ram through policy and not just one person within a broader system. Maybe that's why anti-democratic (small 'd') sentiment appears to be increasing.
Wait, your landlord doesn't let you pay your rent with deported immigrants? Wild.
I don't think the person you're responding to is a Trump supporter. I think they're critiquing the vast amounts of political energy people put into supporting and justifying a genocidal state and its leaders.
Your entire comment exemplifies this perfectly. There's obviously a lot of time and effort you've put into forming your electoral views, and you obviously spend a good deal of time going around, at the very least online, trying to inform people how to make better decisions inside the electoral sphere.
This is exactly what electoralism tries to drive in people. The expenditure of political capital within acceptable bounds. Before electoralism/liberal democracies, political capital accumulated and was then spent on strikes, riots, or revolutions. Things that are much more effective at driving change per political capital spent.
There are literally millions of people like you in America that could all immediately stop all your expenditure of political capital and it would make actually no material difference. That's a beautiful thing about electoralism (for those in power), the thing that matters is the differential, not the total expenditure. This is why "swing states" exist.
I'll put it into concrete terms, imagine the amount of electorally active individuals in America was immediately cut in half. The population remains the same, but exactly half of the current voting population stops voting. Assume all ratios remain the same. There'd be fundamentally no difference in material outcomes.
Now imagine if all current political capital was spent towards strikes, unions, revolution, or really any form of politics outside electoralism. Doubling or halfing this engagement would be massive. Real material outcomes would be different if there were thousands more strikes. What doesn't matter is if the voting population is 150 million, 90 million, or 10 million. Only the differential matters, and only for determining a fixed binary outcome.
That ratio though.
On a social media platform. Rust leans presently far left- you STILL manage to get downvoted into the dirt.
Maybe it’s because of the sheer volume of misinformation you share- like this nonsense here, or maybe it’s just because you’re seemingly wrong more often than not.