• Zink@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    50
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    5 months ago

    I’m not disagreeing with you, but at least those awful actions are plausibly covered as a presidential act made in the country’s interests. I’m not saying they were good for the US, just that they could argue that was the process.

    Trump’s shit is all self-serving and against the interests of the United States.

    • istanbullu@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      5 months ago

      presidential act made in the country’s interests.

      If your country’s interests require committing mass murder (like Bush Jr or Obama did), then your country is an awful evil place.

      • Zink@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        I cannot disagree with you there!

        That’s mostly what I meant by this sentence:

        I’m not saying they were good for the US, just that they could argue that was the process.

        Even if they make the worst, most destructive decisions that most of their constituents disagree with, it’s still a presidential act. I assume they can’t be charged in the US. Might be different in an international court, but I think we refuse to recognize their authority or something, because U-S-A! U-S-A!

    • Linkerbaan@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      15
      ·
      5 months ago

      Mhhh yes lying about WMDs in Iraq to bomb the entire country to rubble and steal their oil. That’s a lot worse than bribing a porn star

      • Zink@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        I’m sure it goes without saying, but legal wrongs and moral wrongs are very different things, like in this case.

        The argument would be “I’m immune because it’s a presidential act” and not “I did the right thing.” Kind of like how cops get away with horrible shit because of qualified immunity.

      • irreticent@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        You know that’s not what he was tried for and convicted of. You’re just arguing in bad faith.