50
submitted 3 weeks ago by SanctimoniousApe to c/usa@lemmy.ml

It blows my mind that there are no legal blocks in place to prevent this (yeah, I know it's because this shit was so unthinkable that nobody prepared for it). This yahoo is on a mission to destroy EVERYTHING America was supposed to stand for. SOMETHING has to be done to stop this shit!

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml -3 points 3 weeks ago

Show me in the Constitution any mention of the FBI as a requirement for any position of the executive branch.

[-] gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 3 weeks ago

That's not how the constitution works

Which part would make a law requiring FBI checks to hold office illegal? If there isnt one then it's not unconstitutional

[-] PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml -3 points 3 weeks ago

Well because the constitution explicitly defines the requirements of the office, in full. Congress making up additional requirements that are not amendments to the constitution would be violating the separation of powers, essentially it would allow congress with a simple majority to deny the Executive Branch it's constitutional powers.

[-] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 3 points 3 weeks ago

Does it say 'these are the only requirements?' Or does it say 'these things are required?'

Necessary and sufficient are not interchangeable.

[-] PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml -3 points 3 weeks ago

So you would be totally ok if congress passed a law that said basically only a specific person is eligible to be president? "All future presidents must be born on August 2, 1984, in Middletown, Ohio, and must be a member of the Republican party."

After all that wouldn't be unconstitutional to you would it?

[-] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 3 points 3 weeks ago
[-] PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml -2 points 3 weeks ago

Just take the L. Maybe learn how the government works before trying to play "gotcha" with someone who paid attention in school.

[-] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 3 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

No, fool, you're pulling examples clean out of your ass, on a different fucking subject.

The senate confirms federal officials.

How they do it is not specified, and according to over two hundred years of high-level bickering, that means they can do it however the fuck they want.

Even your ass-pull example ignores-- you've seen the NPVIC, right? There's a whole bunch of shit that YES, the American government CAN DO, regardless of whether it's intended, or desirable, or would lead to another civil war. We've already had the one, over some shit that was left ambiguous by this one precious document. So yeah, congress probably could specify your made-up thing, and the ink-on-paper constitution wouldn't be why it's total horseshit.

But you're such a psychic drain on this thread that I didn't want to have to spell out any of this. Hence: oh my god, just shut the fuck up.

[-] SkybreakerEngineer@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

Please tell the class where Cabinet level or below positions are defined in the Constitution

[-] PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml 0 points 3 weeks ago

Article 2, section 2, which is exactly what I was referring to. The constitution is not a long or complex document should I explain the electoral college to you next?

this post was submitted on 26 Nov 2024
50 points (94.6% liked)

United States | News & Politics

7315 readers
178 users here now

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS