Gov. Gavin Newsom said he and the Legislature are drafting a new bill that would make it a felony to seize ballots before state or local election officials have certified them.
“In California, we have a message for anyone considering helping Trump interfere with our election or our count. If you violate California’s laws, if you interfere with our voters, tamper with our ballots, or meddle in our election, you will be prosecuted. It does not matter who gave the order,” Newsom said in remarks given to reporters. “In this state, our vote is sacred.”
That’s it guys, wrap it up. Time to stop trying cause previous attempts didn’t work.
State laws are enforced VERY differently than other crimes. And presidents (and expresidents) are (and should be) treated differently than other people.
If someone is charged with a crime, but the people vote them into office, the election should be more important than a conviction.
There are a lot of politicians that are currently being targeted by this administration, and if you claim that their charges (and possible convictions) disqualify them from office, then that’s just more reason to keep targeting political opponents.
Only if by that you mean held to a higher standard, not a lower one.
Ideal world, we’d just be talking about how presidents and other high ranking government officials get a privilege to generally force the other party to waive their right to a speedy trial. Not “well they’ve got 34 convictions but it would be a crime to punish them”
That’s the wrong takeaway. Trying the same thing repeatedly and facing failure every time doesn’t mean quit, it means try something different.
In this context, we have a presumed baseline of legal justice. The legal part isn’t working becuase the offender is above the law. So we can, as you suggested, wrap it up and do nothing; add more laws in the hopes that these people suddenly start being held legally accountable (which rhymes a lot with wrap it up and do nothing); or turn to vigilante justice.
So far we haven’t had the spine for the latter. I certainly don’t, and I’m assuming you’re in the same boat seeing as you’re doing the same thing (bitching fruitlessly into the void of the internet… what can I say, it’s therapeutic!).
As a glimmer of hope though, we did just see an active duty officer give a speech identifying Trump as a domestic enemy of the constitution, which they are oath-bound to engage the same way they do any other enemy of the US. That individual is probably in prison by now - that little maneuver broke a handful of laws under the UCMJ, but this is the first such act of defiance I’m aware of coming from an officer, so here’s hoping it prods other troops into actually taking their oath seriously instead of idly following the domestic enemy’s orders.
Probably still no, but, fingers crossed.
But laws? we’ve seen repeatedly that those don’t mean shit. We don’t need new laws. Actually enforcing the ones we already have would be plenty, but we’ve got years of precedent showing loud and clear that shit ain’t gonna happen.
Anywho, wishing anyone out there with the means and the spine the best of luck!