potterpockets,

Correct. Setting aside other comments made which lead myself and others to argue that this is a bad faith/cowardly ruling, they posit it only covers military officers and legislative representatives to prevent them from being able to serve. Not the executive branch.

They then go on to specify that the Commander in Chief capacity in which Trump served is in he is in charge of the military, but is a representative of the public with the military subordinated to civilian authority. Not as a military officer within the structure of the armed forces.

Therefore, per this very, very pedantic (though arguably technically correct) reading of the law, they are arguing it should not be used to bar him from being on the ballot.

It’s like saying “i dont want any berries in my food” and being served strawberries. Scientifically/technically speaking they do not meet the definition. But in common parlance, understanding, and intention they are understood to be and lumped in with them.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • news@lemmy.world
  • DreamBathrooms
  • InstantRegret
  • thenastyranch
  • magazineikmin
  • tacticalgear
  • rosin
  • everett
  • Durango
  • Youngstown
  • slotface
  • cubers
  • kavyap
  • ngwrru68w68
  • ethstaker
  • JUstTest
  • mdbf
  • Leos
  • GTA5RPClips
  • osvaldo12
  • tester
  • modclub
  • khanakhh
  • cisconetworking
  • provamag3
  • anitta
  • normalnudes
  • megavids
  • lostlight
  • All magazines