Trump is a stress test for the justice system and democracy. Voters should make up their own minds.
As a businessman, Donald Trump has habitually kept the New York courts busy. As a politician, he has taken this to a whole other level. From New York to Florida, there are so many charges pending against the former president that U.S. citizens have lost track.
The judiciary in the U.S. is once again entering unchartered territory, partly because the antiquated Constitution leaves a lot of room for interpretation. Should courts and local politicians be able to prohibit the candidacy of a former president? According to the letter of the law, they have the right to do so. But this would not be politically wise, as it would only further inflame his supporters.
Anything that keeps Trump in the headlines helps him — at least among his fans. Is he a threat to democracy? Yes, But in a democracy, it is up to voters to decide this. Otherwise, it's not a democracy.
Immer Drama um Donald Trump, den Troublemaker
Trump als Stresstest für die Justiz und die Demokratie: Die Wähler sollten das Urteil fällen.
Als Unternehmer hat Donald Trump gewohnheitsmäßig die Gerichte in New York beschäftigt. Als Politiker übertrifft er das bei Weitem. Längst sind von New York bis Florida so viele Anklagen gegen den Ex-Präsidenten anhängig, dass die US-Bürger den Überblick verloren haben.
Die Justiz in den USA betritt wieder einmal Neuland, auch weil die antiquierte Verfassung viel Interpretationsspielraum lässt. Sollen Gerichte und Regionalpolitiker die Kandidatur eines Ex-Präsidenten untersagen können? Nach den Buchstaben des Gesetzes haben sie das Recht dazu. Politisch klug wäre das aber nicht, weil es seine Anhänger nur weiter aufpeitscht.
Alles, was Trump in den Schlagzeilen hält, nützt ihm – zumindest bei seinen Fans. Ist er eine Gefahr für die Demokratie? Ja! Doch darüber müssen in einer Demokratie die Wähler entscheiden. Sonst ist sie keine.
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link
.
The Beijing summit did not produce a major agreement between the great powers on the region, but it firmly established that Middle Eastern crises are now deeply tied to the great-power dialogue.
Secretary Rubio’s ‘diplomatic masterstroke’ in Delhi unintentionally transformed political damage control into an involuntary roast of his own boss.
The Beijing summit did not produce a major agreement between the great powers on the region, but it firmly established that Middle Eastern crises are now deeply tied to the great-power dialogue.
During the Cold War, the United States occupied the apex of this triangular dynamic, pitting China and the USSR against each other. Today, it is Beijing that occupies that apex.
A summit that would normally send a reassuring message ... faces total uncertainty thanks to the weakness of the United States. The only person to blame for this is Trump.
The Beijing summit did not produce a major agreement between the great powers on the region, but it firmly established that Middle Eastern crises are now deeply tied to the great-power dialogue.
During the Cold War, the United States occupied the apex of this triangular dynamic, pitting China and the USSR against each other. Today, it is Beijing that occupies that apex.