I'm confused. Why would a ruling in the US have any bearing on whether or not a South Korean president gets impeached or not? Last I checked, they're two separate countries with their own constitutions and justice systems.
this post was submitted on 04 Jan 2025
98 points (100.0% liked)
World News
651 readers
720 users here now
Rules:
- Be a decent person
- No spam
- Add the byline, or write a line or two in the body about the article.
Other communities of interest:
founded 4 months ago
MODERATORS
Yep, this is literally a Trump-style move inspired by Trump. Just delay and deny, always be on attack, etc.
I'm just always shocked that there's somehow a significant number of people who support them, because there were apparently altercations between those who came to arrest him and those who protected him from arrest.
Just, ugh.
Adding to that, the trump ruling wouldn't block impeachment at all, since that removes the president from office rather than holding them personally liable. The ruling "only" held that the individual holding the office of the president is assumed, barring an argument to the contrary, to have immunity from individual criminal liability for actions they take as the president, not that the office as a whole is immune.
It doesn't.
The SK constitution does draw inspiration from the US constitution, though.
The disease is spreading
He must really believe Skorea is a US state.
of all the places donvict wants to take over, buy, or invade, i haven't seen rok on that list. did i miss something?
SK is one of the most pro US countries in the world
He wants to hand it to his best buddy.
Lol, South Korea explicitly says president doesn't have immunity for treason or insurrection, he's fucked.
(Unless trump orders an "intervention" and instate Yoon as the dictator 🤔)
If you have to resort to citing a ruling involving Trump, you’re guilty. You may be ruled innocent, but you’re guilty.
I would have gone with, "I didn’t know I couldn’t do that."