General Discussion

kentuck

(111,110 posts) Thu Feb 8, 2018, 07:29 PM Feb 2018

Can a sitting President be indicted ??

Most of the talking heads and politicians seem to be of the opinion that there is no "settled" law but that a President can be indicted.

They cite Richard Nixon during Watergate. Although many of his people went to jail, he was an "un-indicted co-conspirator." Gerald Ford pardoned him.

So there is no case where a sitting President has been indicted.

If it was challenged by Trump or Mueller, it could go all the way to the Supreme Court. We should not be surprised if it does make it to the highest Court in the land.

The People argue that "no man is above the law". Also, that if there is a high crime or misdemeanor and if there is no political solution, then the people have a right to take it to court.

I have no idea what the Trump argument might be ??

11 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Can a sitting President be indicted ?? (Original Post) kentuck Feb 2018 OP

John Heilmann was on Lawrence O'Donnell MontanaMama Feb 2018 #1

Jonathan Turley said on Morning Joe yesterday Quemado Feb 2018 #2

In my opinion, the argument that a sitting President cannot be indicted is the same as.... kentuck Feb 2018 #3

if your asking for my ok i say bluestarone Feb 2018 #4

From AG Holder Gothmog Feb 2018 #5

There is absolutely no law or rule that says he or she can't. Downtown Hound Feb 2018 #6

Yes, no one should be above the law. n/t FSogol Feb 2018 #7

Yes the President can be Wellstone ruled Feb 2018 #8

See my sig line marylandblue Feb 2018 #9

From Rep. Nadler Gothmog Feb 2018 #10

From Prof. Tribe Gothmog Feb 2018 #11

MontanaMama

(23,344 posts)

1. John Heilmann was on Lawrence O'Donnell

Reply to kentuck (Original post)

Thu Feb 8, 2018, 07:34 PM

Feb 2018

last night and he was emphatic that people stop saying that a sitting president can't be indicted.

Quemado

(1,262 posts)

2. Jonathan Turley said on Morning Joe yesterday

Reply to kentuck (Original post)

Thu Feb 8, 2018, 07:35 PM

Feb 2018

that, in his opinion, a sitting President could be indicted. As I recall what he said, the situation is not clear, and it's possible that a sitting President cannot be indicted while in office. He also said that, if an indictment were allowed, the trial would probably not occur until the President has left office.

kentuck

(111,110 posts)

3. In my opinion, the argument that a sitting President cannot be indicted is the same as....

Reply to Quemado (Reply #2)

Thu Feb 8, 2018, 07:39 PM

Feb 2018

...saying that one man is above the Law. Do we want a country where one man is above the Law?

bluestarone

(17,062 posts)

4. if your asking for my ok i say

Reply to kentuck (Original post)

Thu Feb 8, 2018, 07:42 PM

Feb 2018

yea ok!!! anytime your ready

Gothmog

(145,631 posts)

5. From AG Holder

Reply to kentuck (Original post)

Thu Feb 8, 2018, 07:57 PM

Feb 2018

Link to tweet

Downtown Hound

(12,618 posts)

6. There is absolutely no law or rule that says he or she can't.

Reply to kentuck (Original post)

Thu Feb 8, 2018, 08:04 PM

Feb 2018

Therefore...yes!

I've heard some Deplorables try and argue that the Justice Department is forbidden from doing so because of some legal OPINIONS:

"Several legal scholars say an effort by Mueller to initiate a case titled U.S. vs. Trump would, at a minimum, likely move quickly to the Supreme Court. There is no legal precedent for an indictment of a president — only a pair of Justice Department legal opinions, from 1973 and 2000 — saying it is not a viable option.

The 2000 opinion concluded that the indictment or criminal prosecution of a sitting president “would unconstitutionally undermine the capacity of the executive branch to perform its constitutionally assigned functions.”

But those are only opinions, not laws. And Trump's crimes are in a class all by themselves and dwarf those committed by previous presidents. So yeah, Trump could definitely be indicted. As to whether or not it will stand is another issue. But I think if the charges are serious enough (which they will be) and the evidence strong enough, the Supreme Court is going to have a tough time justifying not going through with it.