General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsI'm thinking Mueller not only CAN indict a sitting president
It's HIS DUTY!!! He's gotta know what's at stake here! (MY OPINION ONLY)
dchill
(38,474 posts)Cary
(11,746 posts)We shall see.
magicarpet
(14,145 posts)SCantiGOP
(13,869 posts)Everything I have read indicates that his position (and the prevailing sentiment of constitutional scholars and previous SCOTUS decisions) is that a sitting President cannot be indicted.
The remedy lies in impeachment, after which the ex-President becomes a regular citizen and has no protection.
bluestarone
(16,917 posts)unblock
(52,205 posts)There is a doj policy and limitations on Mueller's scope that likely prevent mueller from indicting, at least directly.
The Supreme Court has never ruled on the issue.
The only reason it may *seem* like constitutional scholars think a sitting president cannot be indicted is because republicans have been trotting out the few who agree with this tyrannical pipe dream. If it's ever argued before the Supreme Court, you'll see a list a mile long of amicus briefs saying a sitting president most definitely *can* be indicted.
Doitnow
(1,103 posts)bluestarone
(16,917 posts)RUMP has to testify (maybe against Pence and the whole bunch of REPUBS) with Mueller? If not he could go to prison himself. Any thoughts on this?
SCantiGOP
(13,869 posts)You can only claim 5th amendment right to not testify against yourself if you are facing prosecution. If you have been pardoned that doesnt apply, so you can be jailed for contempt if you refuse to testify or perjury if you lie.
marylandblue
(12,344 posts)AFAIK, he has been silent as a sphinx for this entire investigation.
unblock
(52,205 posts)I'm not certain, but there are some restrictions to Mueller's scope and there are doj policies that, I've heard, may keep him from indicting a sitting president directly.
He can, and will, lay out the argument for why he should be indicted, and then rosenstein will do the indictment under less restrictive doj scope and policies.
At least that's my guess....
bluestarone
(16,917 posts)You could be right here!
marylandblue
(12,344 posts)unblock
(52,205 posts)Mr. Ected
(9,670 posts)Otherwise a President COULD shoot someone dead in broad daylight and avoid prosecution.
With this Congress, that's not even a far-fetched thought.
When the only thing lacking from an indictment for treason is the fact that your collaborators were not engaged in a military battle with you at the time (though they were engaged in a cyber war and are nonetheless considered a hostile foreign power), and there is a good case to be made that many Congressmen were co-conspirators in a political racketeering ring and therefore your jury pool has been compromised....
...I'd say a sitting President should be subject to criminal indictment under these extraordinary circumstances.
bluestarone
(16,917 posts)Hoyt
(54,770 posts)I hope he does, but I thought Fitzgerald would get bush and cheney. Nothing.
In summer of 2016, we probably would have believed Comey would not tolerate trumps campaign irregularities, right up until he released a fictitious investigation letter 11 days before the election that helped beat Clinton.
With what we already know, Mueller could have already indicted trump and/or his kids for at least obstruction or lying to investigators. He has to know that trump is hurting, perhaps destroying, the country. Yet, he seems in no hurry to at least let voters know what they deserve before the November elections.
Shortly, it will be too late to indict or release evidence that might sway the election.
Neither Congress or a significant portion of the electorate seems to really give a damn about what trump was directly involved in, or at least too stupid and crooked to care or stop.
Im not at all sure that Mueller is going to save us from 2+ more years of this.
unblock
(52,205 posts)He's likely to save Donnie for last. Before that, there are a whole lot of indictments and deals and trials to get through.
He's not going to alter the course of other prosecutions for the sake of the political calendar.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)saying, but stopping trump is more important than taking several years to build the perfect prosecution.
For all we know, hes just going through motions to bolster his retirement savings. At least Fitzgerald ended it relatively quickly rather than keeping those who wanted bush/Cheney perp-walked hanging on.
At a minimum, its time for a preliminary report BEFORE the election. If he hasnt got something solid by this time that will wake enough people up, he never will.
unblock
(52,205 posts)Prosecutors really have a duty to put the political implications out of their minds. They're trained to work their way up in big cases and get everyone they can, not just the big fish.
And they're definitely trained to avoid doing anything that could be taken as interfering with the election process. Then again, so does the fbi, and comey ignored that....
Mr. Ected
(9,670 posts)To ensure that veritable political witch hunts cannot be used to remove him from his office.
For Mueller to act rapidly, or rashly, or to conduct himself in such a manner that the Republicans and all of their constituents would deem his actions partisan, or predicated on capricious allegations, would nullify his sanctioned work and cast a true cloud of doubt over his motivations.
Easy does it. That's the only way, unfortunately.
It certainly doesn't help that many of Trump's crimes have been done in public (his obstruction, his admission of guilt this morning), so we expect for law enforcement to move equally as fast and openly. If it was you or me, it probably would boomerang back at us at breakneck speed. And it should.
But Mueller has to protect the office of the presidency, which will outlive Trump and outlive us all.
I just hope the USA is still the USA when the hammer drops.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)the majority of voters by now, he never will.
Im ready to hear where this is going. If its headed toward another Fitzmas, so be it. But we deserve to know before November.
Raine1967
(11,589 posts)I'm not in the camp of thinking that Mueller "bent on bringing trump down".
I am in the camp of his investigation taking things where they go.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)Im sorry, this is more than we are going to get our man no matter how long it takes to investigate every aspect of possible criminality and impropriety.
They didnt do that with Hillary Clinton. They convicted or tainted her in public opinion.
I dont care if hes convicted in court or Senate. I want him out of office or neutered as soon as possible.
Nasruddin
(752 posts)He must have a theory, or set of theories, about these cases. It will be fascinating to hear/read his explanation. Someday.
Right now it seems like a glacial poker game. But who's holding the aces and eights?
beachbum bob
(10,437 posts)Mueller does what needs to be done to save our nation....
bluestarone
(16,917 posts)C_U_L8R
(45,000 posts)Obstruction, conspiracy, money laundering, hacked election, stolen Presidency.
Yes, please indict.
the_sly_pig
(741 posts)klook
(12,154 posts)prohibiting indictment of a sitting president, and I think Preet is in a better position than any of us here to opine on the matter.
marylandblue
(12,344 posts)Unless he has spoken to Mueller about the issue, and I am sure he hasn't.
klook
(12,154 posts)How about you?
Gary Kasparov knows more about chess than I do. Margaret Atwood knows more about writing than I do. And Preet Bharara knows more about the law than I do. Maybe you're on his level, I don't know.
marylandblue
(12,344 posts)There is an opinion of the OLC. There are also opposite opinions of prior special counsels. Which will he follow? That's really a judgement call.
Brother Buzz
(36,418 posts)At least not until he has the sit-down with the orange anus. After that, who knows.
at140
(6,110 posts)If Mueller has enough evidence to indict orange man after year and a half, he would have done so by now. Rudy G is not going to allow interview under oath because of perjury trap.
If he does have evidence to indict, it could end up in SCOTUS. That would be long delays in resolution. In the meanwhile the orange man will go berserk and out of control with executive orders, pardons, starting wars, etc.
Best opportunity is coming in November. If both House & Senate turn democratic, impeachment can begin. That is the method spelled out in constitution, and SCOTUS can do nothing to stop it, Kavanaugh or no Kavanaugh.
Nasruddin
(752 posts)Where do you get the ~66 senators you need to convict and remove from office?
at140
(6,110 posts)They are afraid to openly oppose him, but given the
opportunity to remove him, they will jump on it.
ElementaryPenguin
(7,800 posts)Since this is not a duly elected sitting president - but a traitorous imposter who conspired to steal the election (which Mueller is in a unique to position to know for a certainty)!
VOX
(22,976 posts)It won't be long before some OUTRAGEOUSLY serious shit happens, unless someone can slow down the mega-disaster that's sure to come without any action to prevent it.
bluestarone
(16,917 posts)I'm afraid YOU ARE EXACTLY RIGHT ON THE MONEY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BLUEWAVE is our only hope to slow this nightmare down! ( except for Mueller that is)
VOX
(22,976 posts)I'm not proud!
I've never seen/heard/lived in such total, wall-to-wall insanity. Americans divided against Americans, because one group has been coaxed into an alternate reality, where up is down, Russia is our best pal forever, white nationalism is the thing, the rich deserve to be richer, and if you're poor, it's your fault.
Couldn't be crazier, but I might regret even saying that!
Nasruddin
(752 posts)When we finally come up for air, we need to rethink this system. We have to be able to get rid of incompetency without a horrible political process called impeachment, which has never worked, either. We've had a fair number of incompetent presidents and cabinet officers over the past 200 years, this set being the worst but not the only bad ones.
The guys from the enlightenment were smart, but they didn't know everything. They didn't understand about psychopaths (our problem), they didn't understand cognitive dissonance, they didn't understand the concept of statistical ties (election of 2000), they thought (well, John Marshall thought) a collection of unelected legislators reviewing laws was a good idea. Mmm, maybe not.
Loki Liesmith
(4,602 posts)DeminPennswoods
(15,284 posts)I think this investigation is so serious and so far-ranging in its criminality, Mueller and Rosenstein will agree Trump and everyone else involved should and will be indicted.
at140
(6,110 posts)for Mueller & Rosenstein?