I Think That DOJ Should Only Indict Trump For What He Did After Leaving Office.

[gab13by13]

If DOJ indicts Trump for crimes he committed while in office I can foresee the fascist Supreme Court ruling that Trump can't be indicted for crimes he committed while he was president.

I thin DOJ should indict Trump for obstruction of justice for what he did re: the classified documents, lying to the FBI. Even that isn't a sure thing if his lawyers take the fall for him.

[Poiuyt]

1. He was still in office when he incited a coup against America

[magicarpet]

6. He gets a free ride on the J-6 Coup d e'tat ?

What about the bogus stolen election crap and his effort to nullify and void the will of the voters with his bogus schemes.

What about the Mueller Report listing 10x of obstruction of justice ? He gets a pass there too ?

[gab13by13]

7. I think the Mueller obstruction crimes

and "individual One" crime have passed the statute of limitations.

[Bev54]

2. I think they should indict him for it all under RICO

[gab13by13]

3. I mean, I agree, but,

I don't trust this Supreme Court.

[spooky3]

5. But why should prosecutors concede defeat? Why not

Try any serious case for which they have strong evidence?

[gab13by13]

9. Just imagine if Trump was indicted

but not convicted what he would be like. I have moved to the position that DOJ should only prosecute Trump on slam dunk cases.

The obstruction crime involving the classified documents is a 20 year sentence.

[spooky3]

10. I have far less concern about that than about

The consequences of letting him slide. And the consequences you’re describing may be offset by the public’s outrage over SCOTUS’ decline.

If they have a strong case, bring it.

[tirebiter]

4. Take your pick(s)

[Gaugamela]

8. Indict for both. The stolen documents are pretty clear cut, and could

prevent him from running for office. If SCOTUS overturns a conviction for J6, then it becomes an argument to expand the court. Moreover, the indictment and trial for J6 could get convictions for Trump’s enablers, which could help discourage more coup attempts.

If the indictments spark right wing violence in the streets, so be it. Flush ‘em out and round ‘em up. I tired of playing nice with these delusional nitwits.

[spooky3]

11. +1

[kentuck]

12. That's an interesting thought...

Why not indict on both charges and let it go to the Supreme Court and let them make a ruling.

They would probably be more inclined to make a ruling on anything that happened while he was still officially the president?

Would they rule that a president has absolute power?

Both sides are probably happy putting off a decision at this time?

Garland is waiting to get the facts, and he is much more patient than I. But, it is a balancing act. How do you keep the passions moderated as people and the Courts decide how to handle this mess? Garland is in a tough position. I would not want to be in his shoes.

It's the Mob.

[Justice matters.]

15. "Would they rule that a president has absolute power"

i don't think they would kind of nullify their own branch's powers to give them to a new king, whoever that new monarch would be, and surely not to a traitor of our National Security secrets.

[Fiendish Thingy]

14. No reason he can't have multiple trials for multiple charges

The MAL espionage would likely be tried in Florida, and the J6 attempted coup in DC.

I say bankrupt the bastard.