Page 1 of 9 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 82

Thread: Can a Sitting President be Indicted?

  1. #1
    See, the Thing is... Cow Poke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    The Republic of Texas
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    49,873
    Amen (Given)
    10692
    Amen (Received)
    23349

    Can a Sitting President be Indicted?

    This issue keeps getting tossed around, for example, to explain why Mueller didn't indict, or call for the indictment of, Trump.

    Here's an example of the argument....

    Quote Originally Posted by JimL View Post
    How many times do you need to read the Mueller report before your able understand that he, according to the Justice dept. law, can not charge/indict a sitting president.
    A) There is ZERO "Justice dept. law [sic]" addressing the issue - if this is incorrect, please cite the statute
    2) There is, apparently, a Justice Department POLICY
    c) The Constitution is silent on the matter.

    Even Eric Holder, Obama's unelected wing man, expresses doubt that a sitting president can NOT be indicted.



    So, aside from opinion, can somebody provide CASE LAW to positively state that a POTUS can NOT be indicted?
    --- this space intentionally left blank ---

  2. #2
    tWebber firstfloor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    invalid value
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    3,695
    Amen (Given)
    15
    Amen (Received)
    339
    Edited by a Moderator

    Moderated By: DesertBerean

    Argument by weblink not allowed

    ***If you wish to take issue with this notice DO NOT do so in this thread.***
    Contact the forum moderator or an administrator in Private Message or email instead. If you feel you must publicly complain or whine, please take it to the Padded Room unless told otherwise.

    Last edited by DesertBerean; 05-10-2019 at 04:48 PM.
    “I think God, in creating man, somewhat overestimated his ability.” ― Oscar Wilde
    “You can safely assume you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do.” ― Anne Lamott
    “And if there were a God, I think it very unlikely that He would have such an uneasy vanity as to be offended by those who doubt His existence” ― Bertrand Russell

  3. #3
    tWebber Mountain Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    United States
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    15,087
    Amen (Given)
    5435
    Amen (Received)
    5210
    Quote Originally Posted by Cow Poke View Post
    This issue keeps getting tossed around, for example, to explain why Mueller didn't indict, or call for the indictment of, Trump.

    Here's an example of the argument....



    A) There is ZERO "Justice dept. law [sic]" addressing the issue - if this is incorrect, please cite the statute
    2) There is, apparently, a Justice Department POLICY
    c) The Constitution is silent on the matter.

    Even Eric Holder, Obama's unelected wing man, expresses doubt that a sitting president can NOT be indicted.



    So, aside from opinion, can somebody provide CASE LAW to positively state that a POTUS can NOT be indicted?
    The other issue is that there is no rule that would have prevented Mueller from plainly stating if he thought the President had committed a crime or recommending indictment.

    Furthermore, Barr said in his letter to Congress that "Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and I have concluded that the evidence developed during the Special Counsel's investigation is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction-of-justice offense. Our determination was made without regard to, and is not based on, the constitutional considerations that surround the indictment and criminal prosecution of a sitting president."

    So really, this whole issue is moot.
    Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
    But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
    Than a fool in the eyes of God


    From "Fools Gold" by Petra

  4. #4
    See, the Thing is... Cow Poke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    The Republic of Texas
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    49,873
    Amen (Given)
    10692
    Amen (Received)
    23349
    Edited by a Moderator

    A) That's argument by weblink, which is a no-no
    2) I specifically asked for somebody to cite case law, not just another opinion.

    But thanks for trying - always good to see you around.
    Last edited by DesertBerean; 05-10-2019 at 04:51 PM.
    --- this space intentionally left blank ---

  5. #5
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    11,928
    Amen (Given)
    1482
    Amen (Received)
    1400
    Quote Originally Posted by Cow Poke View Post
    This issue keeps getting tossed around, for example, to explain why Mueller didn't indict, or call for the indictment of, Trump.

    Here's an example of the argument....



    A) There is ZERO "Justice dept. law [sic]" addressing the issue - if this is incorrect, please cite the statute
    2) There is, apparently, a Justice Department POLICY
    c) The Constitution is silent on the matter.

    Even Eric Holder, Obama's unelected wing man, expresses doubt that a sitting president can NOT be indicted.



    So, aside from opinion, can somebody provide CASE LAW to positively state that a POTUS can NOT be indicted?
    Do you know of a sitting President that was indicted?

  6. #6
    See, the Thing is... Cow Poke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    The Republic of Texas
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    49,873
    Amen (Given)
    10692
    Amen (Received)
    23349
    Quote Originally Posted by JimL View Post
    Do you know of a sitting President that was indicted?
    Ah, the ignorant "because something has not yet happened is proof that it cannot happen" argument!

    Here, lemme help you out... what you actually said was....

    he, according to the Justice dept. law, can not charge/indict a sitting president.
    What law? Or are you prepared to admit there isn't one.
    --- this space intentionally left blank ---

  7. #7
    Troll Magnet Sparko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    46,434
    Amen (Given)
    4485
    Amen (Received)
    20695
    Quote Originally Posted by Cow Poke View Post
    Ah, the ignorant "because something has not yet happened is proof that it cannot happen" argument!

    Here, lemme help you out... what you actually said was....



    What law? Or are you prepared to admit there isn't one.
    Jim just says whatever it takes to make himself sound authoritative, but never backs it up.

  8. #8
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    11,928
    Amen (Given)
    1482
    Amen (Received)
    1400
    Quote Originally Posted by Cow Poke View Post
    Ah, the ignorant "because something has not yet happened is proof that it cannot happen" argument!
    You asked a question, I gave you the answer you should have easily figured out all by yourself. How could there be case law, if there has never been such a case?
    Here, lemme help you out... what you actually said was....



    What law? Or are you prepared to admit there isn't one.
    The policy is the law of the Justice dept. Why do you think they have that policy, just for the fun of it! Mueller was following Justice Dept. policy.

  9. #9
    See, the Thing is... Cow Poke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    The Republic of Texas
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    49,873
    Amen (Given)
    10692
    Amen (Received)
    23349
    Quote Originally Posted by JimL View Post
    You asked a question, I gave you the answer you should have easily figured out all by yourself. How could there be case law, if there has never been such a case?
    Well, I'm not the one who said "according to the Justice dept. law" when no such law exists. That was you, JimmyPoo.

    The policy is the law of the Justice dept.
    No. That's just stupid. Policy is NOT law.

    Why do you think they have that policy, just for the fun of it! Mueller was following Justice Dept. policy.
    Jimmy, honey, when you say something really stupid, it's best not to double down and say even stupider stuff. Tassman wants so badly to think you're smarter than that.
    --- this space intentionally left blank ---

  10. #10
    Troll Magnet Sparko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    46,434
    Amen (Given)
    4485
    Amen (Received)
    20695
    Quote Originally Posted by JimL View Post
    You asked a question, I gave you the answer you should have easily figured out all by yourself. How could there be case law, if there has never been such a case?


    The policy is the law of the Justice dept. Why do you think they have that policy, just for the fun of it! Mueller was following Justice Dept. policy.
    That last sentence makes absolutely no sense. Policy is not law. And you still haven't shown the law that says a sitting President can't be indicted. Nor any policy to that effect.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •