Mueller's team told President's legal team they cannot indict a sitting President

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: face23785

No we all assumed he would go with that.
That won't stop the impeachment though.

Impeachement means nothing, keep hoping for it because he will serve out his 8 years anyway just like Bill Clinton did. But then again the Dems blew their lead in the midterms and there will be no Blue Wave so don't count on any impeachment either.

a reply to: introvert

The power to pardon already made it crystal clear that the POTUS is above the law and there's no true separation of powers.

originally posted by: carewemust
Stormy Daniel's crooked attorney just told Anderson Cooper that Trump CAN be indicted for paying Stormy.
WTF universe does that guy live in? He's on CNN daily, hoping for some traction. Even Anderson is looking at Avenatti like he's crazy now, lol.

Because her case is civil and not criminal and because it occurred before Trump was President they can bring the civil case and Trump would not be protected by sovereign immunity.

imo her lawyer is trying to get his 15 minutes of fame before he is exposed for the fraud he is and Democrats stop supporting him.

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: kaylaluv
As we discovered with Comey regarding Hillary, they indeed do not make the indictment. What they do is to produce a report and make a recommendation to indict or not indict based on that report. We all remember that Comey did not recommend indictment for Hillary.

So, this isn’t anything we don’t already know.

I guess there is something you don't know.

You cannot indict a sitting President. You cannot bring criminal prosecution against a sitting President, no matter how hard you squish your eyes together and pray differently.

You can impeach a sitting President for high crimes or treason, which just removes him from office. THEN you can bring criminal charges.

Hillary, if you remember, was not President.

Apples and witches.

Hope I helped your misconception of American Constitutional law.

FINALLY. Someone gets it. Star for you sir or madam

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: face23785

Do you honestly think that rules, laws, guidelines, morals, values, ethics, rights, are going to stop leftists from ousting the president?

It didnt stop the left from ousting President Kennedy.

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: introvert

The power to pardon already made it crystal clear that the POTUS is above the law and there's no true separation of powers.

Presidential pardons dont apply to state crimes (except for New York State where it does apply). Pardon authority is a constitutional power. Pardons have no application / impact on impeachment.

People need to understand the difference between Donald J. Trump and President Donald J., Trump.

One is the man and the other is the office and their is a fundamental difference between both.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Lumenari

The truth is that has not been tested in a court of law.
However Mueller is going with traditional wisdom. If it's believed he will anyway.

The truth is that it has, in several cases. I posted but a few of the court decisions.

However, if that is what you are going to pin your little heart on is an eventual Supreme Court decision on it because Stormy or Russians or Cohen or Obstruction of Justice or any other BS won't fix your Villianary not getting the Presidency so you can just get an election cancelled because... feelings... then keep spinning your wheels as well.

It's time you are spending hoping for it, after all.

Not mine.

a reply to: Xcathdra

If it was easy to sue the President can you imagine the mess it would cause?

Hasn't he been involved in several suits during his time as president?

It is why impeachment is a political question and not a legal question.

Separate, yes. But what you speak of protects entities, not individuals.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Lumenari

No there's no law that says this. It's never been tested because we've never had a criminal president before. It's general!y thought that you can't because it could disrupt the running of the country. Not that an impeachment wouldn't do the same thing.
So now the question... if there is no criminal indictment does that remove the fifth amendment from the equation since there is no court of law to be incriminated in?
Meaning he has to answer and he still can't lie.

Actually, we have in recent history had two criminal Presidents. Nixon and Clinton.

In the case of Nixon, Democratic lawmakers got together and decided that they could not indict a sitting president. It would not be Constitutional, because it would be interfering with the duties of said President.

In the case of Clinton, Republican lawmakers got together and decided that they could not indict a sitting president. It would not be Constitutional, because it would be interfering with the duties of said President.

So do you ever get tired of being wrong, or is the rumor about you true and you just wake up the next morning not remembering anything you said the day before except that no matter what, you were right?

I don't really need an answer to that.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Oh, I understood that and It doesn't impact anything I wrote. The powers I spoke of are separated under the US constitution, not a state constitution.

originally posted by: introvert
Hasn't he been involved in several suits during his time as president?

Personally yes - all civil and all prior to his becoming President which is why he had to deal with them when he was elected.

originally posted by: introvert
Separate, yes. But what you speak of protects entities, not individuals.

The office of the President of the United States is in fact an entity.

a reply to: face23785

" Mueller's team told President's legal team they cannot indict a sitting President "


Kind of Hard to Indict President Trump EVEN if he was Not the President if you have ABSOLUTELY No EVIDENCE to Indict in the First Place,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

a reply to: Xcathdra

The office of the President of the United States is in fact an entity.

So the office itself, or the entity, is protected, but not the individual.

That was my point.

originally posted by: face23785
This is really gonna ruin some folks' days.

Using CNN so nobody cries that I linked to Fox

Special counsel Robert Mueller's team has informed President Donald Trump's attorneys that they have concluded that they cannot indict a sitting president, according to the President's lawyer.

"All they get to do is write a report," Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani told CNN. "They can't indict. At least they acknowledged that to us after some battling, they acknowledged that to us."

That conclusion is likely based on longstanding Justice Department guidelines. It is not about any assessment of the evidence Mueller's team has compiled.

This shouldn't really be news to anyone, but it is, so I'm posting it. Basically Mueller will turn over any "evidence" he finds to Congress and they will decide whether or not to impeach the President over it.

It isn't.

Everyone knew that.


So what was the whole point of the investigation besides smearing/ins policy?

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: Lumenari

Comey could not have indicted Hillary. All Comey could do was to recommend or not recommend an indictment. I didn’t address who could actually indict, only that Comey or Mueller couldn’t.

Yeah a joke.

It's all BS.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Lumenari

The truth is that has not been tested in a court of law.
However Mueller is going with traditional wisdom. If it's believed he will anyway.

Mueller will be the only mofo shot in 200 yrs when this is over.

Virginia slim or Newport?

originally posted by: TinfoilTP

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: face23785

No we all assumed he would go with that.
That won't stop the impeachment though.

Impeachement means nothing, keep hoping for it because he will serve out his 8 years anyway just like Bill Clinton did. But then again the Dems blew their lead in the midterms and there will be no Blue Wave so don't count on any impeachment either.

BTW the impeachment of Clinton was in his second term... So its premature to say that Trump will serve 8 years because of an impeachment. Maybe learn some history before making claims?

originally posted by: kaylaluv
As we discovered with Comey regarding Hillary, they indeed do not make the indictment. What they do is to produce a report and make a recommendation to indict or not indict based on that report. We all remember that Comey did not recommend indictment for Hillary.

So, this isn’t anything we don’t already know.

Yes I am glad you admitted that.

which means that it was Loretta Lynch, who met with Hillarys husband in secret on a tarmac, that ultimately made the decision because she refused to recuse herself.

And yet somehow anti trumpers are ok with this.

president even after leaving office will not be tried. pence will pardon him if it happens.

tSo now the question... if there is no criminal indictment does that remove the fifth amendment from the equation since there is no court of law to be incriminated in? 
Meaning he has to answer and he still can't lie.

Hahahahahaha
"Can we violate his constitutional rights cause I don't like the liars?"