If SC rules against Trump, can Clinton be arrested for perjury?

Looking at the ramifications for this potential ruling, it does beg the question that if a president was impeached, but not convicted by the senate, then he can be arrested once he's no longer president and charged for the same crime. The prosecutorial work is already done. The investigation is already done. It's easy enough to just charge them, have a quick trial, and throw them in Jail.

Bill Clinton was impeached for lying under oath. He was not removed from office. So based on this potential ruling, (if the statue of limitations wasn't an issue) he could theoretically be arrested, tried, and jailed for his crime. It seems this ruling (if it happens) will have lasting effects on the office of POTUS for many years to come. Joe Biden would be ripe for arrest as well. This could be a game changer. And finding out if the Dems are shooting themselves in the foot is equally exciting.

I wouldn’t hold my breath here. The implications are juicy for sure. But the precedent will be used (D)ifferently.

Some presidents are more equal than others and stuff

a reply to: network dude

It all depends on how narrow the court's ruling would be. It's possible they don't want to set any kind of sweeping precedence and write their opinion to pretty much just cover this instance.

a reply to: SteamyAmerican

I don't doubt that, but I do think things are about to change on a global scale. It seems the world has grown tired of the left's nonsense. It will be a slower transition for the US as many of the DERP's are tick-tocked into believing in Woke, but eventually, they will be wondering why everyone is pointing at them an laughing.

Well, the federal statute of limitations for perjury is 5 years, so I'll let you do the math.

a reply to: WiiDemBoyz

and your reading skills are sub par. I'll let you do that math.

Remember Obama's drone strike on Doctors Without Borders? Murder doesn't have a Statute of Limitations.

a reply to: network dude

I was under the impression that once you were elected President you kept the title even after you've 'moved on' the job. So, in effect you'll always be 'President', just not the 'serving president'.

a reply to: McUrnsalso

that was before folks started calling President Trump, Mr. Trump. it's now caught on and even Obama has been referred to as Mr. Obama. I believe in the before time, you were correct.

In theory - YES. This would open up the door for.... well..... virtually every past president that's still alive to likely be convicted of crimes they committed while in office.

On that note though, Trump is the only one that stupid people hate while they defend to the death their preferred office holding criminals, so it likely wouldn't happen in reality.

a reply to: dothedew

eventually, (or it's already happened) the left will open a door that cannot be closed and wish it could. All this TDS is making otherwise rational people act and speak very irrationally. We already now have a new normal of investigating and indicting your lead political rival. In the long ago, that just wasn't done, simply for the optics of it all. BAMN.

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: dothedew

eventually, (or it's already happened) the left will open a door that cannot be closed and wish it could. All this TDS is making otherwise rational people act and speak very irrationally. We already now have a new normal of investigating and indicting your lead political rival. In the long ago, that just wasn't done, simply for the optics of it all. BAMN.

It's been a while since words this true have been spoken.

I like it, and agree.

Things like this were reserved for the worst of the worst; nowadays it's reserved for the people that the left doesn't like.

originally posted by: network dude
...

Looking at the ramifications for this potential ruling, it does beg the question that if a president was impeached, but not convicted by the senate, then he can be arrested once he's no longer president and charged for the same crime. The prosecutorial work is already done. The investigation is already done. It's easy enough to just charge them, have a quick trial, and throw them in Jail.

.....

Not that easy, actually. Passing Articles of Impeachment only requires a simple majority vote of the House of Reps. That's equivalent to a civil case where the Plaintiff only has to prove their case by a "preponderance of evidence" (or "more likely than not").

To prosecute someone through the court system for an act that they were impeached for when they were POTUS requires proof "beyond a reasonable doubt". It takes a lot more effort to assemble a case to those standards. That's why it took about 2 1/2 years to bring criminal charges against Trump for the Jan. 6 events, even though it only took the House 1 week to impeach him the second time.

a reply to: Boomer1947

so it's possible, just not as low a threshold. Got it.

a reply to: Boomer1947

Not that easy, actually. Passing Articles of Impeachment only requires a simple majority vote of the House of Reps. That's equivalent to a civil case where the Plaintiff only has to prove their case by a "preponderance of evidence" (or "more likely than not").

To prosecute someone through the court system for an act that they were impeached for when they were POTUS requires proof "beyond a reasonable doubt". It takes a lot more effort to assemble a case to those standards. That's why it took about 2 1/2 years to bring criminal charges against Trump for the Jan. 6 events, even though it only took the House 1 week to impeach him the second time.

Except that norm got blown up also. The last "impeachment" of Trump did not go that way. Nor did the democrats have have bipartisan support for it. Pelosi resorted to hand picking the Republicans for that sham. Bad precedents seem to be set by the democrats allmthe time, nuclear option anyone?

If SC rules against Trump, can Clinton be arrested for perjury?

Can be. But won't be. The Clintons get away with everything.

a reply to: network dude

Not just POTUS.

Civil liability, judicial liability, congressional immunity etc etc etc.

Who signs the indictments for presidential criminals to be prosecuted and tried for their crimes? The AG?

He could have been, I wrote this in another thread.

Clinton committed perjury and also obstruction of justice. He was not charged for those as the special counsel at the time, Ken Starr, decided not to pursue those charges and focused on Monica Lewinsky and his impeachment. The impeachment happened in the House, and he got acquitted in the Senate. Got off scot-free.

However, there was a period of 5 years after that, in which he could have been charged yet again. The federal statue of limitation on perjury is 5 years.

Perjury Statute of Limitations

The statute of limitations for perjury under federal law is five years. Different states may have different statutes, however. Furthermore, the statute can be tolled if the offender is out of state or out of the country.

Federal Perjury Laws

a reply to: Mahogani

if the power is already there, then what is the question being posed to the SC? You claim there is no rule or law about arresting a president after his term for things he did in office.