Toronto Escorts

Can a sitting president be indicted by the DOJ?

Can A Sitting President Be Indicted By The DOJ?


  • Total voters
    13
  • Poll closed .

doggystyle99

Well-known member
May 23, 2010
7,906
1,205
113
In light of today's redacted FBI report from Attorney General William Barr, and Mueller stating in the report that he adhered to DOJ guidelines that a sitting president cannot be indicted (as this was the spin the Trump camp had put into peoples minds), although contrary to William Barr lying and saying the above guidelines (a sitting president can not be indicted by the DOJ) were not a factor to Mueller's decision.

Do you believe sitting presidents can be indicted by the DOJ?
 

K Douglas

Half Man Half Amazing
Jan 5, 2005
26,131
6,340
113
Room 112
Mueller will be allowed to speak in front of Congress. They can ask him directly what his thought process was.
 

Knuckle Ball

Well-known member
Oct 15, 2017
6,793
2,787
113
I believe it is a matter of unsettled law.

The DOJ guidelines are just that...they are not law. Any policy, procedure, or guideline can be deviated from as long as there is a sound reason to do so.

As it stands, if the DOJ did indict trump it would be automatically challenged in court and appealed to the Supreme Court where they would have to make a ruling on it one way or the other.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
79,716
17,561
113
Mueller believed that he could not indict a sitting president, so his report is for congress and for congress to decide what to do with Trump.
 

jcpro

Well-known member
Jan 31, 2014
24,673
6,836
113
Well, let us look at the history. Starr had Bill Clinton cold on 11 charges. Was he indicted?
 

Mr Deeds

Muff Diver Extraordinaire
Mar 10, 2013
5,980
3,017
113
Here
Its always been the policy of the doj that you cant indict a sitting president but as I understand it there is no actual law
 

K Douglas

Half Man Half Amazing
Jan 5, 2005
26,131
6,340
113
Room 112
I'd love to see any prosecutor try and indict Trump. Won't happen. They know it would basically be the end of their career.
 

Anbarandy

Bitter House****
Apr 27, 2006
10,087
2,733
113
I'd love to see any prosecutor try and indict Trump. Won't happen. They know it would basically be the end of their career.
All of the elements needed to secure a criminal conviction for obstruction of justice times 10, never mind in Congressional impeachments hearing, are laid bare in the report.

Basically Trump was stripped naked and splayed out for all of the world to see.
 

doggystyle99

Well-known member
May 23, 2010
7,906
1,205
113
Mueller believed that he could not indict a sitting president, so his report is for congress and for congress to decide what to do with Trump.
Yes his basis for the report is that a sitting president can not be indicted by DOJ. It's not the law but it's a policy they go by.
My question is do you think a sitting president can be indicted by the DOJ?
 
O

OnTheWayOut

Impeaching it is.
The impeachment watch is back on, Frankie's life again has has meaning! What's you latest incorrect prediction? End of this year? March 17, 2020? Come on, give us more to laugh about when it fails as usual!
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
79,716
17,561
113
The impeachment watch is back on, Frankie's life again has has meaning! What's you latest incorrect prediction? End of this year? March 17, 2020? Come on, give us more to laugh about when it fails as usual!
ournalists Were Right
The Mueller report reads as a 400-page confirmation of years’ worth of reporting on Donald Trump.
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/04/mueller-report-journalism-was-right.html

I don't know.
Mueller states in his footnote that while the DOJ has a policy not to indict sitting presidents there is enough evidence to charge an ex-president.
 

oldjones

CanBarelyRe Member
Aug 18, 2001
24,495
11
38
Of course Presidents can be indicted. It is nowhere written in law that they cannot.

But the precedent is that they are not, even in the case of Nixon, who was adjudged a "co-conspirator" in Watergate crimes and their cover-up. The present case is almost exactly similar: Absent specific, formal authority to indict all the investigating counsel can do is state the evidence and their judgment of it. As with Nixon, the report explicitly says the evidence of wrongdoing is clear, and not disproven, but it is for others to indict.

Or for the incumbent to resign and leave, with what dignity and reputation they have left.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
79,716
17,561
113
Of course Presidents can be indicted. It is nowhere written in law that they cannot.

But the precedent is that they are not, even in the case of Nixon, who was adjudged a "co-conspirator" in Watergate crimes and their cover-up. The present case is almost exactly similar: Absent specific, formal authority to indict all the investigating counsel can do is state the evidence and their judgment of it. As with Nixon, the report explicitly says the evidence of wrongdoing is clear, and not disproven, but it is for others to indict.

Or for the incumbent to resign and leave, with what dignity and reputation they have left.
Mueller did write his report under the understanding that his report would never result in charges directly on Trump, according to DOJ policy.
But he did note that what he has written is likely enough to charge an ex-president in the footnotes.
 

Mr Deeds

Muff Diver Extraordinaire
Mar 10, 2013
5,980
3,017
113
Here
It wont happen anyway with Bar as the head of the DOJ he's basically a shill for Trump and is acting as his personal lawyer
 

doggystyle99

Well-known member
May 23, 2010
7,906
1,205
113

jcpro

Well-known member
Jan 31, 2014
24,673
6,836
113
Of course Presidents can be indicted. It is nowhere written in law that they cannot.

But the precedent is that they are not, even in the case of Nixon, who was adjudged a "co-conspirator" in Watergate crimes and their cover-up. The present case is almost exactly similar: Absent specific, formal authority to indict all the investigating counsel can do is state the evidence and their judgment of it. As with Nixon, the report explicitly says the evidence of wrongdoing is clear, and not disproven, but it is for others to indict.

Or for the incumbent to resign and leave, with what dignity and reputation they have left.
You forget one tiny, tiny detail. There was an actual crime committed under Nixon. Not so in this case as Mueller stated clearly and without any doubt. Mueller cites 10 cases in which the President might have crossed over into obstruction. Who is going to indict or attempt impeachment on "might have"??? For the same reason he left it out for the AG to decide because he was unable to arrive at the yes/no conclusion.
 
Toronto Escorts