Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

kentuck

(110,950 posts)
Thu May 17, 2018, 11:44 AM May 2018

Under what circumstances can a president be indicted ?

On Stephanie Ruhle's show this morning, she read something from DOJ regulations that indicated the decision is up to the Attorney General, depending on the severity of the charges?

It is odd that Guiliani, Trump's personal attorney, speaks as though his client is guilty and he is just looking for the best plea deal?

It is not a settled law. If Rosenstein were to say that Trump should be indicted, it would likely go to the Supreme Court, where it would be settled.

It would be difficult to imagine how charges could get any worse than conspiring with an enemy??

4 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

unblock

(51,974 posts)
1. with this supreme court, one never knows; however, it's hard to imagine that they would decide
Thu May 17, 2018, 11:52 AM
May 2018

that a president has blanket immunity from indictment while president.

that means a president could kill people in the oval office with his bare hands, shoot political opponents, steal, rape, and pillage, and he's immune from even indictment for the length of his term?

in theory, impeachment could expedite that process, but aside from congress's current dysfunction in that regard, would any congress impeach and remove while the president is able to freely kill anyone he pleases, including members of congress he thinks might vote against him?


in any event, an indictment in and of itself doesn't in any way interfere with presidential duties. a *trial* could, but that's an entirely different question.

imho, there's really no constitutional basis to bar an indictment against a sitting president.



there's much more of a legitimate question about whether a sitting president can be tried, as that could be determined to interfere with a president's constitutional duties. that said, the court already determined that a civil trial against a sitting president can proceed, so it's very difficult to thread the needle to determine that a criminal trial would interfere in a way a civil trial wouldn't.

rock

(13,218 posts)
4. What you said
Thu May 17, 2018, 01:18 PM
May 2018

It's mainly the republicans that seem to think that there's of exceptions to Law.

Cattledog

(5,897 posts)
2. Mueller, Rosenstein would never say that Trump should be indicted. That would be irresponsible.
Thu May 17, 2018, 11:59 AM
May 2018

Only a Grand Jury can indict someone. Mueller will present his case to a GJ, and they will decide if a crime has been committed.

https://www.justice.gov/usao/justice-101/charging

PoliticAverse

(26,366 posts)
3. The current official position of the DOJ is that a President cannot be indicted...
Thu May 17, 2018, 12:30 PM
May 2018

(This could always change, of course):

From 10-16-2000:

The indictment or cniminal prosecution of a sitting President would unconstitutionally undermine the
capacity of the executive branch to perform its constitutionally assigned function.

https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/olc/opinions/2000/10/31/op-olc-v024-p0222_0.pdf
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Under what circumstances ...