Take the AARP Smart Driver course and you could save on auto insurance! Sign up today.

Reply
Valued Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
72
Views

Re: Shouldn't We Be Able To Indict A Sitting President?

72 Views
Message 1 of 26

All the GOPerGarp about not being able to indict a sitting President because it would "interfere with his conduct of the Office" is another smokescreen to try and protect the ToadPOTUS. The 25th amendment provides several means of transferring power to the VP during the time the President is "incapacitated" as would be the case if he were giving depositions or sitting in court being tried for obstruction of justice or even serving time for Treason.

 

The notion that we must ignore the incredible criminality of Trump, his family and his Administration because it would be bad for the country is absurd in the extreme - as if having a criminal traitor POTUS continue his treason unimpeded would be good for the country.

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
72
Views
Trusted Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
78
Views

Shouldn't We Be Able To Indict A Sitting President?

78 Views
Message 2 of 26

Centrist, obviously this issue was never decided by the Supreme Court. But one of the core principles of the Constitution was America would never have a king who's above the law. Therefore, if nobody's above the law, I would lean towards the ability to indict a sitting president. 

 

In addition, it's reasonable to believe the Mueller Team will prove Trump obtained the Presidency through an illegal relationship with Russia. If that happens, then how can you reward someone with protection against prosecution because he's president, if he obtained his presidency illegally?

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
78
Views
Treasured Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
93
Views

Re: Shouldn't We Be Able To Indict A Sitting President?

93 Views
Message 3 of 26

@NOTHAPPENING

@CriticalThinking

  Your opinion is as good as mine - just opinion!  CeeTee, I must agree with NH on his comment here....."just opinion"?  Indeed!  Yet some are far more informed than others....and obviously, it's NEVER the extremists.


"FAKE 45 #illegitimate" read a sign at the Woman's March in Washington DC, January 21, 2017.
Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
93
Views
Trusted Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
102
Views

Shouldn't We Be Able To Indict A Sitting President?

102 Views
Message 4 of 26

Pretty soon, even GOP Senators will be asking should we indict a sitting President?

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
102
Views
Regular Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
121
Views

Re: Shouldn't We Be Able To Indict A Sitting President?

121 Views
Message 5 of 26

Sealed indictment...once he leaves office, no?

 

This whole thread shows the path of division we are.

 

Oh by the way, I hope you all have a very joyous and humble Christmas, holiday season or whatever you may celebrate at this time of the year.

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
121
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
2
Kudos
138
Views

Re: Shouldn't We Be Able To Indict A Sitting President?

138 Views
Message 6 of 26

@NOTHAPPENING wrote:

@CriticalThinking wrote:

NH knows I'm essentialy a conservative but he doesn't want to admit it. I'm LOL.

 

Let me explain something for FoxBots. If a U.S. President cannot be indicted, that means he/she is above the law. And despite Not Happening's obvious lack of knowledge about our constitution, that would clearly violate the core concept. Therefore, I agree with the majority of consitutional legal scholars who believe a president can be indicted.


You can drone on about your "expertise" on the "core concepts" of the Constitution, but I say you don't know squat about the Constitution.  There are no "core concepts", only those that you imagine. You have to stop listening to CNN and MSNBC 24/7 to know nothings.


So do you believe that trump is above the law and cannot be indicted?


"The only thing man learns from history is man learns nothing from history"
Report Inappropriate Content
2
Kudos
138
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
139
Views

Re: Shouldn't We Be Able To Indict A Sitting President?

139 Views
Message 7 of 26

@NOTHAPPENING wrote:

@CriticalThinking wrote:

One of the basic tenets of the Constitution is NOBODY's ABOVE the LAW. If you follow that tenet, the President can be indicted.


I don't really remember that amendment.  Could you please point it out.


Oh?  So do you think that trump should be above the law?


"The only thing man learns from history is man learns nothing from history"
Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
139
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
176
Views

Re: Shouldn't We Be Able To Indict A Sitting President?

176 Views
Message 8 of 26

@CriticalThinking wrote:

We should understand that Trump Cult members idolize and worship their Supreme Leader in the White House. Therefore, they do NOT want him accountable to the rule of law. They want an unregulated Comrade Trump, immune from prosecution, running his criminal enterprise.


We all understand as a member of the Obama/Hillary cult, your hatred for Trump but no one is buying your expertise on the Constitution. That's what the real experts are for (the Supreme Court), interpreting the Constitution.  Your opinion is as good as mine - just opinion!

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
176
Views
Trusted Social Butterfly
3
Kudos
186
Views

Shouldn't We Be Able To Indict A Sitting President?

186 Views
Message 9 of 26

We should understand that Trump Cult members idolize and worship their Supreme Leader in the White House. Therefore, they do NOT want him accountable to the rule of law. They want an unregulated Comrade Trump, immune from prosecution, running his criminal enterprise.

Report Inappropriate Content
3
Kudos
186
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
200
Views

Re: Shouldn't We Be Able To Indict A Sitting President?

200 Views
Message 10 of 26

@CriticalThinking wrote:

NH knows I'm essentialy a conservative but he doesn't want to admit it. I'm LOL.

 

Let me explain something for FoxBots. If a U.S. President cannot be indicted, that means he/she is above the law. And despite Not Happening's obvious lack of knowledge about our constitution, that would clearly violate the core concept. Therefore, I agree with the majority of consitutional legal scholars who believe a president can be indicted.


You can drone on about your "expertise" on the "core concepts" of the Constitution, but I say you don't know squat about the Constitution.  There are no "core concepts", only those that you imagine. You have to stop listening to CNN and MSNBC 24/7 to know nothings.

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
200
Views
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Users
Announcements

Have you taken a memorable trip to a destination others should know about? Post a Trip Report


city skyline captured on tablet

Top Authors