Its time to change this "little escape clause" offered to POTUS by the DOJ

[nat4900]

After the embarrassing Starr Report....based on an investigation that went for more than FOUR years, the DOJ under Reno issued this "escape clause" for future presidents.

The seemingly simple one-sentence statement is tantamount to stating that a president IS ABOVE ANY LAW, making he or she a virtual despot....as the term was first used by the Romans.

A SITTING PRESIDENT’S AMENABILITY TO INDICTMENT AND CRIMINAL PROSECUTION
Date of Issuance:
Monday, October 16, 2000
Headnotes:
The indictment or criminal prosecution of a sitting President would unconstitutionally undermine the capacity of the executive branch to perform its constitutionally assigned functions.

A Sitting President’s Amenability to Indictment and Criminal Prosecution

The above may perhaps be the reason why someone like Trump (and unlike Bill Clinton) was NOT subpoenaed to testify under oath before a grand jury....

In simple terms, perhaps Mueller thought that if the DOJ (to whom I, Mueller, respond to) has determined that a president cannot be indicted and IS above the law, THEN........the only option open to our investigation is to point out to both Congress and the public that although not a criminal charge can be brought to the Trump campaign........evidence that the campaign was "unethical, immoral, conspiratorial and unpatriotic" (as Schiff stated) should be reviewed and Congress should contemplate if such deeds constitute "high crimes and misdemeanors."

If, however, such "non-criminal" evidence is redacted by Barr as a possible stooge of Trump...then Congress would be kept in the dark regarding what Mueller found.....and the public trust in our judicial and law enforcement system is undermined by this rogue administration and its minions.

The DOJ's above opinion exempting presidents from ANY chances of answering to either criminal or ethical misbehavior, MUST BE REVOKED.

 

[Kat]

An OP requires 3 - 4 paragraphs, a link and comment.

• Copyright. Link Each "Copy & Paste" to It's Source. Only paste a small to medium section of the material.

USMB Rules and Guidelines

 

[Lucy Hamilton]

After the embarrassing Starr Report....based on an investigation that went for more than FOUR years, the DOJ under Reno issued this "escape clause" for future presidents.

The seemingly simple one-sentence statement is tantamount to stating that a president IS ABOVE ANY LAW, making he or she a virtual despot....as the term was first used by the Romans.

A SITTING PRESIDENT’S AMENABILITY TO INDICTMENT AND CRIMINAL PROSECUTION
Date of Issuance:
Monday, October 16, 2000
Headnotes:
The indictment or criminal prosecution of a sitting President would unconstitutionally undermine the capacity of the executive branch to perform its constitutionally assigned functions.

A Sitting President’s Amenability to Indictment and Criminal Prosecution

The above may perhaps be the reason why someone like Trump (and unlike Bill Clinton) was NOT subpoenaed to testify under oath before a grand jury....

In simple terms, perhaps Mueller thought that if the DOJ (to whom I, Mueller, respond to) has determined that a president cannot be indicted and IS above the law, THEN........the only option open to our investigation is to point out to both Congress and the public that although not a criminal charge can be brought to the Trump campaign........evidence that the campaign was "unethical, immoral, conspiratorial and unpatriotic" (as Schiff stated) should be reviewed and Congress should contemplate if such deeds constitute "high crimes and misdemeanors."

If, however, such "non-criminal" evidence is redacted by Barr as a possible stooge of Trump...then Congress would be kept in the dark regarding what Mueller found.....and the public trust in our judicial and law enforcement system is undermined by this rogue administration and its minions.

The DOJ's above opinion exempting presidents from ANY chances of answering to either criminal or ethical misbehavior, MUST BE REVOKED.

If you want to change The Donald to someone else then why can't you wait and do it the democratic way at the Ballot Box put up a GOOD CANDIDATE who is NOT a Moonbat or a Warmongering Neo-Liberal like Hillary was/is, the next Presidential Election is NOT that long now, this is the way things are USUALLY done.

 

[Confounding]

An OP requires 3 - 4 paragraphs, a link and comment.

• Copyright. Link Each "Copy & Paste" to It's Source. Only paste a small to medium section of the material.

USMB Rules and Guidelines

The politics section requires a link? What if I want to have a political discussion about something I didn't read on some news website? That definitely shouldn't apply here.

 

[Lucy Hamilton]

An OP requires 3 - 4 paragraphs, a link and comment.

• Copyright. Link Each "Copy & Paste" to It's Source. Only paste a small to medium section of the material.

USMB Rules and Guidelines

The politics section requires a link? That completely prohibits original thought OPs. What if I want to have a political discussion about something I didn't read on some news website?

Then CDZ and/or General Discussion you could post an OP in to have a political discussion etc.

 

[progressive hunter]

An OP requires 3 - 4 paragraphs, a link and comment.

• Copyright. Link Each "Copy & Paste" to It's Source. Only paste a small to medium section of the material.

USMB Rules and Guidelines

The politics section requires a link? What if I want to have a political discussion about something I didn't read on some news website? That definitely shouldn't apply here.

but thats not the case here,,,

 

[Confounding]

An OP requires 3 - 4 paragraphs, a link and comment.

• Copyright. Link Each "Copy & Paste" to It's Source. Only paste a small to medium section of the material.

USMB Rules and Guidelines

The politics section requires a link? That completely prohibits original thought OPs. What if I want to have a political discussion about something I didn't read on some news website?

Then CDZ and/or General Discussion you could post an OP in to have a political discussion etc.

There's already a news/current events section though. Some of the very best threads that get posted in this section don't have a link. It's their forum and all that; I'm just stating my opinion that that rule sucks.

 

[Edgetho]

Clinton didn't HAVE to sit for questioning. He could have told Starr to go screw his dead aunt.

What's Starr gonna do about it? Arrest him??

That's the thing with libturds, they don't understand that words need to be backed up by action.

I could see the DoJ sending some pencil-necked geeks from the FBI over to arrest a sitting President and running smack-dab into the Secret Service.

Those boys (and girls) don't play. They WILL shoot your ass deader than Toby's dick if you fuck with POTUS. Without hesitation.

The President of the United States is THE most powerful Human Being on the Planet. Period. And, don't even think about sending over more punk-ass lawyers-with-badges from the FBI to try to use force on POTUS. One call and he's got the 82nd Airborne Division crawling over dead FBI Agents to get at the next ones.

The only time one was taken down was because most of the population, Congress and the Courts were opposed to his bullshit.

Even then, he stepped down voluntarily.

You don't FUCK with POTUS. He can hurt you. Hugely

 

[Lucy Hamilton]

An OP requires 3 - 4 paragraphs, a link and comment.

• Copyright. Link Each "Copy & Paste" to It's Source. Only paste a small to medium section of the material.

USMB Rules and Guidelines

The politics section requires a link? That completely prohibits original thought OPs. What if I want to have a political discussion about something I didn't read on some news website?

Then CDZ and/or General Discussion you could post an OP in to have a political discussion etc.

There's already a news/current events section though. Some of the very best threads that get posted in this section don't have a link. I mean, whatever; it's their forum and all that, but I'm just stating my opinion that that rule sucks.

Yes I know but in general the OP in Politics Zone 2 should have some type of link this so everyone can read and form their own opinion.

 

[Kat]

An OP requires 3 - 4 paragraphs, a link and comment.

• Copyright. Link Each "Copy & Paste" to It's Source. Only paste a small to medium section of the material.

USMB Rules and Guidelines

The politics section requires a link? What if I want to have a political discussion about something I didn't read on some news website? That definitely shouldn't apply here.

You can have opinion only. It is better to state that is what you are doing, and not quote anything after that.
If you quote, you should link. Please read the rules. I posted a link to them.

 

[kyzr]

Nat just doesn't like the current Laws, that were put there for a reason and remain in effect, they prohibit his deep state coup attempt, that has no chance of ever succeeding.

NO COLLUSION, NO OBSTRUCTION, NO COLLUSION, NO OBSTRUCTION, NO COLLUSION, NO OBSTRUCTION
NO COLLUSION, NO OBSTRUCTION, NO COLLUSION, NO OBSTRUCTION, NO COLLUSION, NO OBSTRUCTION
NO COLLUSION, NO OBSTRUCTION, NO COLLUSION, NO OBSTRUCTION, NO COLLUSION, NO OBSTRUCTION
NO COLLUSION, NO OBSTRUCTION, NO COLLUSION, NO OBSTRUCTION, NO COLLUSION, NO OBSTRUCTION

 

[nat4900]

After the embarrassing Starr Report....based on an investigation that went for more than FOUR years, the DOJ under Reno issued this "escape clause" for future presidents.

The seemingly simple one-sentence statement is tantamount to stating that a president IS ABOVE ANY LAW, making he or she a virtual despot....as the term was first used by the Romans.

A SITTING PRESIDENT’S AMENABILITY TO INDICTMENT AND CRIMINAL PROSECUTION
Date of Issuance:
Monday, October 16, 2000
Headnotes:
The indictment or criminal prosecution of a sitting President would unconstitutionally undermine the capacity of the executive branch to perform its constitutionally assigned functions.

A Sitting President’s Amenability to Indictment and Criminal Prosecution

The above may perhaps be the reason why someone like Trump (and unlike Bill Clinton) was NOT subpoenaed to testify under oath before a grand jury....

In simple terms, perhaps Mueller thought that if the DOJ (to whom I, Mueller, respond to) has determined that a president cannot be indicted and IS above the law, THEN........the only option open to our investigation is to point out to both Congress and the public that although not a criminal charge can be brought to the Trump campaign........evidence that the campaign was "unethical, immoral, conspiratorial and unpatriotic" (as Schiff stated) should be reviewed and Congress should contemplate if such deeds constitute "high crimes and misdemeanors."

If, however, such "non-criminal" evidence is redacted by Barr as a possible stooge of Trump...then Congress would be kept in the dark regarding what Mueller found.....and the public trust in our judicial and law enforcement system is undermined by this rogue administration and its minions.

The DOJ's above opinion exempting presidents from ANY chances of answering to either criminal or ethical misbehavior, MUST BE REVOKED.

Bear in mind Trumpists that not too far into the future, there will be a DEMOCRAT president.......and the precedent that has been set places the oval office in virtual despotic power.

 

[kyzr]

After the embarrassing Starr Report....based on an investigation that went for more than FOUR years, the DOJ under Reno issued this "escape clause" for future presidents.

The seemingly simple one-sentence statement is tantamount to stating that a president IS ABOVE ANY LAW, making he or she a virtual despot....as the term was first used by the Romans.

A SITTING PRESIDENT’S AMENABILITY TO INDICTMENT AND CRIMINAL PROSECUTION
Date of Issuance:
Monday, October 16, 2000
Headnotes:
The indictment or criminal prosecution of a sitting President would unconstitutionally undermine the capacity of the executive branch to perform its constitutionally assigned functions.

A Sitting President’s Amenability to Indictment and Criminal Prosecution

The above may perhaps be the reason why someone like Trump (and unlike Bill Clinton) was NOT subpoenaed to testify under oath before a grand jury....

In simple terms, perhaps Mueller thought that if the DOJ (to whom I, Mueller, respond to) has determined that a president cannot be indicted and IS above the law, THEN........the only option open to our investigation is to point out to both Congress and the public that although not a criminal charge can be brought to the Trump campaign........evidence that the campaign was "unethical, immoral, conspiratorial and unpatriotic" (as Schiff stated) should be reviewed and Congress should contemplate if such deeds constitute "high crimes and misdemeanors."

If, however, such "non-criminal" evidence is redacted by Barr as a possible stooge of Trump...then Congress would be kept in the dark regarding what Mueller found.....and the public trust in our judicial and law enforcement system is undermined by this rogue administration and its minions.

The DOJ's above opinion exempting presidents from ANY chances of answering to either criminal or ethical misbehavior, MUST BE REVOKED.

Bear in mind Trumpists that not too far into the future, there will be a DEMOCRAT president.......and the precedent that has been set places the oval office in virtual despotic power.

Impeachment is the remedy for "high crimes and misdemeanors" of a president, its in the Constitution.
The primary and election process should do an adequate job of vetting presidents.
After the election if you have grounds for impeachment go for it. Otherwise its just whiny partisan bullshit.

 

[Lesh]

After the embarrassing Starr Report....based on an investigation that went for more than FOUR years, the DOJ under Reno issued this "escape clause" for future presidents.

The seemingly simple one-sentence statement is tantamount to stating that a president IS ABOVE ANY LAW, making he or she a virtual despot....as the term was first used by the Romans.

A SITTING PRESIDENT’S AMENABILITY TO INDICTMENT AND CRIMINAL PROSECUTION
Date of Issuance:
Monday, October 16, 2000
Headnotes:
The indictment or criminal prosecution of a sitting President would unconstitutionally undermine the capacity of the executive branch to perform its constitutionally assigned functions.

A Sitting President’s Amenability to Indictment and Criminal Prosecution

The above may perhaps be the reason why someone like Trump (and unlike Bill Clinton) was NOT subpoenaed to testify under oath before a grand jury....

In simple terms, perhaps Mueller thought that if the DOJ (to whom I, Mueller, respond to) has determined that a president cannot be indicted and IS above the law, THEN........the only option open to our investigation is to point out to both Congress and the public that although not a criminal charge can be brought to the Trump campaign........evidence that the campaign was "unethical, immoral, conspiratorial and unpatriotic" (as Schiff stated) should be reviewed and Congress should contemplate if such deeds constitute "high crimes and misdemeanors."

If, however, such "non-criminal" evidence is redacted by Barr as a possible stooge of Trump...then Congress would be kept in the dark regarding what Mueller found.....and the public trust in our judicial and law enforcement system is undermined by this rogue administration and its minions.

The DOJ's above opinion exempting presidents from ANY chances of answering to either criminal or ethical misbehavior, MUST BE REVOKED.

Bear in mind Trumpists that not too far into the future, there will be a DEMOCRAT president.......and the precedent that has been set places the oval office in virtual despotic power.

And when that happens...they will dutifully change theior opinion just like they do with the deficit.

Just in the last 15 years I have heard "Deficits don't matter" from Cheney...DEFICITS ARE THE END OF THE WORLD from Ryan etc. during the Obama years and now of course...they don't matter again.

It's the Goldfish Principle. Every day is brand new. Yesterday never happened

 

[Lesh]

Impeachment is the remedy for "high crimes and misdemeanors" of a president, its in the Constitution.

We need to see the Mueller Report

 

[kyzr]

Impeachment is the remedy for "high crimes and misdemeanors" of a president, its in the Constitution.

We need to see the Mueller Report

You will see the Mueller Report, and then the required redactions will be called a "coverup". Then what?
Innocent until proven guilty should be the only outcome.

 

[bripat9643]

After the embarrassing Starr Report....based on an investigation that went for more than FOUR years, the DOJ under Reno issued this "escape clause" for future presidents.

The seemingly simple one-sentence statement is tantamount to stating that a president IS ABOVE ANY LAW, making he or she a virtual despot....as the term was first used by the Romans.

A SITTING PRESIDENT’S AMENABILITY TO INDICTMENT AND CRIMINAL PROSECUTION
Date of Issuance:
Monday, October 16, 2000
Headnotes:
The indictment or criminal prosecution of a sitting President would unconstitutionally undermine the capacity of the executive branch to perform its constitutionally assigned functions.

A Sitting President’s Amenability to Indictment and Criminal Prosecution

The above may perhaps be the reason why someone like Trump (and unlike Bill Clinton) was NOT subpoenaed to testify under oath before a grand jury....

In simple terms, perhaps Mueller thought that if the DOJ (to whom I, Mueller, respond to) has determined that a president cannot be indicted and IS above the law, THEN........the only option open to our investigation is to point out to both Congress and the public that although not a criminal charge can be brought to the Trump campaign........evidence that the campaign was "unethical, immoral, conspiratorial and unpatriotic" (as Schiff stated) should be reviewed and Congress should contemplate if such deeds constitute "high crimes and misdemeanors."

If, however, such "non-criminal" evidence is redacted by Barr as a possible stooge of Trump...then Congress would be kept in the dark regarding what Mueller found.....and the public trust in our judicial and law enforcement system is undermined by this rogue administration and its minions.

The DOJ's above opinion exempting presidents from ANY chances of answering to either criminal or ethical misbehavior, MUST BE REVOKED.

Bear in mind Trumpists that not too far into the future, there will be a DEMOCRAT president.......and the precedent that has been set places the oval office in virtual despotic power.

So conducting espionage against the opposition candidate and trying to get him impeached is not despotic?

 

[bripat9643]

After the embarrassing Starr Report....based on an investigation that went for more than FOUR years, the DOJ under Reno issued this "escape clause" for future presidents.

The seemingly simple one-sentence statement is tantamount to stating that a president IS ABOVE ANY LAW, making he or she a virtual despot....as the term was first used by the Romans.

A SITTING PRESIDENT’S AMENABILITY TO INDICTMENT AND CRIMINAL PROSECUTION
Date of Issuance:
Monday, October 16, 2000
Headnotes:
The indictment or criminal prosecution of a sitting President would unconstitutionally undermine the capacity of the executive branch to perform its constitutionally assigned functions.

A Sitting President’s Amenability to Indictment and Criminal Prosecution

The above may perhaps be the reason why someone like Trump (and unlike Bill Clinton) was NOT subpoenaed to testify under oath before a grand jury....

In simple terms, perhaps Mueller thought that if the DOJ (to whom I, Mueller, respond to) has determined that a president cannot be indicted and IS above the law, THEN........the only option open to our investigation is to point out to both Congress and the public that although not a criminal charge can be brought to the Trump campaign........evidence that the campaign was "unethical, immoral, conspiratorial and unpatriotic" (as Schiff stated) should be reviewed and Congress should contemplate if such deeds constitute "high crimes and misdemeanors."

If, however, such "non-criminal" evidence is redacted by Barr as a possible stooge of Trump...then Congress would be kept in the dark regarding what Mueller found.....and the public trust in our judicial and law enforcement system is undermined by this rogue administration and its minions.

The DOJ's above opinion exempting presidents from ANY chances of answering to either criminal or ethical misbehavior, MUST BE REVOKED.

Bear in mind Trumpists that not too far into the future, there will be a DEMOCRAT president.......and the precedent that has been set places the oval office in virtual despotic power.

And when that happens...they will dutifully change theior opinion just like they do with the deficit.

Just in the last 15 years I have heard "Deficits don't matter" from Cheney...DEFICITS ARE THE END OF THE WORLD from Ryan etc. during the Obama years and now of course...they don't matter again.

It's the Goldfish Principle. Every day is brand new. Yesterday never happened

I realize things don't work this way in the Dim party, but in the Republican Part different people have different opinions.

 

[nat4900]

So conducting espionage against the opposition candidate and trying to get him impeached is not despotic?

Only in your fucking half brain........Have some more kool-aid

 

[hadit]

After the embarrassing Starr Report....based on an investigation that went for more than FOUR years, the DOJ under Reno issued this "escape clause" for future presidents.

The seemingly simple one-sentence statement is tantamount to stating that a president IS ABOVE ANY LAW, making he or she a virtual despot....as the term was first used by the Romans.

A SITTING PRESIDENT’S AMENABILITY TO INDICTMENT AND CRIMINAL PROSECUTION
Date of Issuance:
Monday, October 16, 2000
Headnotes:
The indictment or criminal prosecution of a sitting President would unconstitutionally undermine the capacity of the executive branch to perform its constitutionally assigned functions.

A Sitting President’s Amenability to Indictment and Criminal Prosecution

The above may perhaps be the reason why someone like Trump (and unlike Bill Clinton) was NOT subpoenaed to testify under oath before a grand jury....

In simple terms, perhaps Mueller thought that if the DOJ (to whom I, Mueller, respond to) has determined that a president cannot be indicted and IS above the law, THEN........the only option open to our investigation is to point out to both Congress and the public that although not a criminal charge can be brought to the Trump campaign........evidence that the campaign was "unethical, immoral, conspiratorial and unpatriotic" (as Schiff stated) should be reviewed and Congress should contemplate if such deeds constitute "high crimes and misdemeanors."

If, however, such "non-criminal" evidence is redacted by Barr as a possible stooge of Trump...then Congress would be kept in the dark regarding what Mueller found.....and the public trust in our judicial and law enforcement system is undermined by this rogue administration and its minions.

The DOJ's above opinion exempting presidents from ANY chances of answering to either criminal or ethical misbehavior, MUST BE REVOKED.

That's why you wait until he's out of office. That's justice. Of course, if all you're looking for is political damage to force a president out of office, no need to change anything.