Who would be against this law being passed???

[Harry Dresden]

nat a partisan hack?......what gave you that idea?..

Instead of trolling for attention....Address the fucking question posed or go play with yourself someplace else.

You pose an honest question and these pantywaists post deflective drivel.
They are as cowardly as their Dear Leader.
.
.
.

deflective drivel?....you and nat should know all about that.....

 

[nat4900]

Would need to read the law before giving opinion, our laws are not followed with equity now, got the money, best lawyer or political connection your odds of a win become maximized.

Actually my point was and is that the law would consist of just ONE sentence.......that,

"NO ONE is above the law, including the president of the U.S."

Like that, ALL who aspire to the position but has a shady past, would NOT run....Period

 

[nat4900]

Actually the Constitution is pretty clear if you have the intelligence to read it. It plainly says prosecution can proceed after removal.

With morons like you around, joining the cult mentality, AFTER REMOVAL is a bit too long; especially with a statute of limitation on one's crime..

NO ONE is above the law regardless of position or status........

 

[nat4900]

President is too important to have lawyers disrupting him and causing turmoil during the TRUMP Presidency

Maybe he could be interrupted during his fucking golf outings.......LOL

 

[nat4900]

Suppose a President is arrested and is sent to jail to await trial on charges. How is he going to rule over us from a jail cell?

The Constitution only allows ONE method to remove someone, by impeachment, so he would still be our President and would still be ruling over we, his people, even if he was sitting in prison cell playing poker for cigarettes

Moron.......the same situation would apply if the president .....like Reagan...... is undergoing surgery and a hospital stay/recovery.......

THAT is why we have VPs

 

[pismoe]

President is too important to have lawyers disrupting him and causing turmoil during the TRUMP Presidency

Maybe he could be interrupted during his fucking golf outings.......LOL

----------------------------------- Can't do it , President Trump needs his Rest and Relaxation Nat .

 

[Kondor3]

Yes, I would be in favor of a law that explicitly stipulates that a sitting US President may be indicted.

No, I don't want that law to be as simplistic as the one you've outlined.

I would want such a law to contain some sort of control(s) that minimize or eliminates its use as a political weapon.

 

[pismoe]

Suppose a President is arrested and is sent to jail to await trial on charges. How is he going to rule over us from a jail cell?

The Constitution only allows ONE method to remove someone, by impeachment, so he would still be our President and would still be ruling over we, his people, even if he was sitting in prison cell playing poker for cigarettes

Moron.......the same situation would apply if the president .....like Reagan...... is undergoing surgery and a hospital stay/recovery.......

THAT is why we have VPs

------------------------ UNAVOIDABLE Circumstances like an Operation makes sense but a sleazy operation like YOU Advocate simply to hurt President Trump and slow down his agenda is not a good thing . See what the DOJ thinks for more sensible thinking and reasoning about Indicting a sitting President and you might change yer mind Nat .

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Mindful that the Constitution is not clear on the issue, and that we only have a DOJ "opinion" on the directive that a sitting president cannot be indicted, should an actual, CLEAR and definitive law be enacted that states that NO ONE......not even a president....is above the law and can certainly be indicted in a court of jurisdiction and NOT just the political recourse of impeachment?

After all, the breaking of laws is NOT a political issue but strictly a legal process that requires evidence, unquestionable proof, witnesses, indictments, trials and punishment.

NO ONE should be above the law....NO ONE !!!

Agreed, no one is above the law, including a sitting president – but this should be addressed via the amendment process precisely because the Constitution is unclear on the issue.

 

[Polishprince]

President Trump's problem is that there is a hostile Special Persecutor on board.

There were no special counsels at all when B. Hussein O was in power. If there had been, I'm sure that there would have been a lot Obamunists ruined during his 8 years. No special counsel means no questioning, no perjury traps to evade, no obstruction situations to present themselves.

Maybe for the sake of balance, the Office of the Special Persecutor should be a permanent fixture, with the incumbent being appointed by the opposition?

 

[Markle]

Yes, nitwit........IF the Clintons had been investigated and found guilty....

NO ONE should be above the law.......

Did you forget, or do you only have selective memory that President Bill Clinton was convicted of a FELONY?

In FACT, they were surrounded by felonies!

In addition to the Impeachment of President Clinton for felony perjury.

These are the results and convictions of the various investigations into President Clinton.

Whitewater

Arkansas Gov. Jim Guy Tucker - fraud felony convictions - 3 counts (Tucker resigned facing impeachment)

Jim McDougal - fraud and conspiracy felony convictions - 18 counts

Susan McDougal - felony - 4 counts (pardoned during Clinton's last minute pardongate payoffs)

William J. Marks Sr - conspiracy Stephen Smith - conspiracy

Larry Kuca - Fraud Neal Ainley - 2 misdemeanors for embezzlement

David Hale - guilty plea - conspiracy

Chris Wade - felony - Whitewater real-estate investor

John Haley - felony 1998 on fraud

Robert Palmer - felony for conspiracy

Charles Matthews - guilty plea for bribery

Eugene Fitzhugh - Whitewater - bribery

Webster Hubbell - #2 ranking Justice Dept. Official - felony for embezzlement and fraud

John Latham - CEO of Madison Bank - bank fraud Campaign Finance:

Johnny Chung - Clinton cronie - felony guilty plea - funneling money from China

Gene Lum - convicted - felony for money laundering for the DNC

Nora Lum - convicted - felony for money laundering for the DNC

Howard Glicken - guilty plea - 2 midemeanors - funneling foreign donations

Yah Lin "Charlie" Trie - guilty plea - illegal Clinton campaign donations

John Huang - Clinton cronie - felony guilty plea - funneling money from China

Paula Jonesgate: William Jefferson Clinton - found guilty - civil contempt of court - lying under oath about material facts. The Office of the Independent Council further presented Clinton with an agreement that had him disbarred from practicing law for 5 years and made him signed statement admitting to his deception

Post Administration
Sandy Bergergate

Sandy Berger – Clinton National Security Adviser -- found guilty of stealing highly classified documents from the National Archive and destroying them

A few of the Clinton women. The sexual assault accusations go back to his days at Oxford.
William Jefferson Clinton, Former President of the United States and Democrat
Sexual Assault
Rape

Gennifer Flowers (Unknown settlement)

Paula Jones ($850,000 settlement)

Kathleen Willey (Unknown settlement)

Juanita Broaddrick (Unknown settlement)

Monica Lewinsky….(“I did not have sex with THAT woman”)

 

[Markle]

Nitwit.....just answer the original question.....Here, I'll make more direct for your half brain....

Would you be against such a law....A simple fucking Yes or No will do....LOL

No need for any additional law. We already have that thoroughly covered.

It is called impeachment. Look it up!

 

[nat4900]

I would want such a law to contain some sort of control(s) that minimize or eliminates its use as a political weapon.

Although I agree......above is what screws up MANY laws depending on the expenses of legal representation and what has plagued us....Loopholes.

 

[Markle]

I would want such a law to contain some sort of control(s) that minimize or eliminates its use as a political weapon.

Although I agree......above is what screws up MANY laws depending on the expenses of legal representation and what has plagued us....Loopholes.

My ranking would place nat4900 third in ability regarding being a troll. nat4900 starts a totally senseless thread, then offers little but personal attacks.

He must be so proud! And so utterly desperate!

 

[toobfreak]

Mindful that the Constitution is not clear on the issue, and that we only have a DOJ "opinion" on the directive that a sitting president cannot be indicted, should an actual, CLEAR and definitive law be enacted that states that NO ONE......not even a president....is above the law and can certainly be indicted in a court of jurisdiction and NOT just the political recourse of impeachment?

After all, the breaking of laws is NOT a political issue but strictly a legal process that requires evidence, unquestionable proof, witnesses, indictments, trials and punishment.

NO ONE should be above the law....NO ONE !!!

How can you be above the law when you ARE the law? Sitting presidents MUST have this leeway as a matter of national security and national stability. Which is why impeachment hinges on drastic certain evidence of a high crime, not some flea-flicker bullshit charge that years after the fact, Mueller STILL cannot prove. Meantime, Putin-lovers Barry and Hillary walk away clean.

 

[toobfreak]

I would want such a law to contain some sort of control(s) that minimize or eliminates its use as a political weapon.

Although I agree......above is what screws up MANY laws depending on the expenses of legal representation and what has plagued us....Loopholes.

My ranking would place nat4900 third in ability regarding being a troll. nat4900 starts a totally senseless thread, then offers little but personal attacks.

He must be so proud! And so utterly desperate!

Thank you. He's certainly right up there with Lakhota, Skews13 and Deanrd.

 

[BS Filter]

Trump is guilty of beating Hillary in the Electoral College. They can't get over it. That's pretty much it.

 

[rightwinger]

Mindful that the Constitution is not clear on the issue, and that we only have a DOJ "opinion" on the directive that a sitting president cannot be indicted, should an actual, CLEAR and definitive law be enacted that states that NO ONE......not even a president....is above the law and can certainly be indicted in a court of jurisdiction and NOT just the political recourse of impeachment?

After all, the breaking of laws is NOT a political issue but strictly a legal process that requires evidence, unquestionable proof, witnesses, indictments, trials and punishment.

NO ONE should be above the law....NO ONE !!!

Trump would veto it

 

[rightwinger]

Trump is guilty of beating Hillary in the Electoral College. They can't get over it. That's pretty much it.

Yea.....keep telling yourself that

 

[OKTexas]

Would need to read the law before giving opinion, our laws are not followed with equity now, got the money, best lawyer or political connection your odds of a win become maximized.

Actually my point was and is that the law would consist of just ONE sentence.......that,

"NO ONE is above the law, including the president of the U.S."

Like that, ALL who aspire to the position but has a shady past, would NOT run....Period

Yeah, that's too broad to ever be enforced. You'd have to be very specific in defining the term "above the law". Don't think you can do that in one sentence.

.