• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Whether a president can be prosecuted remains in dispute

Just my thoughts. If a POTUS was indicted of crimes directly in conflict with his office and any other felony that a private citizen would be imprisoned for should they be found guilty, that should mean he/she should go on trial in the Senate first to answer for any Articles and then if found guilty go to trial after removal from office.
 
Parrish said:
Just my thoughts. If a POTUS was indicted of crimes directly in conflict with his office and any other felony that a private citizen would be imprisoned for should they be found guilty, that should mean he/she should go on trial in the Senate first to answer for any Articles and then if found guilty go to trial after removal from office.
Click to expand...

I don't think it works that way... Perhaps in a liberal Utopian world it might work that way though.
 
iguanaman said:
It is as cute as having a felon as President.
Click to expand...

Accusation doesn't even survive cursory examination, Trump has not been convicted or indicted. Since he isn't a felon, your classless remark is stupid.
 
danarhea said:
According to the law, prosecutors would have to prove willful intent here.



Yes, after Friday's information release by Muller, we now know that there is a case, but can Trump be convicted? That part is up in the air. Can Trump be indicted. There is nothing in the Constitution that says he can't be indicted, but The DOJ has always taken a position that a sitting president can't be indicted, as that would make him unable to do his job. He could be impeached by the House, but that would go nowhere, as the Senate does not have close to the votes needed to remove him from office. But here is what I believe is going to happen: At the present time, there are 36 sealed indictments on the DC Court docket. My bet is that one or more of them are going to be unsealed the day after Trump leaves office. All the rest, whether not to indict him while in office is moot. At the same time, I believe that some of the sealed indictments are against Kushner, Don Jr, and other members of the Trump crime family, and they will also stay sealed until the day after Trump leaves office, thus killing the possibility that they will be pardoned for their crimes.

As for collusion, that is just a BS word. Neither the Constitution nor the law have a penalty for collusion, and that word is not even defined. However, Criminal conspiracy and obstruction are serious crimes which carry serious penalties. As for the term "process crimes" that is being thrown about by FOX News, that is also BS. If you are committing perjury in order to cover up a crime, you are guilty of obstruction. Put it this way. A guy goes to rob a bank, and kills a teller in the process. His friend, who knew about the crime in advance, lies that he knew that the crime was going to happen. He has committed perjury and obstructed justice.

Friday's reveal by Mueller pretty much says it all. Trump and Company are in deep doo-doo, and tweeting about "collusion" and "process crimes" isn't going to make it go away. Members of Trump's team, as well as possibly even Trump himself, will be defending themselves against criminal charges just as soon as Trump leaves office. Nothing is going to change that fact.

https://apnews.com/6f4085a78485420cb6b410d9cf9c9c96
Click to expand...

I saw we put this to a test.
 
Deuce said:
Our civilization is far more advanced, you should listen to us.
Click to expand...

In my next life, perhaps when I come back as a yappy little leftist. :lol:
 
poweRob said:
I saw we put this to a test.
Click to expand...

One thing's for sure, if it gets put to the test and the Senate Republicans rubber stamp it a no-go, then they are on record as stating that they're okay with whatever comes next, as well as okay with whatever gets proven in an evidentiary procedure.

If it comes out that Trump is guilty of several very serious high crimes, and they rubber stamp his safety, they are then on record as supporting a criminal. I don't think Trump has left his Senate cronies any good options at this point, because such a stance will cook their goose but good.

So yeah, let's put it to the test, file the indictments, not just Trump's, but everyone's, and let the wheels of justice roll where they may, SCOTUS will take it up or they won't.
 
Checkerboard Strangler said:
One thing's for sure, if it gets put to the test and the Senate Republicans rubber stamp it a no-go, then they are on record as stating that they're okay with whatever comes next, as well as okay with whatever gets proven in an evidentiary procedure.

If it comes out that Trump is guilty of several very serious high crimes, and they rubber stamp his safety, they are then on record as supporting a criminal. I don't think Trump has left his Senate cronies any good options at this point, because such a stance will cook their goose but good.

So yeah, let's put it to the test, file the indictments, not just Trump's, but everyone's, and let the wheels of justice roll where they may, SCOTUS will take it up or they won't.
Click to expand...

Yes. They go on offense as if everything were black and white. Then go on defense as if everything is a grey area. Put them on record as clear in black and white as you can. You are either with this treasonist ****ing crook or you are not. Simple as that. No wiggle room. Make them own this travesty.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom