Can the President be Indicted?

What are the egregious crimes?

Are you serious??!

Yes I am. What are they? What is your evidence?

Forgive, R1. He woke up from a two year long coma.

Again what are they? If they were so egregious you should be able to list at least five in 30 seconds. You never can though.

The Framers???

We’ll soon hear the official versions, but off the top of my head...

Conspiracy to defraud the American People

Campaign finance violations

Tax evasion

Obstruction of Justice

Abuse of Power

Conspiring with a foreign power against the American People

Wow!

[quote]What are the egregious crimes?

[quote] Yes I am. What are they? What is your evidence?

[quote]Again what are they? If they were so egregious you should be able to list at least five in 30 seconds. You never can though.

Don't troll here. No one owes you an explanation and you are not getting one. We don't exist, so you would bait us with your bullshit requests.

Take your passive aggressive trolling and shove it.

You're all still nuts.

Proves R8’s point

Thanks, OP. I hope MSNBC posts some videos.

[quote] Some argue that the President can’t be invited because he’s so busy with his duties.

Like golfing? Watching TV?

You know, I’m really busy with my duties, too. I don’t have time to be charged with crimes I might commit. Wouldn’t all criminals like to argue the same?

It’s un-Democratic to let the First Criminal free.

Perjury, too. Probably, lying to investors.

Money laundering, possibly.

The SCOTUS ruled in the 90s that a civil case could proceed, and did, against Pres. Clinton. It’s hard to really see the difference, logically.

A civil case wouldn’t put one’s liberty at risk, but it could ruin someone, financially, and destroy their reputation, and could lead to impeachment. Look what it did to Bill Clinton. That’s no small matter. A President defending themselves in a civil case isn’t going to say, “oh, it’s just a career ender. No need to spend too much time on it.”

It’s the same time requirements, same expense, same worry. Not really significantly different.

I meant:

Perjury, too. Probably, lying to investigators.

That was incredibly interesting on Rachel. My God what a slime ball was Agnew. I forget that this isn't the first (but maybe the worst) administration driven by unmitigated greed and self serving lawlessness. There doesn't seem to be clear precedent as to whether a president can or can't be indicted. Trumps legal team has been doggedly trying to wall him in. I'm afraid that Agent Orange got his wall after all. It's name is AG Barr. He's the wall and I think he's prepared and installed solely for that purpose. Disheartening.

Hmmmmm....

1. Treason 2. Money Laundering 3. Perjury 4. Violation of the Emoluments Clause 5. Violation in using Corporation to Fund An Election 6. Violation in Lying About Purpose of a Payoff 7. Obstruction of Justice 8. Illegally Terminating the Head of the FBI 9. Defrauding the American People 10. Defrauding Real Estate Investors 11. Colluding with a Foreign Eneny 12. Misuse of Government Agencies 13. Misuse of Government Funds 14. Hiring Illegal Immigrants 15. Racketeeeting 16. Bribery 17. Misuse of Inaugeration Funds 18. Failure to Pay Contractors 19. Prostitution 20. Incest 21. Gross Stupidity

[quote] What are the egregious crimes?

Not using his turn signal and jaywalking, Rose.

Sorry for my formatting, forgot on this stupid site I must use double returns!!! But you get the idea. There are too many to LIST, and the asshole here wants to pretend we can’t make any crimes? HA FUCKING HA!

Southern District of New York has lots. It will follow him for years. Campaign Finance Violation and money laundering. His dirty deeds come home to roost. It will be in real time, not TV time but he's in trouble. Disgusting ...2020 can't come soon enough.

What I’m afraid, is that it will take 10 years to get to trial, and he’s out, blabbing on Fox the entire time, then croaks before the verdict.

Rachel did a great piece on this. As usual she took 16 hours to explain it, but the bottom line is Yes.

We are due for a natural, or otherwise, death of one of these guys. They’re old. I just mean statistically, we could get one. And 50 years from now, Muriel 2.0 will have threads on whether it was foul play or not.

That's a valid fear ( R23). Horrific.

Yes , it took her FOREVER to get there. She's kind of a national treasure. No pundit is half as smart and awake. It was like a great history teacher/lecture that almost puts you to sleep but finally brings it home and then bingo!

[quote]What I’m afraid, is that it will take 10 years to get to trial, and he’s out, blabbing on Fox the entire time, then croaks before the verdict.

Personally suspect that things are going to happen in the next few months that will make even Fox turn their backs on trump.

maddow is starting to annoy me. stop over-promising and expecting too much.

She isn't "promising" anything. She's not in a position to make anything happen with Trump and she knows that. She's reporting on what is out there.

What has she repeatedly overpromised r29? I’m prepping my meat and veggies for tomorrow’s dinner, lots of chop time, so I will eagerly await your reply friend!

You loons are hilarious. Incest? Really?

You lost credibility with that one.

I like how OP is on a first name basis with Miss Maddow.

If he weren't so guilty he wouldn't be so worried.

Are you new here, R33? It's Kamala, Bernie, Amy, Beto and Hillz.

With all due respect, R33, but “Miss” Maddow? That’s just bonkers.

Also, ... damn, I had another good one we’ve all overlooked so far.

Ah-ha, multiple charges of witness tampering! Also, trafficking in stolen property (those pesky emails!) Plus, a slew of other charges related to stolen property.

R32, obviously, the incest accusation was humor. Isn’t it enough that there are more than a dozen of other charges, and multiple accusations of many of them? Should be.

Of course, he can be indicted. Whether it sticks is another question. I just want to see headlines that read "President indicted!"

Crucify him!

Add insurance fraud, per Michael Cohenin the news this afternoon. Plus, that usually goes with money laundering and tax fraud.

Possibly human trafficking and kidnapping.

[quote]Money laundering, possibly.

Are you kidding? Money laundering, definitely. He's been engaged in that for decades.

Remember that all the big mob bosses are brought down with racketeering charges.

It's not even a question of whether the President can be indicted. The President is a citizen and we have very clear procedure for when citizens can be arrested and indicted for crimes.

The only question is whether when there are facts to support an indictment of the President, is there anything to prohibit it? The only legal prohibition we've heard about is a 50 year old advisory memo written by the DOJ and not even in response to any of the kinds of facts related to Pee Brain.

Good one, R43, racketeering. I think that’s new to the list on this thread.

No, Racketeering was #15 on my poorly formatted list, difficult to find because I forgot double hard returns.

Trump had to be involved with the mob for the construction and renovation of his NY buildings. It is impossible to be involved in that type of business in the NY/NJ Metro area without getting involved with the mob on some level, and also buying building supplies and cement from them. Then there's also the Atlantic City casinos. Money laundering and racketeering are very high on the list. There's no way he wasn't and still isn't involved with the mob, not too mention he has a mob mentality.

The problem is that they are incredibly skilled covering their tracks. Yes, some do get taken down but most really don't. We only hear about the ones who are arrested, convicted and imprisoned. We don't hear about the mobsters who are never caught. They are experts at covering their tracks.

Trump is not presidential at all. He's more like a mob boss than a president.

Look at it this way. Rudy & Trump are BFFs. Rudy took down the Gambino family/John Gotti. He road that into the Mayor's office. But what is barely noticed is that it coincided with the ascendance of the Russian mob. Now the Gotti people were nickle dime compared to the Russians. Sure you had your petty criminals. But the bosses at the top of that pyramid were hooked into international banking, and Putin. And Trump was getting Russian money to finance his projects since at least 2007, but he was banking with them in the 90's after they reached down in the mud and pulled him out of bankruptcy. Trump has been dealing with mobsters his entire life, Roy Cohen a family friend was hooked into mobsters, and his father was friendly with them too. If you wanted your projects to happen you had to play ball. And they did more than play ball. There were even some rumors that Trump was a snitch for the feds back in the 80's. He ratted out people so he could help other filth. he is so quick to call people who cooperate rats, that I have to wonder if he's done it himself. Because I am mystified why he was never busted in all these years and he has obviously been running a criminal enterprise.

^ Maybe he was never busted because of his mob connections.

OK. Maybe I watch too many movies, but I watched The Departed recently, which reminded me of the Whitey Bulger case, and in both instances, one fiction, one real; the evil dude, Jack Nicholson /Johnny Depp,gets to keep doing evil, because he has either compromised a few people in law enforcement, or he has given them other people to prosecute so they leave him alone because he's their CI . Trump is a slimy crook, and I would not put it past him to "steer" the FBI towards other people, to keep them off him. If he engaged in bribery, he may have also done more. I'd be interested to track his relationship with Rudy., and how it evolved. Rudy's close buddy, Bernie Kerik was a crook. Police chief in NYC, then a "security consultant working with Rudy, then a jail bird.

The president certainly can be arrested and held accountable for his actions. Do you think if any president murdered his wife in cold blood. the would not be immediately arrested?

As for Trump, it's too late in his term even for impeachment because it would be long and drawn out to start it now. And everyone would simply say "He's up for reelection, let the people decided." Which is correct.

I don't recall anyone enforcing that "don't bother the president, he's busy' rule during the Clinton administration.

Wooooooooooooow. The whole concept of Trump bring an actual rat never occurred to me before. For the last three years, I have tried to understand why, oh why, did our government never catch him before. He’s a RAT, that’s it that’s it that’s it!!!! It explains it!!!! It also explains why the whole thing is so sensitive too, the government hates talking about rats. Trump talks about rats constantly so......there you go. It is one of many missing pieces answered. Case Solved!

Darn you, R46!

About the mob...

I once worked as a truck driver/supplier for a restaurant in Ptown. Once a week I would drive to Boston for supplies. I was in an Italian North End cheese shop once waiting for my order. This was about 1982 when the mob was in full force in Boston.

As I wait, in runs a very nervous guy. He says something like “Vinny, I need your help! You have to protect me! They’re coming for me, Vinny! You have to help me!” Vinny tried to “sush” him. I turned my back and studied the cans of tomato paste on the wall very carefully. There were a dozen identical cans on display. All while hearing “Vinny, you have to help me! Their coming, Vinny...!”

I suppose even a wise guy needs a day job.

The Trump speculation reminds me...

The reason Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait (simplified) was because he borrowed too much money from them to fight Iran. It was cheaper to invade Kuwait, and occupy them, than pay them back. He didn’t expect to have to fight the US, of course.

Likewise, the King of France once owed so much money to the Knights Templar, that it was cheaper to imprison all of them, take their gold and lands, and execute them, than to pay them back.

It’s. great life lesson. Bear in mind how in debt your allies are to you, and never let them get stronger than your debt affords, vis-a-vis the above.

R31

She over promises on what her show is about to deliver. she always hypes up her "reveals" on twitter and they are all damp squibs. you never see cuomo or tapper or cooper hype up their shows even when they have ACTUAL exclusives.

and it's annoying because she doesn't need to do it, she has the biggest audience by far, and people are not watching for breaking news. they watch for her commentary.

Do not ever come to me saying Rachel Maddow and Chris Cuomo in the same breath! He is not her equal. No matter how much some of you pumped up gym rats may drool over him,, he's an asshole. And not in a good way. Rachel is a Goddess.

lol, I have liked Rachel for a long time, but what's with this sudden WORSHIP for her

People are desperate for a hero r59, that’s what it is. And can you blame them? Just look around!

R60

I don't know, this kind of hero worship never ends well. We wouldn't be in the state we are in if not for this "cult of personality." How else do you explain Trump?

The difference is Maddow has substance, Dumpf does not. Maddow's intent is positive, his is destructive. We have to differentiate things in a nuanced way.

there is no nuance in worship. you can appreciate people without calling them goddesses. everyone is fallible and maddow has her fair share of flaws.

R61, I agree with you, I cannot emphasize enough that I see more clearly how dangerous it is to put people onto pedestals — I’m r60. But I GET why it happens, it is a most human thing to do. And as others have shared, if people are going to hero-worship, at least let it be people who are either philanthropic, altruistic, or just good and kind. The fact that the US has lifted up a fucking traitor?!?!?!? I’ll never get over it. The Maddow worshippers need to keep their feet planted firmly. Someday Rachel will be “caught” in a mistake and it will be much easier to defend her if we aren’t lifting her up such great heights, hope that makes sense.

Humanity is and will always be hungry for hope.

Yes, a President is not above the law. So they can be charged, indicted, tried and convicted.

[quote] there is no nuance in worship. you can appreciate people without calling them goddesses. everyone is fallible and maddow has her fair share of flaws.

Goddess? Well, it's DL. It's how some people "talk" here. I wouldn't take it literally. Do you complain about the no nuance nastiness that prevails in most political threads?

R66 Yes I do. And the Maddow worship isn't limited to DL, it is all over twitter etc. And I just find it a little odd.

R64 I get what you mean, and I agree with you.

I'm not on Twitter, so I wouldn't know, R67. Maybe it is odd, but none of my friends worship Maddow, although they appreciate the information she brings to the conversation.

What is OP talking about "no precedence?"

Does he mean, "no precedent?"

RONALD REAGAN AND BILL CLINTON WERE BOTH INDICTED. OF COURSE TRUMP CAN BE INDICTED, BORIS!

ANDREW JOHNSON WAS INDICTED AND IMPEACHED.

And we might be hearing more potential crimes from Michael Cohen on Wednesday!

I keep thinking of the end of the producers, when the juror stands up and says "your honor, we find the defendant.... incredibly guilty."

R69/R70, I don’t think RR nor BC were indicted. I don’t know about Andrew Johnson. I think you are confusing impeachment with inditement.

The MSNBC talking heads are mostly saying he cannot be indicted. He must first be out of the Presidency. I don’t like it. Nor really believe it, as I have explained above in R15/R16. If he murdered someone, would he be above indictment? No!

Last Friday, I think it was, Rachel devoted her hour to the argument that he can be indicted. I’m with her!

Andrew Johnson was not indicted. Richard Nixon was named as an unindicted co-conspirator.

We're going to get an answer to this question very soon, OP.