On the merits, should Trump be indicted?

[Florida Man for Crime]

I know there is a question of whether or not it is Constitutional to indict a sitting President. The DOJ has an old memo recommending against doing that, but this has never actually been tested and many lawyers disagree. Regardless of what one thinks about that, either way, though, on the merits of his crimes and lies, should Trump be indicted?

[Beet]

Yes, and not indicting him solely due to his office would end the long-held notion that no one is above the law, until now an integral part of American legal culture and tradition.

Most defenses of the Presidency have traditionally relied on his political authority, that he was elected; but this president, unlike any in living memory, has never won a plurality vote, unlike any since the advent of polling, has never been popular.

The only reason Congressional Republicans stand behind him is that they are afraid their base would punish them for showing independence, or putting country before party.

The only reason the base stands behind him is that he's the Republican standard bearer. They would stand behind any conservative Republican.

And the only reason the Democrats don't try to push him out is they've wrongly convinced themselves that Pence would do worse.

The reality is, everyone wants him gone; the Republican base would like a more competent, popular standard bearer; if only they could get from A to B. The Republicans in Congress would like a more congenial president to work with, if only they could get permission from the base. The Democrats would like him out, if only they could get over their fear of Pence. The Justice Department and FBI would like to be able to do their jobs without fear of political blowback. He's the Emperor with no clothes. He literally has no friends. Even his own family doesn't like him. If the American people collectively get the courage to pull the rug, he would fall like a house of cards. They have forgotten that they rule themselves. The Founders would weep.

[ηєω ƒяσηтιєя]

[The Mikado]

It was clear months ago when Cohen pleaded guilty. He was convicted, among other things, of two campaign finance violations that he did at the behest and instruction of Donald Trump. Trump's equally guilty of those.

[TML]

If it weren't for the influence of corporate donors, Trump would have been thrown out a long time ago.

[I Can Now Die Happy]

Trump should be given an award for being a ****ing genius who saved us all and another award for being a really funny guy who makes me laugh and makes other people laugh. Man I'm gonna miss him once January 21, 2025 rolls around.

[DabbingSanta]

Yes

[dead0man]

yes, of course

[Badger]

yes, of course

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

The Framers gave the Congress the 'impeachment clause' to remove the president in order to get indicted. However, with McConnell, as Majority Leader, removal is a lost cause.

[Del Tachi]

Yes, and not indicting him solely due to his office would end the long-held notion that no one is above the law, until now an integral part of American legal culture and tradition.

It would end the long-standing notion that law enforcement can not indict democratically-elected leaders, as military juntas often do to opposition leaders/candidates in authoritarian countries. 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Trump was elected President the same way every other president has been.  There is no such thing as a "national popular vote".


Impeachment is the only desirable remedy.  No man is above the law, but Trump is immune from indictment while he is President.  Anything else catastrophically erases the notion of an independent executive.  The fact that the current Congress seems unlikely to go through with impeachment is unfortunate, but hey - it's the Congress we the people voted for.

[Hindsight was 2020]

If it weren't for the influence of corporate donors, Trump would have been thrown out a long time ago.

Corporate donors have a gross amount of influence on our politics and the GOP in particular but to blame them for Trump and his lack of impeachment on them is misplaced. The Koch brothers of the world will write fact checks for Trump because they are GOP hacks but push came to shove they would rather Trump gone. The GOP won’t stand up to Trump due to the GOP base bring a devoted cult to him and fear a Roy Moore or Mark Harris level nut primaries them for standing up to Trump

[TDAS04]

yes, of course

[No War, but the War on Christmas]

Yes, and not indicting him solely due to his office would end the long-held notion that no one is above the law, until now an integral part of American legal culture and tradition.

It would end the long-standing notion that law enforcement can not indict democratically-elected leaders, as military juntas often do to opposition leaders/candidates in authoritarian countries. 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Trump was elected President the same way every other president has been.  There is no such thing as a "national popular vote".


Impeachment is the only desirable remedy.  No man is above the law, but Trump is immune from indictment while he is President.  Anything else catastrophically erases the notion of an independent executive.  The fact that the current Congress seems unlikely to go through with impeachment is unfortunate, but hey - it's the Congress we the people voted for.

The difference being that by and large the US Judiciary system is fairly independent; this is nothing like a kangaroo court indicting democratic opposition, - increasing evidence that is part of a nonpartisan investigation is proving this President is a criminal.

And never having won a support of the majority of Americans, ever, may not have holding in any legal or constitutional sense, -- but it certainly does in the court of public opinion, which may be just as important.