Indictment-O-Rama Megathread: Mueller indicts 13 Russians

[Virginiá]

I think an indictment in office is unlikely.  It may be legal to indict a sitting President, but there's enough uncertainty to that question that most prosecutors may prefer to delay until the end of term or near it.

But if an indictment did occur, a perp-walk is really unlikely.  I think the prosecutor would have enough respect for the office of President, regardless of the individual occupying it, to refrain from such a spectacle.

Honestly, as much as I'd love for them to drag Trump in handcuffs up the steps of a federal courthouse, I wouldn't want that done if he were president. If he is really guilty of a bunch of crimes, I'd rather Congress just remove him from office. However the unlikely nature of impeachment/removal is the only reason a straight up indictment even appeals to me to begin with. I feel like an indictment might give Republicans a reason to consider removal from office instead of backing their man no matter what.

Either way, it wouldn't set a good precedent for the future.

[Virginiá]

And just to add, if the health of our democracy is the top consideration, it might just be better to try and defeat him in 2020 and leave it at that. Trying to prosecute him before or after is just going to create more/deepen divisions in this country and possibly bring us to a new stage of societal decay, where upon gaining power, political parties start locking up their opponents, as Republicans seek revenge against Democrats, and then Democrats against Republicans, and so on. Obviously I get that Republicans started down this path with "Lock Her UP!", but it doesn't help to keep pushing in that direction.

It's not a guaranteed scenario, but it's a lot more likely. The fact is, Trump is very old and leads an unhealthy lifestyle. He's may not even be around for long past 2020 or 2024, so trying to seek justice against any crimes of his might not be worth the potential blowback.

[Gass3268]

I think an indictment in office is unlikely.  It may be legal to indict a sitting President, but there's enough uncertainty to that question that most prosecutors may prefer to delay until the end of term or near it.

But if an indictment did occur, a perp-walk is really unlikely.  I think the prosecutor would have enough respect for the office of President, regardless of the individual occupying it, to refrain from such a spectacle.

Honestly, as much as I'd love for them to drag Trump in handcuffs up the steps of a federal courthouse, I wouldn't want that done if he were president. If he is really guilty of a bunch of crimes, I'd rather Congress just remove him from office. However the unlikely nature of impeachment/removal is the only reason a straight up indictment even appeals to me to begin with. I feel like an indictment might give Republicans a reason to consider removal from office instead of backing their man no matter what.

Either way, it wouldn't set a good precedent for the future.

What about dragging Kushner out of the White House?

[Virginiá]

What about dragging Kushner out of the White House?

God, it's just such a delicate situation, because that would probably trigger a nuclear-hot response from Trump. I wouldn't be surprised if that was when he dropped the hammer on the special counsel's office and immediately doled out pardons and/or fired Mueller.

But I think so long as Mueller actually had a good case against Kushner, then he should bring it. Kushner shouldn't even be in the White House, and just because his father-in-law is president doesn't excuse any crimes he has committed before or after the election.

[pbrower2a]

An indictment might be moot, but it would be an embarrassment. If the President cannot be indicted, then people close to him -- his family members -- have no such protection.

 

[Fight for Trump]

You have a lot invested in disproving the collusion “narrative” don’t you Limo “Liberal”

A “limousine liberal” is a derogatory term for an affluent individual who supports progressive causes, similar to a champagne socialist. The whole point of the name is a troll, and an outdated one at that.

lmao no. It's a description of who I am and the people around me - Arlington County, VA (where I live) has the highest median income in the country and is very democratic. Thus, the epitome of "limo liberals". I'm owning that term and tongue in cheek alluding to who I am - a liberal in a wealthy family in a wealthy place.

Horsesh**t. You're a troll oh, and a very bad one at that

[Gass3268]

Another indictment:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Here is the only tweet I've seen so far that explains who this guy is:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[KingSweden]

Another indictment:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Here is the only tweet I've seen so far that explains who this guy is:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

He’s probably not related to the campaign other than the obvious Paulie Walnuts connection, but add it to thenlist

[GeorgiaModerate]

Another indictment:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Here is the only tweet I've seen so far that explains who this guy is:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

He’s probably not related to the campaign other than the obvious Paulie Walnuts connection, but add it to thenlist

Another possible connection:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[pbrower2a]

False statements involving Paul Man-o-Fraud... that's very bad for protecting one's wealth, health, and freedom.  So far I see Manafort as the most repugnant of characters for helping loot Ukraine on behalf of a dictator now reviled almost everywhere.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

And just to add, if the health of our democracy is the top consideration, it might just be better to try and defeat him in 2020 and leave it at that. Trying to prosecute him before or after is just going to create more/deepen divisions in this country and possibly bring us to a new stage of societal decay, where upon gaining power, political parties start locking up their opponents, as Republicans seek revenge against Democrats, and then Democrats against Republicans, and so on. Obviously I get that Republicans started down this path with "Lock Her UP!", but it doesn't help to keep pushing in that direction.

It's not a guaranteed scenario, but it's a lot more likely. The fact is, Trump is very old and leads an unhealthy lifestyle. He's may not even be around for long past 2020 or 2024, so trying to seek justice against any crimes of his might not be worth the potential blowback.

I see where you are coming from and agree to an extent. But I don't think the message of 'sometimes evil stupid criminals lose re-election' will be nearly as good for the future of our nation as 'we can deal with open incompetence, gross misconduct and criminality in politics by removing the offenders and punishing them according to the law'.

[KingSweden]

Another indictment:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Here is the only tweet I've seen so far that explains who this guy is:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

He’s probably not related to the campaign other than the obvious Paulie Walnuts connection, but add it to thenlist

Another possible connection:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Well now THAT is interesting

[Hollywood756]

And just to add, if the health of our democracy is the top consideration, it might just be better to try and defeat him in 2020 and leave it at that. Trying to prosecute him before or after is just going to create more/deepen divisions in this country and possibly bring us to a new stage of societal decay, where upon gaining power, political parties start locking up their opponents, as Republicans seek revenge against Democrats, and then Democrats against Republicans, and so on. Obviously I get that Republicans started down this path with "Lock Her UP!", but it doesn't help to keep pushing in that direction.

It's not a guaranteed scenario, but it's a lot more likely. The fact is, Trump is very old and leads an unhealthy lifestyle. He's may not even be around for long past 2020 or 2024, so trying to seek justice against any crimes of his might not be worth the potential blowback.

I see where you are coming from and agree to an extent. But I don't think the message of 'sometimes evil stupid criminals lose re-election' will be nearly as good for the future of our nation as 'we can deal with open incompetence, gross misconduct and criminality in politics by removing the offenders and punishing them according to the law'.

so the problem is that Nixon really set the bad precedent. "for the good of the country moving forward" is a really bad reason to pardon someone.   We cannot let Trump off for the crime he has committed, and we cannot let an illegitimate election stand.   

Winning in 2018 is vital.

[Silent Hunter]

What about dragging Kushner out of the White House?

God, it's just such a delicate situation, because that would probably trigger a nuclear-hot response from Trump. I wouldn't be surprised if that was when he dropped the hammer on the special counsel's office and immediately doled out pardons and/or fired Mueller.

Shutting the Special Counsel's Office doesn't terminate the grand jury, nor does it stop state level charges that Trump can't pardon.

[Virginiá]

Shutting the Special Counsel's Office doesn't terminate the grand jury, nor does it stop state level charges that Trump can't pardon.

The grand jury is just a bunch of regular people though. It can't really do anything without a prosecutor. I guess state-level stuff would go on, but I'm not sure what they are up to so I can't comment on that.

[Gass3268]

Shutting the Special Counsel's Office doesn't terminate the grand jury, nor does it stop state level charges that Trump can't pardon.

The grand jury is just a bunch of regular people though. It can't really do anything without a prosecutor. I guess state-level stuff would go on, but I'm not sure what they are up to so I can't comment on that.

My guess is that if Trump fired Muller you would see a shift to a coordinated efforts of AG's from NY, NJ, MD, DC, VA and maybe CA to continue his work (basically anywhere crimes might have been committed). Heck, I could see Schneiderman hiring Mueller to continue his work.

[Silent Hunter]

Also, the GJ can refer an indictment to any US Attorney to prosecute.

[Hollywood756]

Sarah Huckabee Sanders can't speak english. It's insane to me that she's press secretary.

[pbrower2a]

Shutting the Special Counsel's Office doesn't terminate the grand jury, nor does it stop state level charges that Trump can't pardon.

The grand jury is just a bunch of regular people though. It can't really do anything without a prosecutor. I guess state-level stuff would go on, but I'm not sure what they are up to so I can't comment on that.

You must prove that there is a case, even if the case is in flagrante delicto. (caught in the act) Law enforcement must swear to probable cause. 

In this series of allegations we have a money trail, travel itineraries, and perhaps some phone logs. So if there are people still convinced that the President is infallible and that people around him are angels, then such is their choice, much as it is my choice to believe that Michigan and Pennsylvania share a border should I be so silly.   

[ProgressiveCanadian]

Sarah Huckabee Sanders can't speak english. It's insane to me that she's press secretary.

That's why she has the job. She just spins her way into circles and the Trump Whitehouse loves that.

[pbrower2a]

Sarah Huckster-be Sanders uses Orwellian Newspeak. It's only superficially English, and if it ever became the norm in discourse, then we might be wise to start using a language that little resembles Newspeak.

Honest language self-selects for clarity, with ambiguity useful only in literary gestures.

[Angel of Death]

As many have pointed out, if Mueller goes, the investigation simply continues by whoever replaces him. The more essential position is the one held by Rosenstein, because anyone occupying it with malicious intent could easily cripple the investigation into nothingness.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

Sarah Huckabee Sanders can't speak english. It's insane to me that she's press secretary.

It makes perfect sense to me. The TV-show host and professional celebrity playing the President can't speak English either.

[Virginiá]

Shutting the Special Counsel's Office doesn't terminate the grand jury, nor does it stop state level charges that Trump can't pardon.

The grand jury is just a bunch of regular people though. It can't really do anything without a prosecutor. I guess state-level stuff would go on, but I'm not sure what they are up to so I can't comment on that.

You must prove that there is a case, even if the case is in flagrante delicto. (caught in the act) Law enforcement must swear to probable cause.  

In this series of allegations we have a money trail, travel itineraries, and perhaps some phone logs. So if there are people still convinced that the President is infallible and that people around him are angels, then such is their choice, much as it is my choice to believe that Michigan and Pennsylvania share a border should I be so silly.  

what?

[GeorgiaModerate]

Shutting the Special Counsel's Office doesn't terminate the grand jury, nor does it stop state level charges that Trump can't pardon.

The grand jury is just a bunch of regular people though. It can't really do anything without a prosecutor. I guess state-level stuff would go on, but I'm not sure what they are up to so I can't comment on that.

You must prove that there is a case, even if the case is in flagrante delicto. (caught in the act) Law enforcement must swear to probable cause.  

In this series of allegations we have a money trail, travel itineraries, and perhaps some phone logs. So if there are people still convinced that the President is infallible and that people around him are angels, then such is their choice, much as it is my choice to believe that Michigan and Pennsylvania share a border should I be so silly.  

what?

I think he's just trying to say that those who think the President is infallible are entitled to their opinions, but that doesn't make them correct.  Just like those who think the Earth is flat, or 2+2=5, or that MI borders PA.