• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Feds’ probe into Trump hush money payments is over, judge says

BSM1

What? Me worry?
Some don't seem to understand that since the prevailing legal view is that a sitting president cannot be indicted, it would be fruitless for any judge to continue at this time to allow further investigations on the president himself, which is also what Mueller concluded. This is no way implies that there was no culpability by Trump, thus charges could possibly be charged after he's out of office.


But the Mueller never said there were any grounds for charges. BTW, not indicting a sitting President is a good move for all parties. If the President could be indicted then nothing would ever get done in Congress. This is becoming evident in the actions of the Democrat Congress where the focus is ridiculous charges against Trump instead of doing the People's business.
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
But the Mueller never said there were any grounds for charges.
That is not at all what he said in regards to obstruction; but to collusion, yes. Instead, Mueller said that it was Congress' role to decide what to do, thus implying that at this time only impeachment was legally possible when dealing with Trump at this time.

However, with the others in Trump's camp there's been both indictments and convictions as we've seen, and that was mostly done in regards to getting Trump elected.

If the President could be indicted then nothing would ever get done in Congress.
What makes you think anything is getting done now with McConnell in charge of the Senate?

This is becoming evident in the actions of the Democrat Congress where the focus is ridiculous charges against Trump instead of doing the People's business.
Article 1 of the Constitution says that it is both Congress' and the People's business.

And if Trump & Co are so innocent, then why do they continue to obstruct Congress' role to investigate? If I'm innocent, I want the investigations to continue to clearly show that I'm innocent.
 

dianaiad

Well-Known Member
I've remained consistent in my thoughts regarding this issue.

He had a very talented team working for him. Trump can't run a casino, air lines, etc. all. There is no way he could have done a presidential campaign on his own.

Nobody else can, either.

Or haven't you examined the election committees of his opponents?

Ah, well.
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
But the Mueller never said there were any grounds for charges.
Did you read some other Mueller Report?

The actual report makes it pretty clear that there's plenty of evidence that Trump engaged in criminal activity, but the Justice Department's memo about whether a president could be indicted was taken as part of the "terms of reference" for the investigation, so the team had decided from the outset that indictment of the president wouldn't be recommended.

BTW, not indicting a sitting President is a good move for all parties. If the President could be indicted then nothing would ever get done in Congress.
Only a president who's done something indictable would have to fear the threat of an indictment.

In any case, it's not that the President *can't* be indicted; it's that the President could immediately pardon himself, so there wouldn't be much point of indicting him.

... though Congress would be within its rights to impeach a president for using his pardon power this way.

This is becoming evident in the actions of the Democrat Congress where the focus is ridiculous charges against Trump instead of doing the People's business.
Removing Trump from office for his crimes is very much part of the people's business, Pelosi will very much be called to account for her dereliction of duty in refusing to act on calls for impeachment.
 

BSM1

What? Me worry?
And if Trump & Co are so innocent, then why do they continue to obstruct Congress' role to investigate? If I'm innocent, I want the investigations to continue to clearly show that I'm innocent.

Disregarding the hyperbole of the rest if your post, what investigation are they obstructing?

Did you read some other Mueller Report?

The actual report makes it pretty clear that there's plenty of evidence that Trump engaged in criminal activity, but the Justice Department's memo about whether a president could be indicted was taken as part of the "terms of reference" for the investigation, so the team had decided from the outset that indictment of the president wouldn't be recommended.


Only a president who's done something indictable would have to fear the threat of an indictment.

In any case, it's not that the President *can't* be indicted; it's that the President could immediately pardon himself, so there wouldn't be much point of indicting him.

... though Congress would be within its rights to impeach a president for using his pardon power this way.


Removing Trump from office for his crimes is very much part of the people's business, Pelosi will very much be called to account for her dereliction of duty in refusing to act on calls for impeachment.

The reason a sitting president cannot be indicted is to keep any lame brained freshman congress person from bringing trumped up charges on a whim. This, in effect, would prevent the President of the United States from having time to do anything but defend himself from these charges whether they were groundless or not. This is the rule to protect any president from any party from a quid pro quo war. This does not mean a president cannot be impeached, but, logically, you would need to show an impeachable offense to do so. Trump has been charged with zero crimes, and there is no evidence that can be presented to show any crimes committed. Until the Democrats can come up with something they'll just have to lump it. If you think Trump has committed a crime show some proof or get off the pot.
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
Disregarding the hyperbole of the rest if your post, what investigation are they obstructing?
You really are asking that question? Just in one area, what have they been doing with the many House subpoenas?

BTW, the rest was not "hyperbole" but what has been covered in the news on a pretty much daily basis. Just take a look at what's happened with the House bills that were passed and ended up on McConnell's desk. And then maybe read Article I of the Constitution and see what it says about the issue of Congressional oversight. That's not "hyperbole"-- that's reality.
 
Top