Lavin says that any past president may be charged , so President trump can go back on Obama, Clinton and Bush?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
In theory, yes.
But it is never going to happen unless they find a direct, smoking-gun paper trail of bribes; for example a personal check deposited in Obama’s bank account, signed by the head if Hezbollah, and with the reference note added: “For services rendered in quashing DEA investigation.”
Otherwise no sane President would ever want to set the precedent of prosecuting their predecessor(s) for alleged crimes committed in office.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I missed or didn’t see what kind of crimes Levin (you did mean Levin, I figure) said past presidents could be charged with. Thus, I am a bit unclear as to what you (Dis) mean by your reply. I doubt you mean that 0b0la, for instance, won’t be charged with any of the many crimes he committed while in office. Amirite or not?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
LJ, I believe there would have to be overwhelmingly obvious evidence of very egregious crimes in order for Obama to be charged.
As I have suggested previously, I think this would need to be an incontrovertible paper trail of bribes, right into his personal bank account. This is unlikely, in my opinion, much as we wish the traitor would be brought to justice.
Personally, I would be satisfied with a fair reading of the situation by history, so that Obama is forever remembered as a President who threatened the Constitution by his weaponization of intelligence agencies in pursuit of power, sold out to our enemies such as Iran and China and allowed rampant corruption in his administration; such history resulting in the RAT Party being demolished for a generation and socialism eradicated forever in the United States.