Posted on 05/16/2018 6:33:41 PM PDT by Kaslin
Ever since Donald J. Trump won a stunning victory against Hillary Clinton and the Democrats, the Left was convinced there was something at play to cause this event. How could the politically tone deaf Hillary lose? How could a woman with no charisma, economic agenda, or political skill lose? How could a woman who wrote off half the country as deplorable racists lose? You know the answer to this, but for liberals it had to be the Russians. The mocking of the GOP over Russia being our biggest geopolitical rival was relegated to the trashcan. Now, it was the neo-red scare, a Russophobia that was both unhinged and unwarranted. Democrats now considered any contact with a Russian an act of treason. If you had Stoli vodka, it was treason. It was totally insane, but also insanely entertaining.
Did the Russians try and interfere in our elections? Probably—but nowhere near the level of sophistication that the Left thinks caused Clinton to lose. There was no altering of vote tallies. It was mostly shoddy memes run by Facebook, ad campaigns that devoted little money given the length of the campaign and how much money that was spent during this period.
Still, there were allegations that the Trump campaign colluded with the Kremlin to tilt the election. In July of 2016, the FBI began its counterintelligence investigation into the matter. This probe cited the Trump dossier, a piece of partisan campaign literature compiled by former MI6 spook Christopher Steele, which was funded by the Clinton campaign and the Democrats. The Clinton camp contracted Fusion GPS, who then hired Steele to dig up dirt on Trump.
The Left was bracing for collusion to be confirmed. They wanted all the nastiness to come out in order to stop Trump. The Resistance waited in eager anticipation of something devastating, something impeachable to drop. Nothing ever did. It was an endless string of nothing burgers. Now, we’re being told that Special Counsel Robert Meuller, who took over the investigation in May, told the president’s legal team that Trump cannot be indicted; citing a DOJ memo that stated it would be an unconstitutional act, preventing the executive from efficiently carrying out its duties (via Fox News):
President Trump's attorney, Rudy Giuliani, told Fox News on Wednesday that special counsel Robert Mueller has told the president's legal team he will follow Justice Department guidance and not seek an indictment against Trump.
Giuliani, himself a former federal prosecutor and mayor of New York City, also told Fox News that Mueller's investigators have not responded to five information requests from the president's team. That has forced Trump's legal team to push off making a decision about whether the president will sit for an interview with the special counsel -- a decision they had hoped to reach by Thursday.
The precedent that federal prosecutors cannot indict a sitting president is laid out in a 1999 Justice Department memo. Giuliani told Fox News that Mueller has no choice but to follow its guidance.
"This case is essentially over," Giuliani said. "They're just in denial."
One way to break the news to the Resistance that 2 years of leaks and reporting to the contrary, they've got nothing. https://t.co/Y3m7otVYyi— Mollie (@MZHemingway) May 16, 2018
NEW: Special counsel Robert Mueller's team has informed President Donald Trump's attorneys that they have concluded that they cannot indict a sitting president, according to the President's lawyer. @DanaBashCNN scoops https://t.co/eO63TfGY5p— Yashar Ali ?? (@yashar) May 16, 2018
Rudy Giuliani tells @FoxNews that Robert Mueller told @realDonaldTrump legal team two weeks ago that he will abide by DOJ guidelines that a President cannot be indicted. Giuliani said Mueller has no choice but to honor a 1999 Clinton-era memo— John Roberts (@johnrobertsFox) May 16, 2018
In early April, Mueller reportedly told the president that while he is under investigation, he’s not the target of a criminal probe. Later in the month, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein also told the president he had nothing to worry about concerning the Russia probe, or the investigation into his personal lawyer, Michael Cohen, who is under the microscope for possible bank fraud and FEC violations concerning payment he made to porn star Stormy Daniels during the 2016 presidential election over her alleged affair with Trump back in 2006.
Now, over at NBC News, they said an exception can be given:
During the final months of the administration of former President Bill Clinton in 2000, the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel said in a memo that "the indictment or criminal prosecution of a sitting president would be unconstitutional."
Neal Katyal, acting solicitor general in the administration of former President Barack Obama — the administration's top courtroom lawyer — wrote the current special counsel regulations as a young lawyer in Clinton's Justice Department in 1999. They specify that a special counsel "shall comply" with the policies of the Justice Department, for whom Mueller works.
Katyal said on MSNBC's "The Beat With Ari Melber" in February that means that Mueller is bound by the 2000 Justice Department memo but that he "can seek exceptions."
"This old opinion from 20 years ago does preclude, in general, the Justice Department from indicting a sitting president for constitutional reasons," Katyal said. "But an exception can be given."
I doubt that such an exception will be executed in this affair. So, overall—this could be the ballgame. Concerning Congress, they can impeach. And the Democrats are sure positioning themselves to do just that if they retake the House. The base wants it. The progressive wing of the party wants it. The low energy exhibited from leadership on this front is for political purposes. Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) was forced to resign over sexual misconduct claims last year. He was a ranking Democrat on the House judiciary Committee. Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), a reported constitutional scholar, has taken his placein the chance that there’s a showdown between Congress and the White House. They’re still getting ready for that fight. How can we avid it? It’s only if the GOP votes and wins the 2018 midterms.
So, is this game over? Yeah, it looks like it could be. You lose again, Democrats.
Mule ear lies.
Much as I detest the degenerate bill clintoon, he should never have been dragged to court while a sitting president. Impeached? Yes, but not demoted to subordinate status before a court. Now, after he is out of office? Treacherous bastid degenerate should have been hung by the neck!
Cite the article, section and clause that prohibits it. There is one for members of Congress, but not one for the President.
There's nothing in the Constitution that even suggests a subordinate can't arrest and indict a "superior." If there were, the UCMJ would be Unconstitutional: It allows for exactly that. Look it up.
If Mueller can indict the Attorney General, he can indict the President. The same is true of any other Federal prosecutor. Federal prosecutors are Constitutional officers: They must be confirmed by the Senate:
[The President] shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.
Note that not all Constitutional officers need be appointed by the President. Some can be appointed by other officials, even judges.
Such officials swear to uphold the Constitution; they do not swear to obey the President nor serve him instead of serving the country.
Wouldn’t surprise me one bit, for him to be lying.
It won’t make any difference. Trump will not be impeached. And if they try it, I expect a military coup will be the result. Lincoln had a sitting Supreme Court Justice jailed.
Jackson ignored a scotus ruling against him.
Why, this violates the Equal Protection clause of the 14th Amendment! If a bunch of Russians can be indicted, General Flynn can be indicted, and Paul Manafort can be indicted, why can’t President Trump! What? Because the Constitution gives him immunity from indictment? The Constitution is unconstitutional! Besides, he doesn’t deserve the protection of the Constitution because he stole the election by colluding with Russia! What? Just because there’s no evidence? How did that stop the aforementioned hereinbefore recited indictments? The charges are so series that the presumption of innocence should not apply! The blue wave is coming to free us all from freedom! BWAHAHAHAHA!
Mrs. Clinton, it’s time for your afternoon medication. Hold out your arm.
We can hope you are right, but I am not sure the military would step in to stop an administrative coup. What needs to be done first is for military police and investigators to raid Mueller's offices along with all of his fellow coup plotters to seize their records, computers, and surveillance recordings that will expose the enemy agents that they are.
That’s a great tag line. So true!
Neal Katyal, acting solicitor general in the administration of former President Barack Obama — the administration's top courtroom lawyer — wrote the current special counsel regulations as a young lawyer in Clinton's Justice Department in 1999. They specify that a special counsel "shall comply" with the policies of the Justice Department, for whom Mueller works.Katyal said on MSNBC's "The Beat With Ari Melber" in February that means that Mueller is bound by the 2000 Justice Department memo but that he "can seek exceptions."
"This old opinion from 20 years ago does preclude, in general, the Justice Department from indicting a sitting president for constitutional reasons," Katyal said. "But an exception can be given."
Has anyone every witnessed this supposed knowledge? Not even a FISA warrant could procure proof that Nadler knows anything but his way to the bottom of a pig trough...
Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), a reported constitutional scholar, has taken his place in the chance that there’s a showdown between Congress and the White House.
A Sitting President’s Amenability to Indictment and Criminal Prosecution [PDF]Date of Issuance: Monday, October 16, 2000
Headnotes: The indictment or crinminal prosecution of a sitting President would unconstitutionally undermine the capacity of the executive branch to perform its constitutionally assigned functions.
"The OLC memorandum concluded that all federal civil officers except the President are subject to indictment and criminal prosecution while still in office; the President is uniquely immune from such process...
Thus, in the absence of a specific textual provision withdrawing it, the President would enjoy absolute immunity.
The President is the symbolic head of the Nation. To wound him by a criminal proceeding is to hamstring the operation of the whole governmental apparatus, both in foreign and domestic affairs...
Under our developed constitutional order, the presidential election is the only national election, and there is no effective substitute for it. A criminal trial of a sitting President, however, would confer upon a jury of twelve the power, in effect, to overturn this national election."
We knew this when the Clinton impeachment process was happening. Prez Clinton volunteered to testify, we knew then he was not required by any law to testify. He mistakenly did so, lied under oath, got impeached by not convicted by the Senate.
Exactly.
You actually eliminated the need for hours and hours of debate on websites and radio.
Great job.
Mueller is a traitor to America.
When Obama,Bill & Hillary & Chelsea,Podesta,Comey and Mueller all get away with it and skate, then where does that leave the good Americans whose country and way of life are being stolen from them?
What about the boiling over anger?
Our side gets subpoenaed, raided in the early morning at home,indicted (Manafort et al.) and our agenda stopped (judges allowing sanctuary cities and illegals rights).
Then we get lectured to by twits like David Hogg,Maddow, Jimmy Kimmel,NFL players or the cast of The View.
Where does our boiling anger find its outlet?
Article II, Section 1, Clause 1 says that "the executive Power shall be vested in a President...".
So again I ask you, how does a subordinate prosecute his boss, the chief executive? Who does that subordinate answer to?
Again, the president can be impeached, convicted and removed, and then indicted.
Never tire of all the winning.
Indicting Trump was never an option - what matters is public perception regarding Trump/Russia collusion. Either the perception is that Trump is guilty, or that he’s not. Mueller’s no-indictment statement is a backhanded way of publicly stating that he considers Trump to be guilty.
I believe there is some good news here, though. Up until now, Trump has had to make a show of tolerating, even accommodating the investigation. Any pushback would be seen as obstruction and would fan the flames.
By making this statement, Mueller has shown his cards and created an opening for Trump to make his case without appearing ‘defensive’ or ‘obstructionist’.
Trump is probably holding a bunch of aces. Think of it - the general public may not know it, but we know, and Trump certainly knows that the entire Russia/Trump collusion case is a frame-up launched months prior to the 2016 election from within the various politically weaponized agencies of the Obama administration.
The idea was to tarnish Trump and assure a Clinton victory at all costs. Confident that Clinton would win and as POTUS would cover up their tracks, and reward them for services rendered, they broke hundreds of laws and left their fingerprints everywhere.
When Trump won, the Obama deep state found themselves way out on a limb. Their only play was to double down on the Russia collusion frame-up, pinning their hopes on a quick impeachment and removal. To keep Trump’s hands tied, they stood ready to charge him with obstruction of he were to so much as lift a finger to defend himself.
But Trump played it very cool and has apparently weathered the storm. Meanwhile, there are hundreds of deep state players complicit in the frame up and cover up, who are guilty of planting evidence, illegal spying, witness tampering and much, much more. They have no Madam President to protect them or reward them for services rendered. Trump has had over a year to quietly put the squeeze on these people - flip them.
The good news is that it will only take one public confession/indictment of a high level conspirator to blow this whole thing up. Out of probably hundreds of co-conspirators, only one needs to be proven guilty of framing candidate Trump for colluding with the Russians.
Because if even one agent is proven guilty of the frame up, then that proves the frame up happened. If the frame up happened, then the Russia/Trump collusion didn’t happen. At that point, the deep state frame up narrative unravels, dominos fall, and public perception swings in Trump’s favor.
Trump has been the victim of the most corrupt abuse of power in the history of the nation, and the truth will out. The American people are not going to like it one bit.
A President can pardon himself, thus falsifying the argument. And it’s the office of the President that matters, not the individual currently holding it. The person can be replaced. And until that happens, nothing prevents an indicted President from continuing to perform his Constitutional duties. Were you to argue that a sitting President can’t be jailed or imprisoned, you’d have a case. As it is, you don’t.
All Executive officials ultimately answer to the people. Indirectly, they all answer to the Congress, which Constitutionally has power superior to that of the President (as proven by their power to impeach him.)
The Constitution requires that the US be a republic. A republic is defined by the rule of law. Under the rule of law, everyone, even the king or the emperor is subject to the law, without exception. Therefore, a President can be indicted. This is not a debatable point.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.