It's fine to claim the president can be indicted. What if he disagrees? We have three co-equal branches of government. The legislative and executive branches do not answer to the judicial branch. If it comes down to it, Trump can defy the judicial branch. Then it is up to congress to resolve.
Giuliani gets to the constitutional question on presidential indictments
- Thread starter UsualName
- Start date
Jem, my good man, there are some things in life for which no case law or authority is needed. You can ask any five year old who controls the cookie jar. The five year old may very likely say " I do". Is that going to hold up?, jem. You don't need case law here. I agree completely with Chuck Grassley who said, and I am paraphrasing, "If I had a lawyer like that, I'd get a new lawyer."
Oh my god. Let's hope so. Them we can move on.
Yup. He has the lower tier defending themselves against witch hunt charges. Not russian collusion.
Oh wait. After all those FISA warrants that your clinton/fbi buddies produced, howz all those charges against Carter Page coming along?
I got it though. Mueller is resting up for the big lift against Trump. You will find that "big lift" consists of doing an information dump to Congress rather than a real-live, before a jury prosecution of Trump- despite your assertions and assurances that Mr. Speedy-Pace is headed to trial.
the ever convincing kindergarten rules argument.
very impressive scholarship piezoe.
I take it you have no case law...
but fortunately for you I studied and love international law which in the beginning International Law was very much based on the rules made by the big kids with the cookie jars
Ask a five year... what happens if the principal has control of the cookie jar and he or she runs the entire school system and is the commander in chief of the army?
Ask the five year old - if you desire the cookies should you rush in an try and grab em or if you should follow the already documented rules?
Now, that I think about its pretty clear you should probably follow the current DOJ guideline. You can't indict a sitting president... for obvious reasons.
AAA and the DOJ are pretty damn close to being correct even if there is no controlling case law.
very impressive scholarship piezoe.
I take it you have no case law...
but fortunately for you I studied and love international law which in the beginning International Law was very much based on the rules made by the big kids with the cookie jars
Ask a five year... what happens if the principal has control of the cookie jar and he or she runs the entire school system and is the commander in chief of the army?
Ask the five year old - if you desire the cookies should you rush in an try and grab em or if you should follow the already documented rules?
Now, that I think about its pretty clear you should probably follow the current DOJ guideline. You can't indict a sitting president... for obvious reasons.
AAA and the DOJ are pretty damn close to being correct even if there is no controlling case law.
Last edited:
Nice argument there. Try it with a judge. "Your Honor, there are some things in life for which no case law or authority are needed." Yup. That's a winner.
That would be an attention getter right there. A quick order to dismiss the case would soon follow, and then an order for you have a drug test.
Speedy is already involved in a couple of trials. Kicking ass too.
Which ones? You quoted my post that asked how the charges against Carter Page are coming along?
I dont care about Mannafort's taxes from eight years ago.