This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
katielass · F
@SW-User That line was drawn a long time before the left's imaginary crimes they allege were committed by the current president. Think back to clinton, it's the same reason he was not charged in a court of law for perjury and obstruction of justice. This is not new.
SW-User
I just looked it up out of curiosity.
[quote]Date of Issuance:
Monday, October 16, 2000
Headnotes:
The indictment or criminal prosecution of a sitting President would unconstitutionally undermine the capacity of the executive branch to perform its constitutionally assigned functions.
[/quote]
It looks like Clinton and Nixon both could have been charged for their alleged crimes even though neither were. Bush 43 would have been the first one immunized by this directive. The real irony is that it appears that it was the DOJ under Clinton that basically assured that Trump couldn’t be charged as a sitting president regardless.
Source:
https://www.justice.gov/olc/opinion/sitting-president%E2%80%99s-amenability-indictment-and-criminal-prosecution
@katielass
[quote]Date of Issuance:
Monday, October 16, 2000
Headnotes:
The indictment or criminal prosecution of a sitting President would unconstitutionally undermine the capacity of the executive branch to perform its constitutionally assigned functions.
[/quote]
It looks like Clinton and Nixon both could have been charged for their alleged crimes even though neither were. Bush 43 would have been the first one immunized by this directive. The real irony is that it appears that it was the DOJ under Clinton that basically assured that Trump couldn’t be charged as a sitting president regardless.
Source:
https://www.justice.gov/olc/opinion/sitting-president%E2%80%99s-amenability-indictment-and-criminal-prosecution
@katielass