Jump to content

Mueller opens wide angle investigation into Trump finances as part of Russia probe


reo

Recommended Posts

20 minutes ago, ben4titans said:

She was pardoned for all intents and purposes and everyone knows she is guilty as hell....maybe because Comey laid out her crimes for 30 minutes. If Trump pardons himself and Mueller presents the goods, he is gone. If he pardons himself and Mueller presents nothing...then life goes on. 

Hillary wasn't pardoned in any way shape or form. You're really reaching now. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 35
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Trump doesn't have to pardon himself because a sitting president can't be indicted... He could pardon his family and stuff though. Once he's out of office he could be indicted. Maybe he'll resign at t

You knew that's why Trump started crying 

This is rich coming from you. You said she was pardoned "for all intents and purposes" indicating that she was pretty much pardoned. He countered that she was not pardoned in "ANY SHAPE OR F

16 minutes ago, ben4titans said:

This is why you aren't taken seriously. You do know what the term for all intents and purposes means...yeah?

You do know that was covered in "in no way shape or form", right?

Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Titans279 said:

Trump doesn't have to pardon himself because a sitting president can't be indicted

 

Last night, a legal scholar pointed out that that opinion has been shown to be flawed and it has not been adjudicated, so it would be up to the court system to set the precedence and will need specific charges to do that. 

 

Can the President Be Indicted?

May 29, 2017 at 9:16 am EDTBy Taegan Goddard84 Comments

“The Constitution does not answer every question. It includes detailed instructions, for instance, about how Congress may remove a president who has committed serious offenses. But it does not say whether the president may be criminally prosecuted in the meantime,” the New York Times reports.

“The Supreme Court has never answered that question, either. It heard arguments on the issue in 1974 in a case in which it ordered President Richard M. Nixon to turn over tape recordings, but it did not resolve it.”

Edited by 9 Nines
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...