Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Egoboy, Sep 15, 2020.
The Mueller report explicitly said they were not investigating Trump, just some members of his team.
whatever...but as you highlighted he was investigated for Obstruction.
Moreover, Clinton was investigated as well...
What would have happened had Nixon not resigned?
Why is this NOT a law already? Nobody is (or should be) above the law.
Perhaps they should spend some time considering the consequences of such legislation. Taking down a politician by creating special laws brings with it special consequences, particularly in democrat New York. For instance how might such a law affect Hillary Clinton, a New Yorker. Lots of people are above the law. They shouldn't be but they are. Get back to doing what the voters elected you to do. It wasn't this.
There is no need for a law. Allowing people to be above the law is a political activity, not a legal one.
He would have been impeached and removed from office....then indicted...but he resigned and was pardoned. Now that was for Federal Crimes.
This is state crimes....nothing I know of suggest a sitting President can't be indicted by the State....certainly it needs to be litigated...if they have crimes indicted....obviously there is a reason they aren't
So, it's okay for them to willfully break the law and avoid prosecution by running out the clock? This is an entitlement based on their job title? If so, why wouldn't everyone on the planet not run for office? I am not a criminal but there are some things I might consider if I knew there is no way for me to be prosecuted for them.
Thanks for clarifying that for me. I'm trying to play catch-up on a decades long hatred for all things political. I'm only trying to learn now because I'm a parent and care about my children's futures. This whole thing is just crazy in so many directions.
I didn't say it was OK. I just said it exists. That is obvious to everyone. Yes it is an entitlement for those who have achieved high political office. It is what it is. I don't run for office because I don't want the hassle of the election process and, frankly, I'm not a criminal so I don't need to be above the law.
If I'm understanding you correctly, you contend that people in certain positions should be above the law? I understand why some people have diplomatic immunity. I'm not understanding why we should be giving some people a "Keep out of jail free" card solely based on their job title or former job title.
Then why would it be the basis for impeachment?
LOL.. you REALLY don't understand the concept of what is proposed.
The POTUS can certainly be arrested after he/she is POTUS... This law just ensures the Statute of Limitations don't run out, so whenever Trump is evicted, it's basically January 20th 2017 from a Statute of Limitations standpoint.
Perfectly logical and required (never thought it would have been required, but then we got this loser and sucker)
Because, as we now know, Mueller was only looking at criminal activity, with no capability of determining what impeachable activity is...
um...the Constitution says what impeachable activity is...high crimes and misdemeanors....that's why the Dems hoax impeachment failed
I suspect New York voters are THRILLED a law like this will be on the books... Hate to think they were the last stand between Trump and justice and they failed just because he was allowed to run out the SOL...
Such a law wouldn't REMOTELY affect Hillary Clinton since she's never been POTUS, and probably never will...
Nixon didn't live in NY, nor (to my understanding) was he being investigated for breaking any state laws in CA. I think there were some tax issues, but they were probably federal..
This has to be done at the state level because the various SOL's are set at a state level for state crimes...
Presumably the elements related to obstruction that they documented could form an obstruction charge. In the case of their investigation being obstructed, it isn't really extra investigation to note what happened.
Even with that, the investigation deliberately avoided any determination on those charges.
Because she has never been POTUS means that she is immune from prosecution? You certainly didn't mean that.
No. They should not. But in effect they are above the law. Pretty obvious isn't it?
We shouldn't but we do.
Like? Defending himself?
When is Schiff faces charges for withholding his "cold hard evidence" he told us he as for 3 years?
So, shouldn't we be working on a way to stop it instead of excusing it?
Of course. I'm not excusing it. I am simply pointing it out. All you have to do is find a way to force a prosecutor to pursue a case he or she doesn't want to pursue. Not exactly easy.
Wow... just wow... Of course I certainly didn't mean that, because I didn't remotely say that.
Perhaps you can explain to me how this law could possibly impact somebody who's never been president?
The bill introduced by Sen. Michael Gianaris (D-Queens) and Assemblyman Nick Perry (D-Brooklyn) will “toll” the statute of limitations in order to bring a case — meaning freezing or stopping the clock on the limitations period until the president leaves office.
If Hillary broke a state law in 2016, she could have been arrested in 2016.
Seems Trump cannot be, so they pause the SOL clock during his time in the WH.
It's really NOT that complicated, unless you are trying to intentionally make it so..
Such a law is unconstitutional. Criminal law applies to everyone. If they want to pass something like this then they need to include everyone.
The bolded part.
Get rid of Trump, they yell. And present Biden as the alternative. Or should I say Harris. Did they have nothing better? Or do they honestly feel that Harris is the better choice?
Separate names with a comma.