The DOJ opinion paper on the indictment of a sitting president assumes that the legislative branch is functioning as it should and will impeach (and convict) the president. The @GOP have abdicated their responsibilities under the Constitution, thus the opinion is now invalid.
-
-
-
It is also worth reminding everyone that the DOJ paper is an interpretation of the Constitution. It is not a “policy” as is often reported. It is not a law. It is simply an academic exercise in interpreting the Constitution. Trump can, and should be, indicted.
-
First paragraph of the DoJ opinion. It's worth noting that this opinion was first written in 1973 and was updated in 2000. A lot has happened since 2000, and undoubtedly none of the authors ever anticipated a person such as Donald Trump being elected president.pic.twitter.com/f4rgP0rnNt
-
Let's also consider the DoJ opinion on the ability of a president to pardon himself. There's one sentence here that should just scare the bejesus out of everyone.pic.twitter.com/6KSuieuWaH
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Not only could we indict a sitting President, our Constitution guarantees our elections freedom from treason and foreign invasion. We have the right and should demand that they
#Nullify2016. Worse, there is clearly a Russian asset still in the White House as per@PalmerReport -
This is why I believe the DEMS are very calm about how they are approaching their newly gained power. They know that Mueller may have something so egregious that there will be no choice but to indict. Some of the GOP who would vote against impeachment will be under indictment.
-
The impeachment will happen when the traitorous GOP are no longer wielding power because so many will have been indicted. The DEMS are saying no to a small chocolate chip cookie and waiting for the giant piece of chocolate cake. That's how I see it. Trump is a traitor.
-
I also believe there are fewer WH traitors than we think. I believe that some of the players in the WH are helping Mueller collect a massive amount of impeachable offenses including "obstruction of justice" "witness tampering" "abuse of power" "contempt of congress"
-
I hope you're correct!
-
If it turns out to be Conway, she will receive an Oscar for playing the Anne Coulter of the WH.
-
She’s an actress for sure. George Conway gave up refraining from commenting a long time ago. It is so clear
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
How about this.... Pence walks into the Oval and poisons Trump. So Pence is now President. He now can pardon himself and is unindictable even though his crime is what gave him the Presidency? Don’t think that’s what our founders intended!!
-
Not sure of the answer here, but’s let’s try it and see how it all shakes out.
- End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I've wondered that very thing. Clearly in the hands of the wrong person the role can become almost a dictatorship. If that is true, then that needs to change. That role should never be above the law.
-
Stop proliferation and broadening of executive orders has made the executive branch stronger than it should be. Something as simple as reversing that trend would change things for the better immensely on all sides of the aisle
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
And an acting AG can also be indicated for obstructing justice among other things.
Thanks. Twitter will use this info to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Speeding via horse got Grant arrested in the 1870's.
-
Let’s get the man a fast horse pronto!
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
