Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

uponit7771

(90,339 posts) Wed Aug 22, 2018, 11:18 AM Aug 2018

QUESTION: If POTUS must be involved in civil legal proceedings why shouldn't the have to be involved

... in criminal legal proceedings?

IIRC Clinton had to sit for a deposition during the 90s and it was a USSC decision that decided on whether he had to or not.

Why is this not true for criminal, I'm thinking a president being indicted is an asked and answered question no?

Thx in advance for your input

1 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

QUESTION: If POTUS must be involved in civil legal proceedings why shouldn't the have to be involved (Original Post) uponit7771 Aug 2018 OP

Nope, never been asked or answered in court marylandblue Aug 2018 #1

marylandblue

(12,344 posts)

1. Nope, never been asked or answered in court

Reply to uponit7771 (Original post)

Wed Aug 22, 2018, 11:26 AM

Aug 2018

Legal scholars are divided on the issue.

Reply to this discussion