Could there already be a sealed indictment on tRump?

[garybeck]

I'm not a lawyer and I have no idea if this is possible but like many I find myself wondering about different scenarios.

we've all heard that Mueller doesn't believe a sitting president can be indicted.

we've also heard that he is relentless in the pursuit of the truth and justice.

could it be possible that he has already indicted Trump (or plans to soon) but the indictment is kept under seal, and it will not be unsealed until he leaves office? in the meantime, he could be adding more and more charges to the indictment.

[Cicada]

1. No, DOJ rules no indictment sitting president

Mueller is DOJ employee must obey

[2naSalit]

2. I heard

somewhere, that it is not an actual rule but a guideline which is quite different. Do you have a source for that being an actual rule which MUST be obeyed?

[Cicada]

4. I know they can change it. But I do not know it's status.

[Jersey Devil]

8. Once a Grand Jury is empaneled, how could DOJ rules stop it if it wants to indict?

A Grand Jury, once empaneled, has the power to indict. It can choose to ignore a prosecutor's recommendations. A runaway grand jury could indict Trump whether or not DOJ rules or custom allows it and no one could stop them.

[onenote]

10. The prosecutor would have to be seeking such an indictment

And there is virtually no chance that Mueller is seeking such an indictment.

A particular person who I won't name who some here believe has sources of inside information available to no one else, claimed in May 2017 (several days BEFORE Mueller was named special counsel) that there were sealed indictments against a host of Trump administration officials, including Trump himself.

I thought that claim was bullshit then and nothing that has happened makes me think otherwise now.

[Downtown Hound]

9. It's not a rule and never has been

It's simply an opinion. Stop repeating bullshit RW talking points. There is no law ANYWHERE that says a sitting president can't be indicted.

[Cicada]

12. Departments have opinions which are binding on employees

Internal rules, opinions, etc are not law. But employees are required to follow them. No one says it is law. No one says they can not change it. But employees are required to follow it.

I do not care what right wingers think. I do not care how they talk. I just think that is the score.

[Downtown Hound]

13. It's not a rule, stop saying that it is

Allow me to repeat, it's not a rule, stop saying that it is.


Once more with feeling, it's not a rule, stop saying that it is.


If they found gross criminality by the Trump administration they could choose to indict. The "opinion" was in reference to Bill Clinton during the Monica fiasco. What Trump is accused of doing is way beyond lying about oral sex under oath. That opinion is neither binding nor written in stone and does not apply to what Trump is accused of doing. There is nothing, no law, no rule, ANYWHERE, that says Trump can't be indicted. End of story.

[Cicada]

14. Jack Goldstein, Harvard, Marty Lederman, Georgetown say Mueller is bound

Those two leading law professors say “But Mueller is almost certainly bound by the Office of Legislative Council opinions under Department of Justice regulations.”

[Downtown Hound]

15. Mueller is bound by the wishes of the Justice Department

They are not bound by anything, least of all that OPINION made years ago. If they choose not to indict Trump, it is not because they can't. It's because they don't want to for whatever reason.

Claiming they they can't indict Trump because of that ancient opinion on a completely different case is nothing more than their own self-created get out of jail free card. They are bound by no law and no rule to not indict Trump if they find criminal wrongdoing. Don't help them get away with it by feeding into their bullshit claim about how they can't indict Trump. They most certainly can.

[blueinredohio]

3. Don't forget

At the end of the day they're all republicans so they really don't give a shit about you and me. EVERY LAST ONE OF THEM.

[garybeck]

6. you are correct

not only do they not care about you and me. they don't care about democracy or the rule of law.

[ElementaryPenguin]

5. Yes. I recently heard a guest legal expert on MSNBC remark that that is certainly possible.

Justice Department rules are not binding as law - and the special counsel law allows for such an indictment in "special circumstances" (which definitely include a president taking office by "corrupt means&quot

It would be Rosenstein's call (and he may well have already made it).

[garybeck]

7. having a sealed indictment held until he leaves office would

be a failsafe against anything that could happen in the next 2 years, like Mueller being fired or the SCOTUS protecting trump. perhaps it's already in the bag

[onenote]

11. Why? Whomever replaced Rosenstein would simply seek to dismiss the indictment

The Court can't very well proceed if the prosecution refuses to prosecute.

[pecosbob]

16. I have read many sources that suspect he is an unindicted co-conspirator

in Manafort's conspiracy case.