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

kpete

(72,022 posts)
Thu Jan 3, 2019, 08:48 AM Jan 2019

Pelosi breaks with Justice: Trump can be indicted

In an interview to air on NBC's "Today," co-anchor Savannah Guthrie asks Nancy Pelosi, who will become House speaker at around 1:30 pm Thursday: "Do you believe the special counsel should honor and observe the Department of Justice guidance that states a sitting president cannot be indicted?"

The big picture: Pelosi replied, according to an excerpt from NBC: "No, I mean I don't think — I do not think that that is conclusive. No, I do not." With that response, she becomes the highest ranking official to suggest President Trump could be indicted while in office.

Pelosi is ready to rumble, planning to maintain the unyielding posture she took with Trump in their Oval Office standoff before the shutdown.

She tells USA Today that Trump is now entering a "different world."

.........



https://www.axios.com/nancy-pelosi-speaker-of-the-house-speech-3fc7ccca-ff47-4fe9-bf2f-a3c4d05c30c2.html?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=twsocialshare&utm_campaign=organic
30 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Pelosi breaks with Justice: Trump can be indicted (Original Post) kpete Jan 2019 OP
Lock him up! malaise Jan 2019 #1
No president can be indicted is a Republican obstruction measure not founded in law. olegramps Jan 2019 #16
Tell that to Kavanagh defacto7 Jan 2019 #25
I would think so.. why should Cha Jan 2019 #2
No one is above the law. Vinca Jan 2019 #3
"breaks with justice"? jcgoldie Jan 2019 #4
Yeah, could have been worded dfferently and more on point...nt 2naSalit Jan 2019 #21
I agree duforsure Jan 2019 #5
K&R UTUSN Jan 2019 #6
The guidelines were originally written by Justice Dept under Nixon NewJeffCT Jan 2019 #7
Yes, the headline is misleading, watoos Jan 2019 #8
Yep. honest.abe Jan 2019 #10
I'm sure "I like beer" Bart O'Kavanaugh NewJeffCT Jan 2019 #12
I'm only an internet lawyer but, watoos Jan 2019 #14
I dont think we need Bart's vote. honest.abe Jan 2019 #15
True NewJeffCT Jan 2019 #22
I doubt Roberts would do that. honest.abe Jan 2019 #23
Right, but per the Rachel Maddow podcast, "Bag Man" rusty fender Jan 2019 #29
Pelosi: "We shouldn't be impeaching for a political reason, and we shouldn't avoid impeachment... honest.abe Jan 2019 #9
i'm bowing down to this great woman leader onetexan Jan 2019 #24
he's a president not a king SpruceMoe1 Jan 2019 #11
Yeah, even kings got slapped down with the magna carta Farmer-Rick Jan 2019 #17
This is educational. I did not realize. Excellent post. triron Jan 2019 #30
Oh yea she's right on the money here!! bluestarone Jan 2019 #13
Go get him, Nancy! calimary Jan 2019 #18
The Founding Fathers would never have wanted a president who conspired with a foreign government Liberty Belle Jan 2019 #19
In fact they cautioned against any foreign entanglements. olegramps Jan 2019 #28
Absolutely dalton99a Jan 2019 #20
Not Exactly What She Said Me. Jan 2019 #26
President Ulysses Grant was arrested for speeding by a DC cop and had to post bail. No one is above Hassler Jan 2019 #27

olegramps

(8,200 posts)
16. No president can be indicted is a Republican obstruction measure not founded in law.
Thu Jan 3, 2019, 11:01 AM
Jan 2019

It stands in direct contradiction to the American principle that no man regardless of position is above the law. It stands in stark contrast to the outlandish concept that royalty claimed in being above judgment by any one. If this stands then flush the rest of the constitution down the toilet and join with the Republican Party that has been pursuing a authoritarian presidency for over fifty years. Their goal has been to establish an oligarchical cabinet with a authoritarian president and making the congress nothing more than a mockery without authority. It is why Trump admires dictatorships and aspires to tyranny.

Vinca

(50,310 posts)
3. No one is above the law.
Thu Jan 3, 2019, 08:51 AM
Jan 2019

I want his orange ass frog marched out the front door of the White House.

jcgoldie

(11,651 posts)
4. "breaks with justice"?
Thu Jan 3, 2019, 08:52 AM
Jan 2019

I assume they mean the Justice Department, but this is a pretty Trumpian title.

NewJeffCT

(56,829 posts)
7. The guidelines were originally written by Justice Dept under Nixon
Thu Jan 3, 2019, 10:15 AM
Jan 2019

and approved by a Nixon appointed AG.

They were re-affirmed under Bill Clinton by a Clinton appointed AG.

However, I think the crimes and abuses of Trump are so numerous and so vast in scale and scope that Mueller may feel he has no choice but to indict

 

watoos

(7,142 posts)
8. Yes, the headline is misleading,
Thu Jan 3, 2019, 10:30 AM
Jan 2019

it is not settled law that a sitting president can't be indicted.

NewJeffCT

(56,829 posts)
12. I'm sure "I like beer" Bart O'Kavanaugh
Thu Jan 3, 2019, 10:51 AM
Jan 2019

will do the right thing and recuse himself from hearing the case.

Leading constitutional authority Laurence Tribe believes a sitting president CAN be indicted.

 

watoos

(7,142 posts)
14. I'm only an internet lawyer but,
Thu Jan 3, 2019, 10:55 AM
Jan 2019

I believe our founders intended that no one is above the law, especially the president. They didn't want America ruled by a president/king.

NewJeffCT

(56,829 posts)
22. True
Thu Jan 3, 2019, 11:16 AM
Jan 2019

but, didn't Earl Warren & Felix Frankfurter hold out on Brown v Board of Education in order to get a 9-0 vote? Will Roberts be similar in trying to get an enduring legacy that heavily affirms that nobody is above the law?

honest.abe

(8,685 posts)
23. I doubt Roberts would do that.
Thu Jan 3, 2019, 11:25 AM
Jan 2019

There is no love lost between he and Trump. Recall the ACA vote. Trump ridiculed and insulted Roberts for his vote. Roberts wont be out for revenge but he also wont go out of his way to help him in any way.

 

rusty fender

(3,428 posts)
29. Right, but per the Rachel Maddow podcast, "Bag Man"
Thu Jan 3, 2019, 03:48 PM
Jan 2019

the Nixon DOJ said that a sitting Vice President can be indicted, but not a sitting President. This DOJ ruling hasn’t been tested in the courts so Trumpass’s crimes may bust this save Nixon’s ass guideline

honest.abe

(8,685 posts)
9. Pelosi: "We shouldn't be impeaching for a political reason, and we shouldn't avoid impeachment...
Thu Jan 3, 2019, 10:32 AM
Jan 2019

for a political reason."

Perfectly stated.

onetexan

(13,062 posts)
24. i'm bowing down to this great woman leader
Thu Jan 3, 2019, 11:46 AM
Jan 2019

Oh mighty goddess, deliver us from the horror that is trump

Farmer-Rick

(10,212 posts)
17. Yeah, even kings got slapped down with the magna carta
Thu Jan 3, 2019, 11:09 AM
Jan 2019

In 1215, under the threat of civil war, the British king declared that the sovereign was subject to the rule of law in the Magna Carta.

So, when Kavanaugh, the Justice Department, Nixon, Clinton and Traitor Trump declare that a sitting president can't be indicted, they are giving the president power that even a British king hasn't had for over 800 years. They are severely damaging the foundation of individual rights of Anglo American jurisprudence.

Talk about destroying our legal system, this will do it. Because who else are you going to exempt? How about Senators? Judges? Anyone claiming they were breaking the law for the president? Cabinet members? Anyone wh pays off the president? A CEO who gave money to the president?

If he really gets this more than kingly power, you can bet your bottom dollar, he's going to make money off it.

triron

(22,023 posts)
30. This is educational. I did not realize. Excellent post.
Thu Jan 3, 2019, 04:08 PM
Jan 2019

Pukes want to take us back to the dark ages.

Liberty Belle

(9,535 posts)
19. The Founding Fathers would never have wanted a president who conspired with a foreign government
Thu Jan 3, 2019, 11:12 AM
Jan 2019

to undermine national security to remain in office a heartbeat after the crime was discovered.

While it's doubtful they would have considered philandering or lying about it to be worth removing an otherwise good president from office (they were not saints), they would never have countenanced keeping a traitor in office.

If that same government has bought off members of Congress, then unquestionably the judicial branch must exercise its checks and balances powers to step in.

Me.

(35,454 posts)
26. Not Exactly What She Said
Thu Jan 3, 2019, 12:21 PM
Jan 2019

she said "I do not think that that is conclusive" which is right in the middle of yes and no.

Hassler

(3,390 posts)
27. President Ulysses Grant was arrested for speeding by a DC cop and had to post bail. No one is above
Thu Jan 3, 2019, 03:09 PM
Jan 2019

The law.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Pelosi breaks with Justic...