Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Politics
American Politics
Republican Ties to Extremist Groups Are Under Scrutiny
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="A2SG" data-source="post: 75723610" data-attributes="member: 227164"><p>Sorry, but you seem to have misunderstood an important point here. This is <strong><em>not</em></strong> settled law. There is no specific Constitutional provision preventing a sitting president from being indicted; nor is there one allowing it. It's only long-standing DOJ policy.</p><p></p><p>No one knows for certain what would happen if the DOJ tried to indict a sitting president, since it hasn't ever happened; BUT, since the President appoints the head of the DOJ, this is <strong><em>highly unlikely</em></strong> to occur.</p><p></p><p>Which is why I said it can't happen, because the odds are incredibly stacked against it.</p><p></p><p>And also why no one has tried it.</p><p></p><p>-- A2SG, does your point (whatever it is) hinge on the difference between "can't happen" and "extremely unlikely to happen, as in virtually zero chance of happening".....?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="A2SG, post: 75723610, member: 227164"] Sorry, but you seem to have misunderstood an important point here. This is [B][I]not[/I][/B] settled law. There is no specific Constitutional provision preventing a sitting president from being indicted; nor is there one allowing it. It's only long-standing DOJ policy. No one knows for certain what would happen if the DOJ tried to indict a sitting president, since it hasn't ever happened; BUT, since the President appoints the head of the DOJ, this is [B][I]highly unlikely[/I][/B] to occur. Which is why I said it can't happen, because the odds are incredibly stacked against it. And also why no one has tried it. -- A2SG, does your point (whatever it is) hinge on the difference between "can't happen" and "extremely unlikely to happen, as in virtually zero chance of happening".....? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Politics
American Politics
Republican Ties to Extremist Groups Are Under Scrutiny
Top
Bottom