Agnostic.com

6 2

Do you agree that a sitting president should not be indicted?

Marine 8 Dec 15
Share

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account

6 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

1

no--makes him above the law which goes against the Constitution and the rule of law. No one is above the law

lerlo Level 8 Dec 16, 2018
2

Example: Decides to murder his entire family. Should he be indicted? Yes.
It shows just case why he may be unfit to be a seated President.

Same goes for all other legal matters.
I mean traffic tickets - within reason - could wait. Especially as he won't be driving.

But indictments? Yes they need to go forward. Some matters can not wait out a presidency.

2

No. The constitution does not prohibit indictment. If anything, an impeachment takes precedence over a criminal matter, thus the latter should be put on hold during the former. It is not a matter of one or the other, just as criminal and civil matters are distinct.

1
2

Lying about a BJ? Not worth an indictment. Paying off someone to influence an election? Yes, indict.

2

It is my belief that if he is indicted he should automatically be impeached and if found guilty serve time like anyone else.The VP can act in his place until the trial is completed! The trial can be expedited.

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:244726
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.