As Don Lemon and panel were reading the Cohen release last night, one big comment was made -

[NRaleighLiberal]

that there is plenty here for trump to be indicted one he leaves office. Another brought up that this is more than enough to start impeachment proceedings.

So the issue may arise - can indeed a sitting president be indicted? He certainly ought to be.

I am not watching today - can't (busy doing other things)....this just is beyond belief (of course, not beyond the belief of many of us here when trump was positioned as president in 2016)

[marylandblue]

1. The indictment question has never been answered by a court.

People cite law professors, legal theories and self-serving DOJ opinions, but ultimately this will get to a judge one way or another and then we will know.

[zipplewrath]

3. Seal indictments

A suggestion has been made that one could get an indictment, but leave it sealed until the presidency was "over". At that point there is no need to worry about interfering with a sitting president, but alternately, there is no concern about statute of limitations.

[marylandblue]

4. I see that suggestion a lot and it makes no sense to me

Sealing an indictment for years does not necessarily toll the SOL. There have been court cases like that. The proper procedure would be to indict him and let the court decide if the SOL should be tolled. Anything else just risks letting Trump go on a technicality.

[SWBTATTReg]

2. Yes. Indict him and let the courts rule on it like they do in today's world. The ...

constitution never gives the so called president total authority to break all laws with impunity, like rump is doing. In the meantime, impeach the a**hole too.

I know it'll never happen, but he should be charged with a bare minimum of crimes and frog marched out of the WH as other crooks are. He's doesn't deserve any respect for the office held by him, especially since he got it by fraud.

[rurallib]

5. Rachel has been doing yeoman's work on the history of indicting a president

I haven't been watching really close, but my understanding is that the history of the opinion on not indicting goes back to the situation of VP Spiro Agnew and was merely an opinion.

So it is nothing written in stone and should indeed be looked at.

Many government teachers back in my HS days taught that a president could indeed be arrested. This was pre-Nixon days.