General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhy did Mueller mislead the American public?
Claiming that indicting a sitting President is "unconstitutional".
I'd ask him that at a hearing.
The Velveteen Ocelot
(115,588 posts)would be unconstitutional. This has never been tested in court, but it's what those two memos, in 1973 and again in 2000, concluded. https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/olc/opinions/2000/10/31/op-olc-v024-p0222_0.pdf
Dream Girl
(5,111 posts)remedy for dealing with unlawful behavior -impeachment. It is unconstitutional in that there is a legal remedy and it is not
indictment. It was a bit unclear how he said it, but pretty sure that's what he meant...
BeckyDem
(8,361 posts)And a Republican.
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)Which is as we know based on the 2000 OLC opinion: https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/olc/opinions/2000/10/31/op-olc-v024-p0222_0.pdf
There has been 19 years since that opinion and many chances for the DOJ to change that policy and yet no Attorney General has.
EffieBlack
(14,249 posts)Surely you know that Mueller didn't say he believes it's unconstitutional, but said that DOJ policy is that it's unconstitutional.
GemDigger
(4,305 posts)GemDigger
(4,305 posts)"We did not, however, make a determination as to whether the president did commit a crime. The introduction to the volume two of our report explains that decision. It explains that under long-standing Department policy, a President cannot be charged with a federal crime while he is in office. That is unconstitutional. Even if the charge is kept under seal and hidden from public view, that too is prohibited. The special counsels office is part of the Department of Justice and by regulation it was bound by that Department policy. Charging the president with a crime was, therefore, not an option we could consider. "
https://www.vox.com/2019/5/29/18644237/robert-mueller-remarks-transcript