| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Message |
Author |
 Is SDNY on track to indict POTUS? (L) |
Dave Dorsey |
Great piece here by Andy McCarthy (generally a Trump defender, and a former SDNY prosecutor who most famously led the successful prosecution against the Blind Sheikh in 1995) -- https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/andrew-c-mccarthy-why-trump-is-likely-to-be-indicted-by-manhattan-us-attorney
I'll quote a tweet of his at the outset -- "I did not say @POTUS is guilty - I've already said I think he has a good defense (and I said it again in the Fox op-ed), & I don't think it should be felony."
I likewise am not suggesting POTUS is guilty, or that the unreported in-kind campaign contribution should be a felony even if he is, or that an indictment is appropriate. Just sharing a solid breakdown of what will probably be a very big story. |
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 13654
12/9/18 8:56 am
|
|
|
|  |
 |
|
|
| Re: Is SDNY on track to indict POTUS? (L) |
MayB2Day |
| Dave Dorsey wrote: | Great piece here by Andy McCarthy (generally a Trump defender, and a former SDNY prosecutor who most famously led the successful prosecution against the Blind Sheikh in 1995) -- https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/andrew-c-mccarthy-why-trump-is-likely-to-be-indicted-by-manhattan-us-attorney
I'll quote a tweet of his at the outset -- "I did not say @POTUS is guilty - I've already said I think he has a good defense (and I said it again in the Fox op-ed), & I don't think it should be felony."
I likewise am not suggesting POTUS is guilty, or that the unreported in-kind campaign contribution should be a felony even if he is, or that an indictment is appropriate. Just sharing a solid breakdown of what will probably be a very big story. |
No. Sitting Presidents cannot be indicted (especially for something that is not a crime).
_________________
Socialism is a great idea until you run out of other people's money. |
Acts Enthusiast
Posts: 1907
12/15/18 12:11 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| Re: Is SDNY on track to indict POTUS? (L) |
Dave Dorsey |
| MayB2Day wrote: | | No. Sitting Presidents cannot be indicted (especially for something that is not a crime). |
Did you read any part of the article? Both of those topics are addressed. |
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 13654
12/15/18 9:21 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| Re: Is SDNY on track to indict POTUS? (L) |
Resident Skeptic |
| Dave Dorsey wrote: | Great piece here by Andy McCarthy (generally a Trump defender, and a former SDNY prosecutor who most famously led the successful prosecution against the Blind Sheikh in 1995) -- https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/andrew-c-mccarthy-why-trump-is-likely-to-be-indicted-by-manhattan-us-attorney
I'll quote a tweet of his at the outset -- "I did not say @POTUS is guilty - I've already said I think he has a good defense (and I said it again in the Fox op-ed), & I don't think it should be felony."
I likewise am not suggesting POTUS is guilty, or that the unreported in-kind campaign contribution should be a felony even if he is, or that an indictment is appropriate. Just sharing a solid breakdown of what will probably be a very big story. |
The AG will shut it down if they try. There is obviously a civil war going on at the DOJ.
_________________
"It is doubtful if any Trinitarian Pentecostals have ever professed to believe in three gods, and Oneness Pentecostals should not claim that they do." - Daniel Segraves UPCI |
Acts-dicted
Posts: 8065
12/15/18 9:29 am
|
|
|
| |
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
