What I'm Really Afraid Of

[LittleRaven]

If the president is charged with high crimes, then wouldn't the supreme court ultimately rule on that?

No. The Supreme Court is not some kind of 'super court' that the President goes to. The only thing the Supreme Court does is rule on constitutional issues, and the constitution is quite clear on the subject of the President's power vis-a-vie pardons.

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

You don't need to have Kavanaugh on the Court to get a favorable interpretation for Trump on that. I'm pretty sure one or more of the liberals would admit that there's no "unless the President is the target of the Offense" in there.

While Trump is President, he is effectively immune from prosecution of any kind. The criminal justice system can not touch him. You could never get a Federal prosecutor to go after him, and even if you could, he can simply pardon himself. No state court has standing, much less any enforcement mechanism. And that's by design - we have a procedure for removing a criminal President. He can be impeached, but as we've discussed before, that's a political process, not a judicial one. The Supreme Court doesn't factor into it at all.

The only way that having Kavanaugh on the court could possibly effect the odds of Trump going to jail is if he is removed from office (either impeached or loses an election or is term limited) and some subsequent criminal trial hinges on some niggling matter of Presidential Authority as it pertains to confidentiality or something like that. I cannot possible stress how unlikely that scenario is, though - we have never, EVER prosecuted a former President, and we've had men that did much worse things than Trump in office. And even if it did come to pass...the odds are overwhelming that Trump would die of natural causes before that case was settled. He is not a young man, and at that level, the gears of justice grind slow.

[LittleRaven]

In other words, impeachment is very likely post-November, ESPECIALLY if Mueller drops a bomb. If he drops a big one, then conviction is possible depending on how much of their souls the Republicans haven't sold yet.

I doubt it. Unless they KNOW the Senate will convict him, then the Democrats would be fools to impeach. The Republican attempt to impeach Clinton backfired horribly. Having Trump in office is whipping up Democratic donations and support like nothing else has in a generation. Better to just leave him there until 2020 and take him down the good old fashioned way, with the very real possibility of grabbing a super-majority in the Senate as a bonus.

[Worffan101]

In other words, impeachment is very likely post-November, ESPECIALLY if Mueller drops a bomb. If he drops a big one, then conviction is possible depending on how much of their souls the Republicans haven't sold yet.

I doubt it. Unless they KNOW the Senate will convict him, then the Democrats would be fools to impeach. The Republican attempt to impeach Clinton backfired horribly. Having Trump in office is whipping up Democratic donations and support like nothing else has in a generation. Better to just leave him there until 2020 and take him down the good old fashioned way, with the very real possibility of grabbing a super-majority in the Senate as a bonus.

Fair point--but if, like it's widely suspected and Trump's behavior has done nothing to allay suspicion of, Putin was as balls-deep in Trump as he was in Manafort, it could easily become politically dangerous to the Republicans to keep defending Twitler.

I mean, "We stand by the man who the FBI says took money from the Ruskies to fuck with us" is not a good look.

[LittleRaven]

Fair point--but if, like it's widely suspected and Trump's behavior has done nothing to allay suspicion of, Putin was as balls-deep in Trump as he was in Manafort, it could easily become politically dangerous to the Republicans to keep defending Twitler.

Sure. And the second the Democrats have 15 Republican votes in the bag, they should absolutely impeach Trump. Because if they actually DO have 15 Republican votes, then Trump has most definitely been caught doing something SO naughty that even his formidable political floor as collapsed.

[Worffan101]

Fair point--but if, like it's widely suspected and Trump's behavior has done nothing to allay suspicion of, Putin was as balls-deep in Trump as he was in Manafort, it could easily become politically dangerous to the Republicans to keep defending Twitler.

Sure. And the second the Democrats have 15 Republican votes in the bag, they should absolutely impeach Trump. Because if they actually DO have 15 Republican votes, then Trump has most definitely been caught doing something SO naughty that even his formidable political floor as collapsed.

My fever dream is Mueller dropping an October surprise. Unfortunately, Mueller's too much of a responsible G-man to do that.

Either way, if the Dems take the Senate, they can at least neuter Trump, though passing legislation would be nigh-impossible.

[Fuzzy Necromancer]

I thought that the Can A President Pardon Himself question was still up in the air?

[LittleRaven]

I thought that the Can A President Pardon Himself question was still up in the air?

It is in the sense that it's never been officially tested. But most legal scholars think that

1. the Constitution allows it
2. It's a moot point, because you can't prosecute a sitting President, and he can't pardon himself once he's no longer President.

The more interesting question is whether he can preemptively pardon himself, but frankly, that's not likely to come up either.

[Worffan101]

One would think that the natural thing to do would be to patch the rules so that the President is subject to the law same as the rest of us.

I mean...this is an equal society, at least in theory. Shouldn't every citizen be equally subject to the law?

[LittleRaven]

One would think that the natural thing to do would be to patch the rules so that the President is subject to the law same as the rest of us.

Well, we certainly could. The Founders left us a method.

But frankly, if we ARE going to start tinkering with the Constitution, that wouldn't be where I would start. The President is NOT like other other citizens. We can't really treat him as one.

The solution to our current problems with the office is not to change the rules...it's to elect better Presidents.

[Deledrius]

The solution to our current problems with the office is not to change the rules...it's to elect better Presidents.

We really need to demand better candidates.

What I'm most afraid of, based on the last election, is that the next bunch is going to be even worse. The American people sent a message that we'll accept the worst choices and still vote for them. That's not a strategy which leads to better candidates in the next run.

Can you imagine a ballot where both choices are good, and one's even better? Instead of the tired refrain of lesser evils? I think it would be something to give a try to, just once.