A president doesn’t.Why a President has complete protection from legal prosecution while in office is beyond me. It’s the stuff of kings, not democracies.
Lots of talk about nailing to the wall a man who as you said is 72 and still going. Anyone obsessing over an ex-president is bitter. . . . Of course, that describes Congressional Democrats perfectly, so I am sure they’ll keep trying to go after the man. There is real hatred for him, after all.72 years, nothing has happened.
No, he didn’t. He was not charged with any crime that led to an indictment.
Not YET. Because Barr declared that a sitting president is “immune” to even investigation.No, he didn’t. He was not charged with any crime that led to an indictment.
No words about arresting. But he fights tooth and nail, because without the protection of presidential immunity, his chances in court are bleak indeed. The number of crimes he committed is huge, and he will be tried and convicted.You guys might want to think of the implications of arresting a man roughly half the country voted in a highly polarized atmosphere like we currently find ourselves in.
Indeed, not YET… except in an autocratic system, like Russia, China, North Korea, Turkey, and some others. That is what Trump longed to change the US into. Remember the “and we fell in love”… when he talked about one of the bloodiest dictators - Kim Jung Un - who had his own relative be torn into pieces by rabid dogs.No one above the law, and all that stuff.
Not true. Just look at the case of Ceausescu, who was summarily executed, along with his wife. And the “trick” played by new president pardoning the old was simply nauseating.It has never applied to those at the top. Ever.
Sure… let the “top dog” do whatever he wants, kill or imprison anyone he dislikes.No. In order to rule effectively they need a level of immunity. Short of treason looking the other way is better for continuity, social cohesion, and trust in institutions.