Support NeoGAF

[Death Dealer]

I'm incredibly shocked that he picked the guy that wrote an opinion in 2009 about how a siting president cannot and should not be tried for crimes.

It's about separation of powers. The remedy for a criminal act by the president is impeachment. Anything else, would be subject to too much political abuse.

 

[bucyou]

I'm incredibly shocked that he picked the guy that wrote an opinion in 2009 about how a siting president cannot and should not be tried for crimes.

Like absolutely stunned, really didn't see that coming at all. Trump is usually such a selfless guy always thinking of the welfare of others ahead of himself.

I'm going to need a second to process the decision of him suddenly looking out for his own interests ahead of his country and more shockingly ahead of his party.

Jeebus forbid they follow the rule of law and impeach then indict, right?

 

[Cauliflower of Love]

mmm that delicious rule of law is convenient sometimes maybe on occasion

 

[Corrik]

Jeebus forbid they follow the rule of law and impeach then indict, right?

Yeah, I mean, has a president ever been tried in a court? I can't think of anyone.

It doesn't mean he cannot be impeached and indicted. Which 2 presidents have been impeached so far via.

Johnson was hella close to being indicted also.

 

[Spheyr]

This guy is too far to the left for my liking.

 

[oagboghi2]

This guy is too far to the left for my liking.

Anyone further to the right would rally the left for the midterms. Trump and the GOP are probably waiting for RBG to die before he elects a really far right judge

 

[greyshark]

This guy is too far to the left for my liking.

Why do you say that?

 

[Metaphoreus]

I'm incredibly shocked that he picked the guy that wrote an opinion in 2009 about how a siting president cannot and should not be tried for crimes.

It was a law review article, not an opinion, and it left open the question whether a president can (constitutionally) be indicted and tried while in office. Kavanaugh argued only that Congress should enact a law deferring indictment and trial until he or she is out of office. Even in his earlier law review article, in which he went into much greater detail, he still left open the constitutional question. And he isn't being appointed to Congress, so what's the problem?

 

[Kadayi]

It was a law review article, not an opinion, and it left open the question whether a president can (constitutionally) be indicted and tried while in office. Kavanaugh argued only that Congress should enact a law deferring indictment and trial until he or she is out of office. Even in his earlier law review article, in which he went into much greater detail, he still left open the constitutional question. And he isn't being appointed to Congress, so what's the problem?

The problem is not understanding the context or the intent as you've outlined.