,
9 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
Lots of talk about POTUS prosecution, impeachment and pardon. Here’s where I come down. 1/
Many observers agree that POTUS can be guilty of crimes, including obstruction of justice, at least in an extreme enough case where his motive is purely corrupt. 2/
POTUS lawyers disagree, say it’s impossible for him to obstruct justice, no matter what, because as chief executive he would only be "obstructing himself." 3/
The DOJ position – in 1973 and again in 2000 – is that a *sitting* President cannot be indicted or tried for any crime, so prosecution must wait until he is out of office. 4/
But that DOJ position is only about when, not whether, POTUS may be prosecuted – DOJ says he “is not above the law” and is “accountable for his misconduct … before, during and after his service” in a prosecution after he leaves office. 5/
Some scholars and prior special counsels reject DOJ’s position on timing, and believe that a sitting President can be prosecuted. But this is unlikely to be tested in practice as Mueller is bound by regulation to follow DOJ policy. 6/
Obviously, a sitting President can be impeached, including for obstruction, and removed from office if convicted. And after removal, he can then be prosecuted (he has no double jeopardy defense to the prosecution based on the prior impeachment and removal). 7/
Presidential self-pardon is an open question, but DOJ’s position is no, self-pardoning is as nonsensical as self-judging – this is significant because DOJ normally supports POTUS prerogatives. 8/
Finally, it is clear that POTUS cannot pardon (himself or anyone else) in cases of impeachment. It is the ultimate safety valve for a corrupt Chief Executive. 9/9
