While we’ve long heard speculation that Donald Trump may have committed crimes, pundits have said a sitting president would never be indicted because of a DOJ memo written in the 70’s that said a president on trial wouldn’t be able to carry out his duties of the office. But now that the U.S. Attorney has officially put on paper that Trump did indeed break the law some are changing their tune. MNSBC’s Laurence O’Donnell is just one of the many who say Friday that there’s nothing in the constitution that prevents a president from being charged or put on trial. Here’s part of what he said:
“So “Individual 1” has committed two federal crimes according to federal prosecutors working in the Trump justice department. Now, there is actually nothing in the Constitution that says the President of the United States cannot be indicted and charged with a crime. There is nothing in the Constitution that says the President of the United States can never be charged with a crime and never put on trial, in court, while serving as President of the United States. That is not written in the Constitution anywhere. In fact, the United States Supreme Court has ruled that the President of the United States is subject to personal civil litigation and can be dragged into court and into trials in civil cases while serving as President of the United States. Paula Jones established that legal principle in her civil case against President Bill Clinton. It’s merely a relatively recent Justice Department tradition outlined, only in memo form, that says the President should not be indicted. And so the only conceivable reason why Donald Trump has not been indicted as a co-conspirator in the Cohen case is that he won the presidential election, that he conspired with Michael Cohen to illegally effect. If Donald Trump lost the election and federal prosecutors were pursuing this same case he would be facing exactly the same cases as Michael Cohen. He would be charged with exactly the same two campaign finance violation crimes.”
Watch the rest of O’Donnell’s analysis above.