Quantcast
Connect with us

Bombshell report reveals Trump could be indicted under seal without his knowledge

Published

on

Trump's planned tariffs on steel and aluminium have triggered fears of a trade war. (AFP / MANDEL NGAN)

Berkeley, California attorney Alexander Stern, released a bombshell report on Friday that suggests President Donald Trump may be under a sealed indictment without even knowing.

The report gathered eight leading criminal law professors across the country. The Department of Justice has argued that indicting President Trump could distract him from his presidential duties, but Stern said a sealed indictment could take away that concern.

ADVERTISEMENT

“The Department of Justice says prosecuting a sitting president can impermissibly distract him. However, indictments under seal, remove this fear,” Stern wrote in the report.

A sealed indictment could start the process under the radar, thus eliminating the potential distractions that a public indictment would create. If a sealed indictment takes place, President Trump would not face any consequences until after he leaves office.

“It just sets the process in motion formally. It empowers the courts to have authority over Mr.Trump, so that perhaps if Mr. Mueller is fired or otherwise leaves his post, the judicial branch will have jurisdiction and they are not beholden to Mr. Trump,” Stern told Raw Story.

A sealed indictment would remove the statute of limitation concern.

The University of Alabama School of Law’s Prof. Jenny Carroll, said:“One possibility would be that the indictment if sealed [could solve] the sol [statute of limitations] problem and the matter does [not] proceed until after the President leaves office.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Stern noted that indicting a sitting president has never been investigated to this extent and called the Mueller probe the “investigation of the century.”

“No, absolutely not, on the flip side, we have never had a president like Donald Trump before,” Stern concluded.


Report typos and corrections to: [email protected].
READ COMMENTS - JOIN THE DISCUSSION
Continue Reading

2020 Election

Supreme Court mail-in voting ruling raises alarm: Democrats may ‘never win another national election’

Published

on

A divided Supreme Court rejected a Pennsylvania Republican effort to curtail mail-in voting, but experts say the Democratic victory may be short-lived — and confirming Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett would be a "disaster for Democrats."

This article was originally published at Salon

With Chief Justice John Roberts joining the court's three liberals, the court split 4-4 to reject a request from Pennsylvania Republicans to block an order from the state's Supreme Court allowing mail-in ballots to be counted if they are received within three days of Election Day — even if they do not have a clear postmark. The tie left the state decision in place, which Democratic lawyers hailed as "great news for voting rights."

Continue Reading

2020 Election

Trump can ‘rage from the balcony’ but he ‘will not succeed’: Dem super lawyer promises to protect the vote

Published

on

President Donald Trump has a lot of options available to him when it comes to his attempt to steal the election. That doesn't mean they'll work, however.

In an interview with Democratic "super-lawyer" Bob Bauer, "The Circus's" John Heilemann listed a few scenarios for Trump trying to steal the election.

"We already have an electoral infrastructure -- a voting system -- that is not always adequately resourced or supported," Bauer explained. "You take that system, you layer on top of it a pandemic, you lay on top of that destructive behavior by one of the major political parties who espouses this kind of nonsense, and you add on top of that the internet-distributed misinformation plays, and that just means that the task that you have to address these contingencies is much larger than it's been as a structural matter any time in the past."

Continue Reading
 

2020 Election

Will American elections ever again be legitimate?

Published

on

Only an established, legal “right to vote“ can defeat Republican voter suppression.

Republican politicians and conservative commentators are shocked, shocked! that Chief Justice John Roberts would say that people who voted before election day in Pennsylvania but their ballots were delayed by Lewis DeJoy’s sabotage of the Post Office should have their vote counted.

Increasingly, this election is coming down to the simple question of how effective 40 years of concerted Republican voter suppression efforts will be.

Their main strategy, particularly since George and Jeb Bush got together in 2000 to use a Texas felon list to purge 90,000 Black people off voting roles in Florida, has been removing the names of people who are legitimate voters.

Continue Reading
 
 
Democracy is in peril. Invest in progressive news. Join Raw Story Investigates for $1. Go ad-free. LEARN MORE