Members banned from this thread: Devil505


View Poll Results: Should a sitting President be able to plead the 5th and remain as president?

Voters
15. You may not vote on this poll
  • No

    10 66.67%
  • Yes

    5 33.33%
  • Maybe - please include your opinion

    0 0%
Page 1 of 9 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 81
Thanks Tree38Thanks

Thread: Should a sitting President be able to plead the 5th and remain as president?

  1. #1
    Veteran Member Devil505's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    62,707
    Thanks
    19727

    From
    Mass and Florida

    Should a sitting President be able to plead the 5th and remain as president?

    How about .....Should a sitting President be able to defy a subpoena and remain the chief law enforcement officer in the land? (I say No to both)



    Edit: Could staff change the 2nd option to just say "Yes"
    Last edited by Devil505; 7th February 2018 at 06:53 AM.
    Thanks from Friday13, MeBelle and Davocrat

  2. #2
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    12,183
    Thanks
    2995

    From
    California
    Quote Originally Posted by Devil505 View Post
    How about .....Should a sitting President be able to defy a subpoena and remain the chief law enforcement officer in the land? (I say No to both)



    Edit: Could staff change the 2nd option to just say "Yes"
    Mr. Devil,

    Perhaps you should read a little thing called "The Constitution of the United States" then get back to us.

  3. #3
    Cat-tastic Babba's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    67,114
    Thanks
    48171

    From
    So. Md.
    As far as I understand it, EVERYONE is entitled to plead the 5th. The president is neither above the law nor below it.
    Thanks from pragmatic, Madeline and MeBelle

  4. #4
    Spock of Vulcan Ian Jeffrey's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    58,558
    Thanks
    28634

    From
    Vulcan
    Quote Originally Posted by Devil505 View Post
    How about .....Should a sitting President be able to defy a subpoena and remain the chief law enforcement officer in the land? (I say No to both)
    Yes. That is constitutional law. If subpoenaed, he has to appear; but he does not have to say anything.

    Quote Originally Posted by Devil505 View Post
    Edit: Could staff change the 2nd option to just say "Yes"
    Polls are not editable. Sorry.

  5. #5
    Veteran Member Devil505's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    62,707
    Thanks
    19727

    From
    Mass and Florida
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Jeffrey View Post
    Yes. That is constitutional law. If subpoenaed, he has to appear; but he does not have to say anything.


    Polls are not editable. Sorry.
    So your answer is no.....no one, including a sitting president can defy a subpoena?

  6. #6
    Spock of Vulcan Ian Jeffrey's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    58,558
    Thanks
    28634

    From
    Vulcan
    Quote Originally Posted by Devil505 View Post
    So your answer is no.....a sitting president can not defy a subpoena?
    That depends on what you mean by "defy." If you mean refuse to appear, no; but the only remedy for that is contempt, and contempt sanctions probably cannot be enacted against the president (while he holds office, at least). If you mean refuse to give evidence or testify, then yes, he can do that. He has an absolute right to not be a witness against himself, which means he can remain silent with impunity.
    Thanks from Madeline

  7. #7
    Veteran Member Devil505's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    62,707
    Thanks
    19727

    From
    Mass and Florida
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Jeffrey View Post
    That depends on what you mean by "defy." If you mean refuse to appear, no; but the only remedy for that is contempt, and contempt sanctions probably cannot be enacted against the president (while he holds office, at least). If you mean refuse to give evidence or testify, then yes, he can do that. He has an absolute right to not be a witness against himself, which means he can remain silent with impunity.
    I meant not appear. ...ie thumb his nose at our laws like he's done all his miserable life.
    I think the present laws would allow Trump...the person... to plead the fifth but my opinion is that he shouldn't be able to unless he resigns or is removed from office first.
    Last edited by Devil505; 7th February 2018 at 07:52 AM.

  8. #8
    Spock of Vulcan Ian Jeffrey's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    58,558
    Thanks
    28634

    From
    Vulcan
    Quote Originally Posted by Devil505 View Post
    I meant not appear.
    Ok, fine ... but there really are not any consequences for him not appearing. And for an "informal interview" that has no subpoena power, it does not matter anyway.

    Quote Originally Posted by Devil505 View Post
    [M]y opinion is that [a sitting president] shouldn't be able to [plead the 5th] unless he resigns or is removed from office first.
    I disagree. Since his testimony can get him removed from office and put in jail, he absolutely retains the right to remain silent.
    Thanks from Madeline

  9. #9
    Veteran Member Devil505's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    62,707
    Thanks
    19727

    From
    Mass and Florida
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Jeffrey View Post
    Ok, fine ... but there really are not any consequences for him not appearing.
    With a complicit congress that is a huge problem for our democracy. There should be consequences beyond party politics.


    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Jeffrey View Post
    I disagree. Since his testimony can get him removed from office and put in jail, he absolutely retains the right to remain silent.
    We'll have to agree to disagree here.
    A criminal president should not be able to abuse laws he has sworn to defend.

  10. #10
    Spock of Vulcan Ian Jeffrey's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    58,558
    Thanks
    28634

    From
    Vulcan
    Quote Originally Posted by Devil505 View Post
    We'll have to agree to disagree here. A criminal president should not be able to abuse laws he has sworn to defend.
    Until he has been convicted, he is not a "criminal" as a matter of law. And even criminals retain their 5th Amendment right against self-incrimination without restriction. The only way a person can be punished for refusing to answer questions would be if he received immunity, which would mean nothing he says could incriminate him as a matter of law.
    Thanks from Southern Dad, Madeline and MeBelle

Page 1 of 9 123 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. How long will Trump remain President?
    By Devil505 in forum Opinion Polls
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: 6th June 2017, 03:12 PM
  2. Replies: 61
    Last Post: 26th February 2017, 01:52 PM
  3. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 8th September 2014, 03:26 AM
  4. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 29th January 2012, 05:04 PM
  5. Replies: 9
    Last Post: 4th March 2011, 03:36 AM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed