What if Clinton wins and is indicted?

The same thing as if Trump wins and is indicted. Although he may get indicted before the Electoral College votes.

It is really all about timing and when. The President does not get any immunity until January 20th, at Noon ET.

It does not matter whether the accusation (or the supposed crime) takes place before or after the taking of office. All that matters is when the trial starts. Given the number of hearings, conferences, and motions that occur before a trial is even scheduled, it is mathematically impossible for a trial that has not yet begun to start before January 20th, 2017. But even if the trial magically started before then, it wouldn’t disqualify Clinton from assuming the presidency. Even a conviction wouldn’t necessarily disqualify her. She is presumed innocent until proven guilty, and a guilty verdict would just be the first step in Congress having to then prove that her actions were severe enough to warrant impeachment in the House and then convicted in the Senate.

Also, let’s not pretend that President Obama wouldn’t pull out the old pardoning pen if it really came down to it.

@JeSuisRickSpringfield GA.

“Also, let’s not pretend that President Obama wouldn’t pull out the old pardoning pen if it really came down to it.”

You’re probably right, but there’s no doubt that Clinton is shitting all over his legacy at this point. I don’t think it’s beyond the realm of possibility that he wouldn’t pardon her, just out of spite, though I guess Kaine always could?

Is the president immune from lawsuits? Didn’t SCOTUS allow a lawsuit to proceed against Bill Clinton while he was in office? (Paula Jones or whoever? Not bothering to look it up.)

Irrespective of the Constitutional details of exactly when a trial might start or what the charges may be, as @JeSuisRickSpringfield notes, for an indicted President-elect to take office (or attempt to) would be to have perhaps the weakest Executive imaginable in the office.

A President depends on a certain respect as probity and “moral altitude” which a person in this legal condition could not enjoy. I suspect that her own party leaders as well as Congressional leaders (from both parties) would advise her to step aside. For that matter, I’m really surprised that they didn’t do that over the summer.

@gorillapaws What exactly Obama’s legacy is very much depends on your perspective. The President very clearly sees Clinton as his natural successor. He’s far more moderate than his campaigning let on. Remember, this is the guy who has expressed no remorse for the continued bombing of seven countries, defined all males of fighting age in those countries as “enemy combatants,” and has used that definition to justify the execution of civilians with drones.

@CWOTUS I suspect that the Democrats already assume that Clinton will receive neither respect nor cooperation from the GOP regardless of what she has or has not done. The party leadership has been afraid of her since before her husband was elected and before any of the Clinton scandals came to light. In conditions like those, an indictment just changes what they say about her, not their actual attitude. In fact, the GOP leadership’s unwillingness to show any nuance in their criticisms of Democratic leaders is precisely why the Democrats have had such an easy time steamrolling her into office. When every criticism is treated like it’s equally valid and serious, it gives people license to dismiss all of them as a whole if they find reason to dismiss even one of them. The GOP gave voters license to ignore their anti-Clinton campaigning, which is why it’s only working on the people who were already converted.

There’s merit in what you say, @JeSuisRickSpringfield, but the problem for her is that she also risks losing the support of her own party in Congress if she comes into office with too much tarnish, not to mention the respect of the rest of the world outside of our borders.

Everyone knows that presidents lose support gradually over time; that’s normal and natural given our electoral cycles. But we don’t often put presidents into power who have Nixon’s approval ratings from 1974. It’ll be interesting, however it works out.

@CWOTUS There’s no question that an indictment would weaken her. I didn’t mean to be disagreeing with that part. But I don’t think it would be due to a loss of support from the Democratic leadership (they’ll band together to call the indictment political) or even from Democrats (who have demonstrated time and time again that they simply don’t care what she has or hasn’t done). The party will do what it can to prop her up, even if a few conservative Democrats stray from the farm. The problem would be the immediate loss of public support from moderate and independent voters who tell pollsters within the first 100 days that they voted for her, but no longer support her.

The international situation is a little more complicated. She already commands enormous respect from a lot of world leaders, and I don’t think an indictment would change that. But it would certainly give them an excuse to push harder against US interests when it suits them, so it could cost us in that regard. The weird thing is that could still work in favor of her own personal reputation, regardless of whether it works in favor of the country, given how many people around the world see the US as strong-arming other nations into adopting pro-US policies.

We can stop holding our breath and P-A-R-T-Y !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Lawyers will clog the system of due process to where we will lose both interest and trust in our legal system that is supposed to handle issues at this higher level. The fix is in.

Then the VP will take over.

@CWOTUS

The GOP have been trying to tarnish her for 25 years. It hasn’t stuck. Not sure why you think the Democratic party would suddenly want her to step aside now when she’s never even been charged with anything.

@Darth_Algar When you now have Comey throwing bombs left and right and Donna Brazile who was cast to the curb today by CNN…the Dem Party is scrambling to circle the wagons in vain to save face…not for Hillary but the down ballots. The Democratic machine is sinking like a rock and even the FBI has turned the tables on them…every man for themselves. Never would have imagined this level cannibalism pales in comparison to what the Repubs did to Donald.

Hillary seems to have better Teflon® than St. Ronald the Reagan.

@Cruiser

Bombs? More like Black Cats (and this one may have blown up in his face as he, like many a drunken redneck on July 4th, handled this stupidly in his effort to impress people).

You’re welcome to rejoin us here on planet Earth anytime you wish.

”The emails were not to or from Clinton, and contained information that appeared to be more of what agents had already uncovered, the official said, but in an abundance of caution, they felt they needed to further scrutinize them.”

@Cruiser The Democratic machine is sinking like a rock…

Is that rock called Gibraltar?

@Yetanotheruser Can you say Sally Wasserman Schultz, Leon Panetta and now Donna Brazille…I’d say the rock is crumbling rather severely.

Meanwhile the GOP ship is listing badly with their presidential candidate happily shooting more and more holes in it and half the party stumbling over themselves trying to run to the end of the boat where he’s not.

Learn to speak Ukrainian or Russian for the “Don”.

@Tropical_Willie

we’ll all be reading (and watching) And Quiet Flows the Don

@Darth_Algar The GOP ship sank to the bottom of the ocean 2 years ago when the GOP swept the midterms and reneged on their campaign promises. The conservative voters have not forgotten this and the only reason Trump is the Repub nominee and why the race is as close as it is and there are a lot of liberal voters who are sick of establishment politicians too. If Sanders was still in this race, he would have a 20 point lead over Trump. Most lopsided Presidential election results ever.

“Everyone complains about politicians. Everyone says they suck. But where do people think these politicians come from? They don’t fall out of the sky; they don’t pass through a membrane from a separate reality. They come from American homes, American families, American schools, American churches, and American businesses. And they’re elected by American voters. This is what our system produces, folks. This is the best we can do. Let’s face it, we have very little to work with. Garbage in, garbage out.

So maybe it’s not the politicians who suck; maybe it’s something else. Like the public. That would be a nice realistic campaign slogan for somebody: “The public sucks. Elect me.” Put the blame where it belongs: on the people. Because if everything is really the fault of politicians, where are all the bright, honest, intelligent Americans who are ready to step in and replace them? Where are these people hiding? The truth is, we don’t have people like that. Everyone’s at the mall, scratching his balls and buying sneakers with lights in them. And complaining about the politicians” – George Carlin

@Darth_Algar Politicians are human…and if you need a lecture on the human condition I will be glad to give it to you. The minute a pol throws his hat in the ring he/she is beholden to donors…and that is the moment they are no longer as noble as their campaign managers present them to be. IF elected they have debts to repay and the longer they are in office the longer and more expensive the list of debts and the less they work for the voters and more for corporate interests. Do the math….30 years of debts for Hillary including more than a few years of obligations to the Donald himself or consider 14 months for Mr. Trump of which during this time much of his money is owed to himself. Self funding is the way to go.

Judging by that response I’m guessing the point sailed over your head by about a mile.