>>>I think I agree with you here on this for the most part - however this is something that has not been tested in the courts. Justice dept opinions are trumped by supreme court rulings. There is also the thinking that no one, even the president, is above the law.
>
>Which is why activists on the SC are no good. If the legal position is a), that should not be subverted by activist judges motivated to push b).
>
>>>So - this hasn't been tested by the courts - Trump is in hot water via Muller - and we know Kavanaugh's views. Kavanaugh gets added to the list after Muller. It's not rocket science lol.
>
>Added to the list after Mueller- did what? Ran a bath for Trump? That's the only hot water for Trump I can see so far.

After Muller was appointed! Check timeline please -- that is important.

>>>And really if you think about it if your sitting president can be indited for crimes you've got a constitutional crisis happening already.
>
>You don't get to indict anybody by wishing evil on them. You need an allegation of crime supported by evidence.

Agreed. This is why you have investigations -- like the special council Muller investigation. So until he's finished with the investigation and we know what's been discovered about Trump himself all we can do is wait as he rounds up more and more of Trump's inner circle. As you know Trump has already publicly literally admitted to obstruction of justice - what else is found we'll have to wait and see. All of the various skeletons in Trump's history is going to come back to haunt him - this is partly why voting for such a person was a really bad idea.