President Trump, United States Supreme Court, Congress discussed on WTMJ Conversations

Automatic TRANSCRIPT

To say you're taking inclusive commemorative sampling glass for using the events to keep also the fines displays of beer ciders. Seltzer all their fee to try to quench your thirst. If you're the right caller who can quickly identify our top stories later this morning, then you'd be headed to the six annual bikes and bruise listening for your chance to win that is coming up in the ten o'clock hour, or now, we're joined by my friend. Rick Burke for the president, the president of the Wisconsin. Dan, Rick, lots of speculation last night. Robert mother is getting close your thoughts on that speculation. And what that might mean. In the context of all the things that are swirling around this president would just from the legal aspects. Right. Well, I mean, there are a lot of signs that you bet he's winding up on the speculation last night is that he might submit his report to attorney general bars early next week the a couple of things first of all it is. I think almost certain that Bob Mueller will not recommend that criminal charges. Deep be brought against President Trump. This is probably because there won't be any criminal conduct on a on the part of Trump within the scope of Mueller's investigation. But beyond that department of Justice guidelines is generally say, you can't indicted a sitting president. So the question now will become well, okay. He's got this investigative. Report which is probably what it should have been considered in the beginning. It should have been done as a counterintelligence investigation to find out what the Russians did in the course of the two thousand sixteen election and the question then becomes how much of this is going to be made public normally when prosecutors investigate someone, and they decide not to charge them with a crime. The report is not made public. This is one of the criticisms of Komi in the Clinton situation, if he wasn't gonna charge. He shouldn't have said anything, but there's this other aspect to it. And this other aspect to it is is sort of an investigative investigation into Russian activity in the twenty sixteen election. And I believe the statute says that the attorney general is supposed to report to congress. And so we're gonna have perhaps controversy over how much of this is going to be made public since it seems to me that even though there may not be criminal. Conduct on the part of the president, or or, you know, people closer to the president's already been identified. There could be stuff. It's embarrassing. And, you know, then President Trump has a pretty thin skinned. So, you know, he's he's he's likely to to think some of it's embarrassing, even if you know, it may not be the worst stuff in the world. And so, you know, is there now going to be a battle between the White House, the attorney general and congress as to you know, just how much of this is going to be made public will congress subpoena Miller to testify, you know, will there be litigation brought in order to compel the production of you know, some of this stuff. Should he H E decide that not all of it ought to be released? So I think we could have quite a lot to talk about in the in the coming weeks could every could there be a role for the supreme court and some of the stuff if let's say the president were. Charged with something even not just from the mall investigation. But the southern district of New York are one of the house investigations could there be a role for the supreme court the plate? Sure. Sure. Because because and again, I mean, I think you make a great point there. Even if you know Muller releases its report, whether it's public or not and closes up shop, they're still investigation going on in the southern district of New York where there's this issue of campaign finance violations is this issue of contributions to the inaugural committee that apparently under investigation the issue of whether or not you could indict a sitting president has never been resolved by the United States Supreme court. There's a lot of people that say that this is just implicit in the separation of powers, it would be, you know, violation of the constitutional structure, if if I, you know courts, would, you know, weigh in on the, you know, the criminality is the president while he's, you know, still in office. But the supreme court has never addressed that. And you know, if I suppose if the folks in the. It's kind of awkward because of course, the southern district of southern district in New York work for the department of Justice department of Justice, the attorney general works for the president. So I don't know if there's a scenario in which case actually gets up to the United States Supreme court. What might be more likely is if in fact, there is an issue of, you know, somebody wanting to charge the president with a crime, and and they're being, you know, some type of conflict over whether this can be done or not I think it's far more likely that the way that that will work itself out with the congress to bring articles of impeachment. And if in fact, that's not hard to imagine a democratic controlled congress little harder to imagine a Republican Senate voting to remove the president would seem to me that what they would have to find we have to be a pretty bad. Be pretty clear. So there's no real roomed argue whether it actually happened or not. And then I think is probably always the case with the impeachment of any president the president's popularity has to sort of dip to a kind of a Knicks Oni and level where you know, the president is just all his political supporting, and you know, starts to, you know, lose backing within his own party. Got a couple of minutes left with the president of the Wisconsin law liberty Rick Berg can can a house investigation, which is primarily political connect- ever bleed into a criminal investigation. Well, sure, I could I mean, you know, the house couldn't cover stuff that that is that that's criminal once again, if if that if you things involve a sitting president of the United States that sitting president is is not going to be indicted by the Justice department, just not gonna happen. And and that's not. A new Trumpian policy. The department of Justice has taken a position for a long time. Now that a sitting president cannot be indicted, and it's in their guidelines. And so I think it's unlikely it's unlikely to happen. But it could once again, you know, the far more likely scenario, and this is what happened. You know? Watergate situation is is if something like that comes to light in the course of the congressional investigation. The report is the southern district of New York, and it really is far more likely that that will be dealt with in congress than than than in the courts, Rick Esab, president of Wisconsin institute for long every thanks for taking a few moments to explain all that legal stuff for us. Take care. I was gonna talk to wreck. We'll take a quick break. More next right here in WTMJ WTMJ..

Coming up next