Fox News Gregg Jarrett has raised the question of whether or not Special Counsel Robert Mueller, with the help of James Comey, use false or bogus obstruction of justice charges to prompt House Democrats to bring impeachment charges against President Donald Trump. Jarrett and others say they believe that it appears like Comey is working in conjunction with Mueller in his investigation into Russian interference and possible obstruction of justice claims made by many, but not directly made by Comey.
“The indictment or criminal prosecution of a sitting President would unconstitutionally undermine the capacity of the executive branch to perform its constitutionally assigned functions.” — DOJ opinion, October 16, 2000
The Department of Justice has long held that it would be unconstitutional to criminally charge and prosecute a sitting president. The Constitution itself expressly states that “indictment, trial, judgment and punishment” can occur only after a president is convicted upon impeachment (Article 1, Section 3).
However, there is nothing to prevent a special counsel from investigating a president and leveling an accusation with no formal charge. The accusation could be completely manufactured and meritless. Proving it in a court of law would be irrelevant because impeachment is a political act, not a legal one…
Jarrett points to what happened with former special counsel Ken Starr when he investigated President Bill Clinton. Starr’s investigation did lead to impeachment charges of perjury and obstruction of justice, and Jarrett says the similarities are between the two investigations are quite similar. That similarity could be history repeating itself with Donald Trump being the target this time.