discretionary and i want to say office siege versus officeholder, what is your position of would we have to remand it for the district judge to have to decide in the first instance whether these various four points that the defense has made against imposing criminal liability hinge on whether the acts are ministerial, discretionary, private or however you want to categorize it. i would use clinton versus jones is purely private conduct is what is judicial conduct after a president leaves office. and our position is that the indictment is to be dismissed because we acknowledge that the judicial court did not reach that in blaisingame and in the
court has found that the sitting president is subject to legal process. do you remember a 199 dec7 deci in a case called clinton versus jones? i do. do you remember the supreme court saying the president of the united states who s in office right now is subject to civil suit? is there any reason to believe that a former president is not subject to legal process or even worse that he can wave a magic wand and keep other people from having to testify? no. i think that that last point is really critical. that there are issues that we are litigating here. there s no question. but people need to remember that the current president, as to many of the matters we re discussing, has waved executive privilege. mr. meadows has, in fact, received indication that from the sitting president, from the white house, that he needs to
0 defense. the court yesterday appointed a guardian to represent their son. they have seemingly abandoned him. have had no contact with him. have not seen him or spoken to him. obviously what lies ahead for their case, it s going to be a difficult one for prosecutors after they charge them with four counts of involuntary manslaughter arguing that they gave him the gun as a gift, but also saying that they did nothing to prevent him from unleashing this shooting, this attack. prosecutors saying they knew things were going on and they should have done stuff, that s why they charged them and we ll see them later in court this afternoon. four children are dead. sh shimon, thank you very much. very good tuesday morning to you. i m jim sciutto. i m erica hill. the fate of mark meadows will likely soon be in the hands of the justice department, this following the january 6th committee voting unanimously to recommend that meadows be charged with criminal content of congress for defying it
department and it goes back to the days of bob work and the nixon administration and judge bork make a decision that a sitting president could not. i think the case of clinton versus jones when president clinton made a legal claim that he was entitled to immunity from a lawsuit was rejected by the supreme court. no person is involved in the law means a president can be di indicted, but that is not the justice department policy, and he is required to follow that policy. he cannot indict. there is the glitch. there is a glitch, and there is a couple of bob barr, does
congress this job. if the president is unfit for office, if he has made bad policies, committed maladministration, political crimes, that s what congress s job is to investigate that and conduct impeachment proceedings. i don t think it s a job for a special counsel. i think that s become a distraction for the real constitutional route. however for the crimes that the sdny that are occurring before trump was president, i think the sensible things for the courts to do is to delay that until after the presidency is over. we didn t do that with president clinton. there s a case called clinton versus jones which says let the process work through, but the supreme court also said but we don t want those investigations to interfere with the president s ability to do his job. neil, counter point. so two things, if john is right that this is a job for congress, the logical consequence that follows is mueller, the southern district,