I feel like these - admittedly interesting - discussions of technical details are missing the point behind the question: namely, why should the person we would like to hold to the highest standard be the one person immune from criminal prosecution? Other countries don't have such difficulties.
It seems the President is legally allowed any crime, even to murder someone for fun on tv. This doesn't sound like the world's most advanced democracy.
It seems the President is legally allowed any crime, even to murder someone for fun on tv. This doesn't sound like the world's most advanced democracy.