Is an indictment coming? That seems to be the buzz right now surrounding the Russia investigation. “It would create a constitutional crisis,” said Rep. Ken Buck (R-Colo.). The former federal prosecutor and district attorney told Politico, “Assessing the motives” of a president who decides to dismiss executive branch personnel would be “unique in the history of the country.” Would a little thing like precedent stand in Mueller’s way, given the opportunity to take down Trump? Politico’s anonymous lawyers close to the investigation think so. “The lawyers’ assessments hardly resolve the public debate about whether a federal prosecutor can indict a sitting president — one that several attorneys involved in the Russia probe said they are closely tracking through online op-eds and Twitter dustups. (‘It’s so much fun!’ said one.)”
 
“There’s a sense of confidence I feel when I’m with them,” their source said. “If I were a betting man, I’d bet against the president,” they said. The main problem the Mueller investigation faces is that the Special Counsel statute used in the past has long expired, meaning that Mueller is effectively governed by the rules of a U.S. Attorney, and reports to Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who would sign off any indictment. That means Deputy AG Rosenstein could block it as well.
 
The official policy of the Justice Department, from both 1973 and 2000, concludes that a sitting President cannot be prosecuted; this allegedly constrains Mueller. Then again, Mueller should have stopped when he determined there was no evidence of collusion, yet he persists in his quest to find process crimes surrounding the firing of Comey, and this exceeds his mandate. “If he’s going to do it, I think he’ll do it in the spring,” the Politico’s source said. “I don’t think he wants to be accused of trying to influence the election that dramatically.”

[RELATED: Trump Takes Major Step Toward Entitlement Reform]

[RELATED: Liberal City In Chaos]

[CLICK HERE To Follow Trump Train News On Twitter]