@RuthMarcus:

It’s not an easy call. Anyone who believes it to be simple is not grappling with the implications of taking the unprecedented step of lodging criminal charges against a former president. The United States is not a place, chants notwithstanding, where those in power lock up their political enemies. There is a delicate line between the pursuit of justice and indulging the urge for retribution….

Prosecuting Trump for pre-presidential or nonpresidential actions would be easier, less freighted with questions about criminalizing the operations of government, than a case centered on his actions as president. Here, the possibilities are abundant. For example, whether his manipulations of the tax code amount to criminal tax fraud, or whether he violated campaign finance laws by covering up his hush money payments. And the questions are reasonably straightforward: Can a case be proven? Would charges be brought against someone else with the same fact pattern?…

The issue of prosecuting Trump for what he did as president is much more complex. It cannot be that a president is simultaneously immune from being prosecuted while in office and should not be targeted after departure, lest the new administration appear to be pursuing a political opponent. Indeed, the 2000 opinion on this subject by the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel explicitly contemplated that “the immunity from indictment and criminal prosecution for a sitting President would generally result in the delay, but not the forbearance, of any criminal trial.” Doing otherwise would not be a get-out-of-jail-free card for presidents; it would amount to assuring them they never have to worry about going to jail at all….

In short, investigate now, and prosecute judiciously. No president can be above the law, but the law needs to move with extreme care — and no haste — in this exquisitely difficult situation.