Not necessarily. Ever since about 1993 thanks, Clinton!, presidents have been good and careful to get something called "administrative immunity" before breaking the law. It's been abused more than your typical cheese pizza, but let me see if I can clarify why Obama will likely live to be 100 and die in his own mansion.
Say you're a public official and, like many such august persons, you have a lot of money in a mutual fund. That fund is invested in natural gas futures, but you're in a position to draft a rule for – hypothetically – refining equipment. This isn't an obvious conflict of interest, but it could be. You don't know, which is why you hire a lawyer and ask him for a letter explaining your exposure.
The lawyer explains in his letter that you should be fine, provided your draft rules are within certain parameters and doesn't obviously tilt the market for natural gas one way or the other. So you hold onto your investment and draft the rule. Surprisingly, the rule you imposed makes natural gas much more profitable, so you have technically used your power to enrich yourself. Are you guilty of a crime?
If you had acted on your own, probably. But because you made a good faith effort to check where the law stood before you acted, and you followed the lawyer's advice, you are immune to prosecution for your actions. Administrative immunity is basically an acknowledgment that federal law is complicated, and the best any reasonable person can do is ask an expert for advice on what's legal and then do what he says.
Cut to the modern presidency.
Bush and Cheney abused the system by asking Justice Department lawyers to draft memos to the effect that torture is a-ok as long as it isn't called torture or the victims aren't called POWs. When talk turns to impeachment or prosecution (violations of the torture convention are a capital offense, even for the president), all they have to do is point to the bullshit letter written by Anonymous Shithead Justice Department Flunkie #3476, and they're effectively off the hook.
Except they aren't – not really. Remember that this immunity is for complicated legal matters with a lot of gray area. Torture is so obviously illegal that neocon traitors shouldn't have any coverage at all (the Supreme Court has ruled that it doesn't apply to violations of the Bill of Rights, which Executive Branch employees are supposed to have read and understood without a lawyer to explain it). But the system is so fucking corrupt that Cheney's lame "I had a letter from a lawyer saying it's okay" excuse is allowed to fly because nobody wants to rock the boat too much.
I do not doubt that Obama – a Harvard-trained constitutional lawyer and former senator – knew this privater money laundering scheme was illegal, but I also do not doubt he had a note from mom saying he could. And I also do not expect anyone in a position to prosecute to toss that bullshit excuse out the window and file charges.
Sorry for the blackpill, but that's how business is done in Washington.