LIBERBAL propaganda; the DOJ is NOT independent of the president.

Except none of that is law lol. It’s views and principles of certain people.

If there is something that truly wanted to be changed, Congress would do it.

Look at FDR, Congress realize how dangerous a leftist democratic truly was, FDR ruled by mob rule, Congress imposes term limits by law immediately.

No one is concerned about the president being in charges of the DOJ, and congress set no laws after Nixon to change that fact

 

Have you forgotten that Nixon was thrown out of office for trying to set himself above the law as Trump has done? It sounds like you are saying Trump is justified in doing anything provided no law specifically prohibits it. That might makes right. Please tell me that isn't really what you think.

BTW, please read the entire article.

"His views on that point were set forth with breathtaking clarity in June 2018, in an unsolicited 19-page memorandum that Barr sent to then–Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, arguing that Mueller’s investigation of the president for obstruction of justice was fundamentally misconceived. The president “alone is the Executive Branch,” he wrote, and “the Constitution vests [in him personally] all Federal law enforcement power, and hence prosecutorial discretion.” (The emphasis is his.) Thus, as a matter of constitutional law, Barr concluded that Congress is without any power to bar the president from “[exercising] supervisory authority over cases in which his own conduct might be at issue.”

 

Nope.
For example, the law prohibits the prez from obstructing justice. A law that became part of precedent when the SC ruled against Nixon in the tapes case. What Barr asserts is the prez establishes what laws he needs to obey and what laws he can ignore. That he has jurisdiction over criminal investigations in to himself. So if he chooses he could have stopped the Mueller investigation in its tracks. These views are antithetical to the Constitution and thus the founding principles enshrined at the time of America's birth.
Now, you are entitled to agree with Barr so long as you acknowledge it goes against all that we as a nation stand for.

 

The executive branch has always asserted broad powers.

what are you even talking about?

Go back to Marbury v. Madison, read that case. Thomas Jefferson told Madison to not even show up for the hearing because Thomas Jefferson (one of the founding fathers, who was president at the time) scoffed at the idea that the constitution allowed the Supreme Court to make any decisions on presidential powers.

There is nothing in our founding history that any members of the executive branch is independent from the president.

Thomas Jefferson openly didn’t care about what the Supreme Court said he had to do, because he drafted the constitution and he thought it was absurd the courts could make him do anything.

So he no showed, and openly acknowledged he didn’t care how Marbury v. Madison would be ruled, he would do what he wanted

 

I'm not at all sure that is what Jefferson believed. But if he did he would not be happy with the way things turned out since the SC asserted its authority to compel Nixon to follow the law, and he did. You know, you have some very odd ideas about..............hey wait............Bill...........is that you?

 

The point is, it is not the tradition or the principle of this nation of a weak executive or moderate executive branch. Historically, the executive branch has always been the most powerful, sure there are checks to prevent it from being a monarch, but it’s never been that far off.

It has only been since FDR, who took it to a whole new level of executive power, followed by Nixon that some powers were sought to be removed.

But it is not in our tradition or what this country was founded on. And Democrats only care about checks and balances when the president is one they don’t like.

 

Hmmmmmm. So when a Dem wins the presidency by a large majority of popular votes that's called mob rule? But when Trump wins the presidency with a minority of votes, about 3M, that's called..........let me guess............a landslide.
You aren't a Russian bot are you?

 

No, it hasn't, nor was it intended to be. Not by coincidence I suspect, that is what Barr's 19 page audition for the job of AG says. It's why he was hired. And it's why Trump keeps coming out with these ridiculous remarks about his unchecked power when it is in fact nothing of the kind. Billy keeps whispering this rubbish in his ear. And because it's what he wants to hear, and because he has no understanding (or regard) for history or the constitutional framework of 3 co-equal branches of government he rolls with it.

 

Name calling Russian bots huh, since when did I ever say Trump won in a landslide? I disagree with that statement but it’s a meaningless statement nonetheless.

do you at least admit FDR was far more of a dictator than Trump?

 

You realize that Obamacare was a far greater exercise and encroachment of power than anything Trump has done to date?

One of the strongest checks on the federal government is their inability to act unless explicitly approved by a clause in the constitution to act.

Prior to the 1930s, the federal government had very little power and passed few laws. FDR through his threats to pack the court (beyond threats introducing legislation to do so) got the courts to put forth a reading under the commerce clause to put forth FDR’s policies.

Obamacare was an unfettered result of that power. Regardless of whether you support or not support Obamacare on a policy standpoint, it was a huge expansion of power by the federal government, it survived the Supreme Court on the legacy of FDR’s commerce clause interpretation.

Obama and FDR have exercised broad and expansion executive powers, far more than Trump has. And the Democrats complained zip.

 

Sorry, but comparing legislation passed by Congress to Trump's proclamation of unchecked, unlimited executive power is about as ludicrous as it gets. If you were playing a game of pinball it would have tilted about 27 posts ago.

 

Sigh, you realize the greatest check on preventing our country from becoming a monarchy isn’t within the federal government itself. It’s through our established federalism of state and individual rights.

The federal government cannot act unless a enumerated power is allowed.

 

Was that word salad designed to bail you out of your fatuous analogy? If it was, it failed.

 

Sigh, sorry to interrupt but, when will you realize you aren't going to change his mind? Poor fella is still stuck on Russia, Russia, Russia....

 

Judges' association calls emergency meeting in wake of Stone sentencing reversal
https://thehill.com/homenews/admini...alls-emergency-meeting-in-wake-of-roger-stone

The independent Federal Judges Association is planning an emergency meeting to address issues stemming from the Justice Department's decision to intervene in the case involving Roger Stone, a longtime ally of President Trump.

Philadelphia U.S. District Judge Cynthia Rufe, president of the group, told USA Today that it “could not wait” until its spring conference to discuss the recent decisions made within the department and that its executive committee would convene a conference call on Tuesday after the department backtracked on its recommendation for Stone's sentence.

“There are plenty of issues that we are concerned about,” Rufe, who was nominated by former President George W. Bush, told the newspaper, noting that the group called for the meeting after Trump railed against the initial sentencing recommendation Stone received.
..............................................................................................................................................................
More than 2,000 former DOJ officials call on Attorney General William Barr to resign
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/1100-doj-officials-call-william-barr-resign/story?id=69030388
.........................................................................................................................................................
Anyone who pretends what Barr has done is normal doesn't understand a thing about America.

 

I'm not so much stuck on Russia as much as Trumpette's continued refusal to accept the facts surrounding their interference and Mueller's conclusions about it.

 

So, stuck! CNN even gave up om it..

 

1) So a bunch of federal judges don't support Trump; maybe there ought to be a conference of judges who aren't concerned. I wonder how many would go to that one.

2) So 1,100 former attorneys sign off on wanting Barr to resign, I wonder how many would sign off on he's doing a good job.

I see nothing of relevance here.

 

Oh I member

 

nobody said anything about public officials being a president's personal servers.

They are servants to the office.

It's not a lawless regime you're just mad because he won. Or you're being told so by people who are mad that he won.

The lawlessness is the House of Representatives trying to overturn the democracy because they are butt hurt. it seems most people in most of the country don't want their brand of government if they did they would have voted for it.

 

As I have said many times before, you are entitled to your own opinions, but not your own desperate version of the facts. Stone was tried and convicted by a judge, and a jury, for the Federal Laws he had violated. The sentencing recommendations by the 4 US Attorneys was 7-9 years. What was the initial sentencing recommendation, that Barr was waiting to approve? There was none--you just made that up. Once Trump heard about the sentencing recommendations, he went into another immature tweet tantrum. He clearly stated, "...This is a horrible and very unfair situation. The real crimes were on the other side, as nothing happens to them. Cannot allow this miscarriage of justice!” Later that day, and after a call to Barr, the sentencing recommendation was rescinded, and the sentence of probation was recommended by the Justice Department. 9 years down to probation. No big deal, right? Barr said that his decision was not influenced by the President. But, he also said that the President was making his job impossible to do. All 4 seasoned US Attorneys resigned from the Stone case in PROTEST, not because they had did anything wrong, or were trying to sandbag Barr. Your version of events, is not even logical. Of course this juvenile President wannabe, was quick to congratulate Barr on his taking charge. Trump was also quick to send a series of tweets attacking Judge Jackson and the prosecutors who quit. “Who are the four prosecutors [Mueller people?] who cut and ran after being exposed for recommending a ridiculous 9 year prison sentence to a man that got caught up in an investigation that was illegal, the Mueller Scam, and shouldn’t ever even have started?”. This is truly a man, completely devoid of morality, empathy, and responsibility.

Just how many excuses are you going to make for this moron? What is your excuse for Trump's firing of Comey, Sessions, Cohn, Bannon, Spicer, Shaub, Yates, Bharara, and others? How many more "yes men" does he have to appoint, before common sense and reason, begin to remove your blindfolds and earplugs? When will your fear of being wrong, blind you to what is right? The Constitution does not want any man to have absolute power over our government. Directly, or indirectly.

Possibly. But, based on the convergence of evidence, it is definitely not an unreasonable conclusion.

Is the Chief executive of your company, also the chief accountant? Is your boss also the chief technical and security advisor? Of course not. Just because you own all parts of the whole, doesn't mean that you ARE all parts of the whole. This is a logical fallacy. Water is NOT a gas, even though it is composed of gases. Unless it is written in the Constitution(like Commander in Chief), the President is just the head of the Executive Branch of Government. He is NOT a composition(fallacy) of the executive branch of government. Here is a list of his duties. Nowhere is the title of Chief Law Enforcement Officer.
A PRESIDENT CAN . . .

• make treaties with the approval of the Senate.
• veto bills and sign bills.
• represent our nation in talks with foreign countries.
• enforce the laws that Congress passes.
• act as Commander-in-Chief during a war.
• call out troops to protect our nation against an attack.
• make suggestions about things that should be new laws.
• lead his political party.
• entertain foreign guests.
• recognize foreign countries.
• grant pardons. (Federal crimes only)
• nominate Cabinet members and Supreme Court Justices and other high officials.
• appoint ambassadors.
• talk directly to the people about problems.
• represent the best interest of all the people

A PRESIDENT CANNOT . . .

• make laws.
• declare war.
• decide how federal money will be spent.
• interpret laws.
• choose Cabinet members or Supreme Court Justices without Senate approval.

I know that no matter how much facts are presented, or, no matter how rational an argument is presented, cognitive dissonance and confirmation bias, will be far more powerful than the truth. Even for something so obvious, as a clear abuse of presidential power, and for erroneously being called the chief law enforcement officer of the US. Do you even care, that all departmental aspects of government, should serve and obey the President? Is this the Government that you think our founding fathers wanted? Thank God for their "checks and balances", and the "separation of powers", to protect our Democracy from people like you and Trump.

Our country can survive this madman, because of the safeguards embedded into our Constitution. But in 2021, he will not have the cover of the Presidency to save him anymore. It is only customary, to not indict any sitting President. Once he is out of office, it will be Trump who will be serving at the pleasure of the State. Even a Presidential pardon won't help him(federal laws only). My only hope is, that maybe justice will be done after all.

 

I can certainly prove that the posters claims, have an exponentially higher degree of certainty than your claims. Especially, since your claims are totally subjective.

No investigation is necessary. All you need to apply, is a little common sense and logic. Convergence of facts equals truth, and the Divergence of facts equals falsehood. Not so difficult.

 

This will likely come as a shock to you, but obstructing and influencing are not anywhere near the same thing. That direct question (by Mr. Collins, not Susan) and direct answer of "no" cannot be taken out of context. Nowhere in his testimony did Mueller hedge on his answer of 'no, my investigation was not stopped, curtailed, or hindered,' hindered being the equivalent of obstructed. If you believe Mueller's questionnaire was "mock" you need to go fuss at Mueller. If you believe answering a special prosecutor's questionnaire truthfully and honesty amounts to obstruction then neither I nor Mueller can help -- you are on your own for that faulty thinking. Finally you adamantly ignore and try to bury the fact that Trump's and his administration's cooperation with Mueller was unprecedented, including the unheard of a hours-long testimony by the white house counsel.

 

Nixon resigned because it became clear he committed crimes....Trump has done no such thing.

That quote is correct

 

There are three branches of Govt...the legislative, which makes law, the Judicial, which says what is law, and the Executive, which enforces the law....the power of the Executive vest in A President...making that President the chief law enforcement officer.

This is basic Civics...things didn't change because Trump won in 2016....the laws aren't changing because the Dems are butt hurt