• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should Bill Barr be confirmed as the new Attorney General?

Should Bill Barr be confirmed as the new AG


  • Total voters
    20

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
263,224
Reaction score
81,334
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Barr was Bush 41's second AG after Dick Thornburg. He apparently has been nominated by Trump to be the Attorney General. Should he be confirmed and if not, why?
 

roughdraft274

ThunderCougarFalconBird
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 3, 2010
Messages
15,955
Reaction score
9,791
Location
Louisiana
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Depends. He's probably the best qualified candidate who would actually take a job in the dumpster fire that is the Trump administration. And he's probably better than the guy he currently (likely illegally) has as his acting AG.

If I were a Senator voting on his confirmation I'd vote for him if he could make these promises:
-You will not stifle the Mueller investigation in any way, either by firing him, by cutting his budget, by sitting on indictments or reports and preventing them from going public.
-If you can promise under oath that you made no promises or negotiations to Trump or his associates in order to get this job.

Assuming he could promise under oath those things then I'd likely vote for him. But I haven't done a deep dive in to his history. I know I don't agree with him politically but that shouldn't matter when looking at presidential cabinet picks.
 

Anagram

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 10, 2011
Messages
8,858
Reaction score
5,411
Location
St. Louis MO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
I think almost any cabinet official nominated by any president should be confirmed. I don't see any red flags so far that would make Barr an exception.
 

Tanngrisnir

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 2, 2016
Messages
34,150
Reaction score
15,597
Location
No longer Los Angeles
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Barr was Bush 41's second AG after Dick Thornburg. He apparently has been nominated by Trump to be the Attorney General. Should he be confirmed and if not, why?

No. He's a huge supporter of mass incarceration and the War on Drugs (complete with magical thinking!) and urged blanket pardons for all engaged in Iran/Contra.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-poli...rump-attorney-general-criminal-justice-reform

He's also somewhat delusional on matters involving Trump and his firings, to say nothing of him buying into conspiracist bull**** (Uranium One, etc...)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...rump-russia-collusion/?utm_term=.05367bccd4cd
 

davidhume

Banned
Joined
Aug 21, 2013
Messages
255
Reaction score
72
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
No. Democrats should be the like the GOP and oppose everything Trump wants.
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
263,224
Reaction score
81,334
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
No. He's a huge supporter of mass incarceration and the War on Drugs (complete with magical thinking!) and urged blanket pardons for all engaged in Iran/Contra.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-poli...rump-attorney-general-criminal-justice-reform

He's also somewhat delusional on matters involving Trump and his firings, to say nothing of him buying into conspiracist bull**** (Uranium One, etc...)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...rump-russia-collusion/?utm_term=.05367bccd4cd

I agree with you about the drug war. I agree with Barr when his comments were about violent criminals (though he apparently also meant drug dealers who are often NOT violent criminals)
 

apdst

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2009
Messages
133,631
Reaction score
30,928
Location
Bagdad, La.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Depends. He's probably the best qualified candidate who would actually take a job in the dumpster fire that is the Trump administration. And he's probably better than the guy he currently (likely illegally) has as his acting AG.

If I were a Senator voting on his confirmation I'd vote for him if he could make these promises:
-You will not stifle the Mueller investigation in any way, either by firing him, by cutting his budget, by sitting on indictments or reports and preventing them from going public.
-If you can promise under oath that you made no promises or negotiations to Trump or his associates in order to get this job.

Assuming he could promise under oath those things then I'd likely vote for him. But I haven't done a deep dive in to his history. I know I don't agree with him politically but that shouldn't matter when looking at presidential cabinet picks.

What if he discovers impropriety? Ignore it?
 

Amelia

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 13, 2014
Messages
9,804
Reaction score
7,610
Location
Wisconsin
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Progressive
It doesn't even matter any more.

If he is awful, then that's par for the course.

If he's decent, then what a nice surprise.
 

Neomalthusian

DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2011
Messages
10,294
Reaction score
3,009
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
bill-burrypaats.jpeg
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
263,224
Reaction score
81,334
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Republicans. That's what I said.

that's based on what? seems to me its been going on for awhile. We had Bork and then we had Keisler and Estrada.
 

Cardinal

Respected on both sides
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
81,626
Reaction score
60,896
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Trump is primarily concerned about how Barr would supervise the Mueller investigation.

In some of those conversations, Mr. Trump has also repeatedly asked whether the next pick would recuse himself from overseeing the special counsel investigation into whether his campaign conspired with Russia in its interference in the 2016 election, several people said.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/06/us/politics/william-barr-attorney-general-trump.html

During the confirmation hearing, he needs to give three clear answers to three specific questions:

1)Does he believe that Mueller is conducting a legitimate investigation?
2)Does he intend to let Mueller conduct his investigation unimpeded?
3)Did he sign or voice a pledge of loyalty to Trump himself, or communicate anything to him that could be taken as a form of loyalty oath?

I'm not a legal professional so these questions could stand to be cleaned up a bit for precision and clarity, but if he answers them in a way to suggest that he would interfere with the investigation, or if he pulls a Kavanaugh and does his best to avoid answering them altogether, then he shouldn't be confirmed.
 

davidhume

Banned
Joined
Aug 21, 2013
Messages
255
Reaction score
72
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
that's based on what? seems to me its been going on for awhile. We had Bork and then we had Keisler and Estrada.


Bork didn't believe the free speech in 1st Amendment applied to the average citizen.
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
263,224
Reaction score
81,334
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Bork didn't believe the free speech in 1st Amendment applied to the average citizen.

really? I never heard that when I was at Yale and he was a law professor. I never heard that claimed when he was a DC judge either. have some sources?
 

Xelor

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 20, 2018
Messages
10,257
Reaction score
4,161
Location
Washington, D.C.
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Were there a poll answer option of "yes," without the additional "elements," I'd have ticked "yes."
 

davidhume

Banned
Joined
Aug 21, 2013
Messages
255
Reaction score
72
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
really? I never heard that when I was at Yale and he was a law professor. I never heard that claimed when he was a DC judge either. have some sources?


Yes. He said it during his confirmation hearings. You watched them all, yes?
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
263,224
Reaction score
81,334
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Yes. He said it during his confirmation hearings. You watched them all, yes?

most of them-plus I had the benefit of knowing Judge Bork since his son was one of my friends in college and Judge Bork and my late father were classmates in HS. I don't recall him saying the first amendment did not apply to individuals.
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
263,224
Reaction score
81,334
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Were there a poll answer option of "yes," without the additional "elements," I'd have ticked "yes."

that would be other. But you make a sound point-I should have had a simple yes
 

davidhume

Banned
Joined
Aug 21, 2013
Messages
255
Reaction score
72
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
most of them-plus I had the benefit of knowing Judge Bork since his son was one of my friends in college and Judge Bork and my late father were classmates in HS. I don't recall him saying the first amendment did not apply to individuals.


He did. It was rather a long conversation. He argued that 'free speech' only applied to official sessions of Congress. The purpose of the 1st Amendment was to allow people in Congress to argue passionately without fear of being sued libel or slander.
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
263,224
Reaction score
81,334
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
He did. It was rather a long conversation. He argued that 'free speech' only applied to official sessions of Congress. The purpose of the 1st Amendment was to allow people in Congress to argue passionately without fear of being sued libel or slander.

I'd love to see some proof of that/ he would also have to claim Congress was given the power to regulate speech as well
 

davidhume

Banned
Joined
Aug 21, 2013
Messages
255
Reaction score
72
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I'd love to see some proof of that/ he would also have to claim Congress was given the power to regulate speech as well

You should search it out and see for yourself. Good point.
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
263,224
Reaction score
81,334
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Top Bottom