• 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 we remove the DOJ from the umbrella of the Presidency?

ipsofacto said:
Are you sure you understood what your own posts were about?!
Click to expand...

Yeah. They're about the impropriety of putting the DoJ in any branch but the Executive.
 
independentusa said:
As we have seen with this president and others, having the president "in charge" of the DOJ leads to only bad things. Although there is a precedent for the president not being able to force the DOJ to prosecute a political enemy, he can force an investigation. I think it would be better to just place the DOJ under the wing of the congress or break up the DOJ into the parts that investigate and those that prosecute and place one under the president and one under congress. In the end, the DOJ should not be a political wing of which party. Thoughts?
Click to expand...

Hilarious coming from an OBAMA/HOLDER/LYNCH supporter.


And , YET ANOTHER CONSTITUTIONALLY IGNORANT left post.

To remove a CABINET POSITION from the EXECUTIVE BRANCH, is something Congress CANNOT DO, short of AMENDING THE CONSTITUTION....
 
The DoJ certainly appears broken when the president appoints and fires those empowered with investigating him and his campaign.
 
bearpoker said:
Actually, it might make sense to put justice under the judicial branch. I agree that putting it under legislative wouldn't work. Any change would require constitutional amendment.
Click to expand...

The problem with putting the DOJ under the judicial branch is that Federal seats are lifetime, which means that a lifetime partisan judicial would mean a partisan DOJ for generations.
 
It must be remembered that until now the tradition of separation between the White House and the DOJ was actually quite good. It was so good, in fact, that the last President who tried weaponizing it was forced to resign, and the last AG who met with the husband of the subject of an investigation caused such an uproar that she was forced to recuse herself from overseeing the investigation just two weeks later.

The problem here is less the DOJ and its relationship to the Presidency and more the question of why a country decided that it wanted to move in the direction of fascism. Trump is the product of this country and a product of the evolution of Conservative principles, and what he turned out to be was exactly the picture he painted of himself long before his inauguration. Why did the country and conservatives become the way that they are, and how do we see to it that the country doesn't seek out another authoritarian after Trump is gone?
 
Grokmaster said:
Hilarious coming from an OBAMA/HOLDER/LYNCH supporter.


And , YET ANOTHER CONSTITUTIONALLY IGNORANT left post.

To remove a CABINET POSITION from the EXECUTIVE BRANCH, is something Congress CANNOT DO, short of AMENDING THE CONSTITUTION....
Click to expand...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_Justice
As can be seen by the link above the DOJ was not created until 1870 and there is no mention of it in the Constitution. It was created by law and thus can be changed by law rather than a Constitutional Amendment.
 
independentusa said:
As we have seen with this president and others, having the president "in charge" of the DOJ leads to only bad things. Although there is a precedent for the president not being able to force the DOJ to prosecute a political enemy, he can force an investigation. I think it would be better to just place the DOJ under the wing of the congress or break up the DOJ into the parts that investigate and those that prosecute and place one under the president and one under congress. In the end, the DOJ should not be a political wing of which party. Thoughts?
Click to expand...

THE DOJ needs to be as independent to the prez as SCOTUS is, in my opinion. I'd consider any solution which leads to that objective.

The Prez can influence the DOJ, though Trump can't directly tell them what to do. I believe AG hirings and firings should be senate approved and on firings, where senate rules on the cause of action, whether, indeed, there is just cause to fire an AG. But, I'm still looking at this idea.

I do agree that Whitaker's appointment is illegal and not constitutional.
 
OscarLevant said:
THE DOJ needs to be as independent to the prez as SCOTUS is, in my opinion. I'd consider any solution which leads to that objective.

The Prez can influence the DOJ, though Trump can't directly tell them what to do. I believe AG hirings and firings should be senate approved and on firings, where senate rules on the cause of action, whether, indeed, there is just cause to fire an AG. But, I'm still looking at this idea.

I do agree that Whitaker's appointment is illegal and not constitutional.
Click to expand...

Whitaker also seems corrupt.
 
Kal'Stang said:
Apparently you do not know how our government works. The sole reason for the Executive Branch is to enforce the laws that Congress passes. How exactly is the Executive Branch going to do this without a DOJ?
Click to expand...

Evidently I did not know that either.
Time to get out my old GOVT 101 book again and do some reading.

Speaking of GOVT 101 textbooks....

Side note;
Would it not be cool as heck to go forward 60 years in the future, get a History and Government text book and see what it has to say about right now?
Read about all the scandals yet to come, and what they will think of how we behaved now?
I have always believe they will call this period the period where Big Pharma owned everything and controlled everything.
Not one elected official is willing to take on Big Pharma at this time.
...and look at all the stupid pharma commercials everywhere.
...almost every mass murderer was on some kind of psych drug.
...and you are violating federal law if you say a lime can treat or cure scurvy.
 
Last edited:
We just need to remove the president from the government just to get back to a normal presidency.
 
independentusa said:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_Justice
As can be seen by the link above the DOJ was not created until 1870 and there is no mention of it in the Constitution. It was created by law and thus can be changed by law rather than a Constitutional Amendment.
Click to expand...

There is still the problem that the Executive Branch is the one that executes and enforces all the laws of the land. That is its main purpose. And the Constitution does not allow for any other branch of the government to do so due to separation of powers. Not even Congress can oversee this as that is not their purpose per the Constitution. If you separated the DOJ from the Executive Branch who is going to direct them? (A: No one as no one else is allowed to) How is the Executive Branch going to execute and enforce the laws of the land?
 
I don't think it needs to be removed from the executive branch. I do think there should some new laws.
I would like to see something where if anyone in the executive branch needs to be investigated there should be an independent body to do so. And a few other simple fixes.
We don't need to rewrite and change everything we need some more guardrails.
 
Suburban Jedi said:
Until President Von Clownstick(with the exception of Nixon),Presidents stayed away from even the appearance of interfering with DOJ investigations which might involve them. Obviously today's GOP cares as little about propriety and justice as Democrats did under Clinton.
Click to expand...

Just like the last administration that happened to be Democrat?
 
Suburban Jedi said:
Nothing coy. I'm asking for EVIDENCE. Liberals play the same game as you when they ask what Putin and Trump discussed in Helsinki with no one else present.
Click to expand...

Attorney General meeting with the husband of Hillary who was under investigation on a airport tarmac in Phoenix.

Move on folks.......................nothing to see here! :roll:
 
RetiredUSN said:
Attorney General meeting with the husband of Hillary who was under investigation on a airport tarmac in Phoenix.

Move on folks.......................nothing to see here! :roll:
Click to expand...

President meeting with dictator alone while his campaign is under FBI investigation for possible collusion?

(HINT: works both ways. What is needed is EVIDENCE)
 
PleasantValley said:
I have been saying that since they closed ranks and were all one-sided about Hillary.
If i remember correctly, I said we will have this kind of corruption was long as the directors of the DOJ and FBI are POLITICAL appointments.
This means they can be fired for not towing the POLITICAL line and putting those priorities as number one.

So, yes, I am with you on this.
We need to depoliticize the DOJ and FBI.
Even under Hoover the FBI was used for political purposes.
Click to expand...

Agreed, but the purposes were Hoover’s. He collected dirt equal opportunity-wise.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom