• 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 William Barr be confirmed as Attorney General?

Should William Barr be confirmed Attorney General

  • Yes, he should be confirmed

    Votes: 24 61.5%
  • No, he should not be confirmed

    Votes: 15 38.5%

  • Total voters
    39
Yeah, that's definitely a bit concerning. I missed that part of the questioning so I don't know if there was any context added or not.

No, no context. Klobuchar asked a question and his answer was deliberately vague, and thus open as needs be, to a very wide interpretation.
Put it this way, in the end, this is what Donald Trump masturbates to:

(particularly the part at 2:25 in the clip)



This is what he expects, this is what he demands, and only an AG who facilitates that is acceptable to the Trump regime.
 
He should because everyone is praising George H. W. Bush. Oh wait was that a fake way to saying a goodbye? Barr was in Bush administration. I tell you guys what you can pick them for trump because you are so worried that the president will makes any pick for attorney general a puppet. If I was the president would ask for a pick because obviously the democrats are the controller
 
Well yes, they were if you've forgotten. Comey, Page, Skrozk, McCabe, Sessions and James Mattis are all gone.

Former FBI lawyer James Baker is under criminal investigation by the DOJ for allegedly leaking information to the press

Oh you were in support of the firing and prosecution of the corrupt crossfire hurricane members that actively abused their power in colluding with one campaign in manufacturing lies to generate FISA warrants against another?

*golf clap*

Low fruit indeed.
 
Former FBI lawyer James Baker is under criminal investigation by the DOJ for allegedly leaking information to the press

Oh you were in support of the firing and prosecution of the corrupt crossfire hurricane members that actively abused their power in colluding with one campaign in manufacturing lies to generate FISA warrants against another?

*golf clap*

Low fruit indeed.

I'm sure you won't understand this because it will diffuse your argument, but in the opinion of most liberals, they hold the belief that anyone who is found guilty of any crimes whether it's fraud, lying under oath, or even high crimes and misdemeanors, should indeed be punished to the full extent of the law and that includes anyone whether they're a democrat, republic, independent or whatever. The law is the law and those guilty of breaking it should suffer the consequences. We will never defend anyone that is found guilty of any crimes, that's not how we roll.

Having said all of that, the two Congressmen Mark Meadows and Jim Jordan may be using this as a political tool and to take the focus off the Trump shutdown, the Trump removing of troops from Syria, the Trump attempts to diminish the role of NATO, the upcoming Michael Cohen testimony before Congress and even the Mueller investigation.

.....just sayin
 
I'm sure you won't understand this because it will diffuse your argument, but in the opinion of most liberals, they hold the belief that anyone who is found guilty of any crimes whether it's fraud, lying under oath, or even high crimes and misdemeanors, should indeed be punished to the full extent of the law and that includes anyone whether they're a democrat, republic, independent or whatever. The law is the law and those guilty of breaking it should suffer the consequences. We will never defend anyone that is found guilty of any crimes, that's not how we roll.

Don't forget the tendency to assign guilt from afar sans evidence as well........

 
Oh hey!

Trump startled by cozy Barr-Mueller relationship

President Donald Trump was startled Tuesday as he watched television coverage of his nominee for attorney general describing a warm relationship with the special counsel Robert Mueller in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee, according to three people familiar with the matter.

:2razz:
 
I have to say that being a liberal and a definite anti-Trump advocate, if I were a Senate on that hearing, I am leaning to voting to confirm his appointment but only if he assures the Senate that he allow Mueller to continue his investigation and he will allow Mueller himself to release his report to the public when it's finished.

Mueller doesn't get to release his findings. His finished report with prosecutorial recommendations will go to Barr. Barr alone will decide on accepting or rejecting Mueller's prosecutorial recommendations. Next, Barr is only required to inform Congress that he has received the finished Mueller report and supply his (Barr's) prosecutorial decisions. Bar can either agree with or reject Mueller's prosecutorial recommendations. Barr will not release either an un-redacted or redacted version of the Mueller Report. What he may elect to do, at his discretion, is to provide Congress with his personal take on the Mueller Report. Of course, without the original as a template, Congress has no idea how true Barr's rendition is, or if it is merely a political document (a'la Devin Nunes). The House will probably subpoena the Mueller Report, which would probably wind up before SCOTUS.

If Barr acts partisan and is an impediment to Americans getting to the truth, I tend to believe Mueller's report will be leaked.
 
There's some misgivings on the left about his appointment since he wrote a pro-Trump memo last year that became public knowledge. In his 20 page memo, he gave the opinion that as president of the U.S., that Donald Trump should not be prosecuted for obstruction of justice. It has also been reported that William Barr shared this memo with Donald Trump personally.

I have to say that being a liberal and a definite anti-Trump advocate, if I were a Senate on that hearing, I am leaning to voting to confirm his appointment but only if he assures the Senate that he allow Mueller to continue his investigation and he will allow Mueller himself to release his report to the public when it's finished. This is important for many reason. It can't be edited by anyone else, not Giuliani, not Barr, not anyone. We can't have Mueller writing a 400 page report then have either Giuliani, Barr or any of Trump's lawyers editing it. William Barr should also agree to subject himself to the ethics people at the Justice Dept and do what they say, that's not what Whitaker has said he had the power to do.

The democrats really don't have the votes to stop him but despite that, I feel he's an institutionalist and would abide by the rules by not interfering in any way with the Mueller investigation. This is an important appointment in many ways, William Barr will also be 3rd in line of succession for the presidency.

He was attorney general before. If he was good enough then, then he is good enough now.
 
Should he be confirmed? Probably not. Will he be confirmed? Probably so.

why not, he was the first AG I served under and he did a good job. He was one of the better senate-confirmed AGs over the last 40 years
 
He has misgivings about the investigation. But he also has a lot of trust in Mueller, someone he has known and respected for decades. I think those two things balance each other out so I am fine with the confirmation.
 
I would hope that after being confirmed Barr would give Mueller until the end of the week to finish it up. The report should be turned in to Barr, and he should determine how it is released.
 
Back
Top Bottom