Just trying to get your philosophical take on what the role of the Attorney General should be? Under Bush the Attorney General's office seemed to be primarily a branch of govenrment that was subject to the politics of the President. Under Obama it seems that the AG is actually going against the political wishes of the President. Which do you think is better for our country and why? Can you, or should you make decisions about legal issues with the primary focus being political? Or should the Justice Department be largely "blind" to politics and focus primarily on legal issues? Discuss...
Under Obama it seems that the AG is actually going against the political wishes of the President. __________________________________________________ This is just perception. If you are speaking of the investigations into the terrorist interrogations, I do not believe for one second the AG is going against the wishes of the president. They (Obama administration) is under tremendous pressure from very powerful political leftist groups that put them in power. Obama may say things publicly one way because he wants to be the nice guy but it doesnt mean he isnt saying something else privately. They were going to eventually cave on this one.
Another example was the dismissing of charges against the Black Panther group during the election. A member of the obama administration was involved in this decision. How can you say this administration is any different. The AG's office is a political arm of the presidency. It is a cabinet post.
The AG has been an extension of the Executive Branch for many many years, not just the past 8 years as our favorite Bush Basher points out at every chance. Just one example would be the early 60's when the Presidents brother was the AG.
Just trying to get your philosophical take on what the role of the Attorney General should be? Under Bush the Attorney General's office seemed to be primarily a branch of govenrment that was subject to the politics of the President. Under Obama it seems that the AG is actually going against the political wishes of the President. Which do you think is better for our country and why? __________________________________________________ for some reason, i can see this as the type of bs question a public high school social studies teacher would ask his class.
Pres Obama is attempting to triangulate on this ala Clinton. Holder is going forth with a wink and a nod. This is all about setting up a new set of headlines for the fall and winter. The is the age old, "we're in trouble so let's change the subject by dredging up evil old Bush" maneuver. Its not new in politics. Others have done it.....doesn't make it right. The OP's original point.....AG should be about the law, not politics....but when has it ever been that?
The POTUS is the executive in charge of the AG. If the AG is going against him he should be fired. The AG never acts on anything without permission or orders directly from the POTUS. IF you think otherwise then that can only mean OBama is an incompetent executive and cannot control his minions.
Wasn't Holder the guy who persuaded Clinton to pardon fugitive tax evader Marc Rich? And did he really engineer sentence reductions for the Boricua Popular Army, a know terrorist group. And did he really represent Chiquita in their fight against the US DOJ about their payments to terrorist groups. So do you really think this is merely a "Wag the Dog" diversion, or is Holder a "true believer" in helping tax evaders and terrorists protect themselves against the big, bad USA. " > ~
I like it as a more independent agency- Do you think Janey Reno was a Clinton Lackey? OWuld clinton have siad go in heavy on the cuban kid Gonzales? I think that under Bush the AG's office and the Justice department was more policitcized than at anytime SINCE the kennedys were in office. I prefer a more independent Justice department. I think that some major errors in judgment were affirmed by the Bush Justice Department. I do not buy that Obama is caving to the left, as he doesn't need to he is President for 3-1/2 more years, but I can see how the conspiracy theorists would think that Obama would make the worst choice possible pollitically, when in a battle over healthcare. Politically this would be unwise. However I the situations holder must be looking at must be fairly horrifica s to outside the "pretty much anything goes" philosphy of the Bush Administration realting to the rule of law. If Obama WANTED this investigation, he would simply delay the puplic release of the info until November. that woudl be politicizing the office, not hurting yourself poltically.
