Should the DOJ be directly under the executive branch?

Just looking for opinions here? With all the concerns of weaponization of the DOJ should there be a buffer between the president and the DOJ? With a president directly calling for investigations and the attorney general the head law enforcement agency for the United states being able to run interference in investigations . I think there should definitely be more independence here no?

Traditionally, the Attorney General is that buffer.

Historically, Presidents have gone out of their way to avoid interfering in criminal investigations, for exactly the reasons you state here.

It’s an interesting question given current circumstances though. Even as it relates to the current fight between Congress and the White House over Congressional subpoenas for Executive Branch employees. Or non-employees as it were. The White House is apparently instructing Lewandowski to assert EP today. Congress can refer his contempt to the DOJ. But what if Barr refuses to do anything about it (likely)? Is the Executive Branch truly above oversight and the law?

This is a different debate, I think - and not a new one. It’s a basic separation of powers issue.

Why do you think Holder was never prosecuted by Obama’s DoJ for contempt of congress?

And how do you propose they be more independent and what branch of government do you thing is should fall under.

You’ve only got three choices:

Legislative - those who make the laws (kind of hard to let them be the investigators as well).
Judicial - those who impose penalties for those who break the laws (kind of hard to let them be the investigators as well)
Executive - the branch that oversee’s how the laws passed by congress are enforced, and then if need be refered to the judicial branch.

So which of the three branches to you propose be over the Justice Department?

Once again I’m going to ask.

Please give me the section of the constitution that gives congress oversight of the executive branch. Please and thank you.

Sure. But I think the debate is moving now. Extending Executive Privilege to non-employees of the Executive Branch is different, isn’t it? Trump is claiming EP over all conversations with all people. Holder was an employee of the Executive Branch. Lewandowski was not.

Here’s a question that I would love to see an answer to:

What if Lewandowski ignores Trump’s claim of EP, and testifies anyway?

1 Like

How about none?

I’d love to see that as well, and an answer. But it is not going to happen in this reality. Maybe in a bizzaro world perhaps.

Lewandowski is using this experience to bolster his resume to run for Senate in NH. He wants to prove to the cult he is the best and biggliest Trump boot-licker of them all.

1 Like

Not a possability.

You HAVE only three branches of government allowed under the constitution.

Department of Justice HAS to be under one.

What one do you think they need to be under? You have three choices.

To fully investigate you need independence. Other than investigating, the DOJ would have no other power. That is workable whether you believe it or not.

Again, there is NO justice department in the constitution.

You have THREE branches and justice department HAS to fall under one of them.

What branch do you want Justice department under? You can’t just have them out on their own . . . Again the constituion outlines three branches of government. What you are proposing a a fourth.

Stop with this. They need to be independent. The way to do it is to have them independent and not be beholden to any other branch.

Look at a special council. They investigate, they turn ot over to the DOJ to do whatever they want with it. What could go wrong?

They certainly were not independent under Obama.

Ok even more reason for it no?

They can’t be independent of any other brandh.

Constitution grants THREE branches of government. There is NOT a fourth independent branch.

It’s really simple. Tell what of the three branches of government the constitution calls for justice department should be a part of.

You don’t want to do that. They HAVE to be a part of one of the three branches of government. Or either that you can show me where in the constitution an independent fourth branch is authorized.

Their is only one solution. A constitutional amendment making a fourth branch of government. Now how do you propose to write up this so that it is co-equal like the current three branches?

1 Like

Being independent doesn’t mean you always get what you wish for. One reason why cons don’t understand that Fox News isn’t journalism.