US attorney general Todd Blanche on Sunday declined to assure that the federal justice department he helms would always act independently of the White House and Donald Trump.
“No, I’m not going to pledge that,” he said when asked about the topic by NBC’s Meet the Press host, Kristen Welker. “And no attorney general should ever pledge that.”
Blanche also claimed Trump would never ask him to do something that crosses an ethical or legal line – after the president dismissed his predecessor, Pam Bondi, having become frustrated over insufficient action from the justice department against Trump’s political foes.
I mean just because Republicans made it into a scandal doesn’t mean there was anything improper about it. I would expect if a President had a legitimate concern that they would voice that concern to the AG to investigate. And that the AG would follow up on it.
“Acting independently” can mean a lot of different things in different contexts and promising not to ever do it would just get them in hot water later down the road.
You’re normalizing this shit. Stop.
I’m sorry if the facts hurt your feelings
Ugh
Right!?
Yes. The branches communicate with each other, but ultimately work independently except for very specific sync points. Or if one branch needs to check and balance another.
That is very different from meeting up with an AG for a private meeting. Let alone the conflict of Interest of being the president’s personal lawyer. This isn’t normal.
Yes, I’m sure it will for Todd. Much later than I wish, but later down the road indeed.
The DOJ is not an independent branch though. It’s part of the executive branch. At this point I think law enforcement probably should be an entirely separate 4th branch, or made part of the judicial branch, but that’s not how the Constitution is written.
To me this is one of the biggest flaws of the constitution. It gives the president too much power. There was never anything but decorum and precedent making the DOJ independent of the president, and even then it was incredibly weak since all the most powerful people in the DOJ are appointed by the president, and can be fired by the president arbitrarily.
Structurally, no. In spirit it is. That’s why 75% of the DOJ left over 2025, because they do not want to deal with the eventual fallout of how Trump is managing this DOJ. It’s not a case they are confident they will get out of cleanly (with their license to practice law).
Yes, the constitution was kept small on purpose and a lot was left to the honor system. Under the logic that a truly tyrannous leadership could tear it down no matter how many loopholes it tries to close. Was that the right call? I can’t really say.
These can be interpreted as contradictory statements. And they’re the same branch. That’s the point.
Yes obviously thus situation is improper in many ways, but I was speaking to the specific statement.
Sure, if you never worked at a large structure. They are professionals who talk. They are not intimate nor buddy-buddy with each other.
The same way Congress has various agencies it delegates powers to, yes. You are very technically correct.
Like those agencies, the DOJ is a non-partisan part of the otherwise partisan executive branch whose job is to represent the US in its court cases. It is not the president’s personal law firm.
I’m speaking generally. Becsuse this specific situation is so sleazy and utterly corrupt that it’s barely even worth analysis. But for those who don’t know: no, this is not normal, business as usual.
The word used was not “intimate” nor “buddy buddy”, it was “independent”.
Thenstop replying to me to argue about things I didn’t say?
you’re not who I originally responded to and you came in later in the chain. I made one reply on a public forum and you’re already all “stop talking to me”?
Come on, man.
Are you trying to gaslight me? I made a parent comment that you replied to. I didn’t “come in later” to anything. You did not make 1 reply, you replied to me 6 times.
Come on, man.