Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (34588)	4/3/2009 4:50:58 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 71588

"A partisan lie is a violation of every oath. Such things are never prosecuted under the current system" Partisan lie? You mean lying for partisan political advantage? I don't see how that can reasonably be prosecuted unless the lie is under oath or is clearly fraud in the legal sense of the term. All such lies are under oath, the oath of office. "Among the most corrupt are the most favored by the partisan electorate. " That's a problem with the electorate more than its a problem with our legal structure. Easily corrected by my proposal and most people would be glad if it were. Currently, the answer to accusations against one politician is 'oh, yaaah well remember what your guy did last time.' That discussion goes in a circle and nothing gets resolved. We would all like to see that discussion disappear, and effective resolute measures implemented, IMO. "As far as congress and the administration, I thought you wanted to remove the Justice department from political influence. If its ok that congress and the administration make the decisions than the current setup should be mostly ok. No. It is partisan bias I want removed from the selection process. This is a proposal for Congress and the Admin to set direction for types of cases but the AT can determine the merit of prosecuting particular cases. I see your point on the Supreme Court. OK "The American people? Having them directly decide is unrealistic, most of them won't even know about the cases or understand the legal ideas. And you just can't schedule that many votes. Maybe you mean they will indirectly decide, but they would do that through elected officials, and that's what happens now." What I suggested was 'by petition'. So if there is enough interest from the American people over some issue that the President and Congress aren't pushing then they can petition the AT... not for specific cases but types of cases. Maybe the people think gangs are getting out of hand or human trafficking, congressional corruption, or interstate water disputes or something. "So who appoints the new Attorney General if the president doesn't? If the voters, or congress, than its still political. I am open to possibilities as long as its free from partisan bias. It could be a general vote, or something unique like an election by members of the US bar, or just prosecuting attorneys.