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 : The Trump Presidency -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dracin72 who wrote (76395)	6/9/2018 10:28:57 AM
From: combjelly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 358894

So if Dersh was alluding that the US Constitution got it wrong by placing the AG under the executive then maybe. If that is what he had said, that would have been ok. As we are seeing, depending on our elected officials to do what is right for the country is a poor bet. But that isn't what he said. Now I suppose it is possible that he meant something along the lines of "the way the Constitution is written, Trump has every right to expect loyalty from the DOJ and the Constitution got the wording wrong". Apparently his argument is that the AG has essentially two jobs. One is to advise the president and that role should be loyal, and another is to supervise law enforcement and that should be independent. In that he has a point. But the way he said it allows the Trump supporters to claim that Trump has a right to expect the AG to protect him. And he doesn't.