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: combjelly who wrote (76455)	6/9/2018 4:54:30 PM
From: i-node	Respond to of 359079

Exactly. I don't know what the Framers' rationale was, whether it was an oversight or what, but it is a fact that someone had to be in charge. Someone had to be able to fire the AG. And that power was vested in the president (after all the president appointed him). Perhaps they just said, "Hey, if he fires him for investigating himself, and Congress thinks the firing was wrong, they can impeach, because we don't have a good alternative." I don't know what might have been, but I do think Dersh makes sense with his comments. You can't sensibly say, "Generally, the president can hire the guy, and can fire the guy, but if Congress thinks the firing was wrongful they can just impeach the president." Dersh argues that other constitutions deal with the problem more handily. Personally, I have no idea.