157
Todd Blanche declines to pledge independence from White House
(www.theguardian.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 17 Aug 2026
157 points (100.0% liked)
politics
30813 readers
2107 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
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.