Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Attorney General question

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 2
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 template Next
    #1

    Attorney General question

    I just read the definition of "Attorney General" in regards to the USA and I'm very confused. It says the Attorney General is "the top cop and lawyer for the United States". Isn't that a conflict of interest? It would be like the County Sheriff also being the County Prosecutor. Aren't these two seperatley parts of law enforcement? Am I understanding this wrongly or can someone explain how this isn't a conflict of interest?

    Thanks
    Tags: None
    #2
    the top cop and lawyer for the "Federal Government"

    Comment

      #3
      Originally posted by JFISHER View Post
      the top cop and lawyer for the "Federal Government"
      How can they be both and remain impartial?

      Comment

        #4
        Originally posted by RODEO View Post
        How can they be both and remain impartial?
        They never are impartial...

        Comment

          #5
          No, not really. Attorney's General is the head of the Justice Department and the FBI falls under the justice department. Think of it in terms of the procescutorial/law enforcement (sp) side and then you have the judicial side of things.

          A cop tickets you/arrests you because he thinks you committed a crime and he is working under the authority (kinda) of the DA/State AG/Fed Prosecutor . A judge/jury decides if you are guilty. The AG can't try you, only oversees the people enforcing the law.

          Comment

            #6
            All I can tell you about them is they send me a letter every three years wanting me to sit down and talk about how much of a raise they want to give my ex wife.

            Comment

              #7
              Originally posted by 175gr7.62 View Post
              No, not really. Attorney's General is the head of the Justice Department and the FBI falls under the justice department. Think of it in terms of the procescutorial/law enforcement (sp) side and then you have the judicial side of things.

              A cop tickets you/arrests you because he thinks you committed a crime and he is working under the authority (kinda) of the DA/State AG/Fed Prosecutor . A judge/jury decides if you are guilty. The AG can't try you, only oversees the people enforcing the law.
              I would say the prosecutorial part would also be on the judicial side.

              Comment

                #8
                This administration's idea of an attorney general is whatever it wants them to be at a given moment, but it usually seems to involve stirring up racial conflict.

                Comment

                  #9
                  Originally posted by Filletem View Post
                  All I can tell you about them is they send me a letter every three years wanting me to sit down and talk about how much of a raise they want to give my ex wife.
                  That would be the Texas office of attorney general, not the federal attorney general. Hard to know which is worse sometimes...

                  Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

                  Comment

                    #10
                    Originally posted by RODEO View Post
                    I would say the prosecutorial part would also be on the judicial side.

                    The judge is the judicial part. The prosecutor is the law enforcement part. The prosecutors job is present evidence to show you are guilty, only reason he is there. The judge's job is to make sure you get a fair shake and then dole out punishment if the prosecutor convinces a jury of your peers (or the judge if you don't want a jury trial) he is right.

                    Comment

                      #11
                      Originally posted by Be10dwn View Post
                      That would be the Texas office of attorney general, not the federal attorney general. Hard to know which is worse sometimes...

                      Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk


                      C'mon man. You can't be serious.


                      "An honest government has no fear of an armed population".

                      Comment

                        #12
                        Originally posted by RODEO View Post
                        How can they be both and remain impartial?
                        who ever said they were impartial?

                        Comment

                          #13
                          Originally posted by RODEO View Post
                          How can they be both and remain impartial?
                          The Atty. Gen. is a lawyer.
                          A lawyer's job is to do whatever is best for their client.
                          The Atty. Gen's client is the United States government, so he (she) does whatever is in the government's best interest, like prosecuting bad guys and defending the country in court when required.

                          Comment

                            #14
                            Legislature branch makes laws defining what is illegal. Executive branch (AG and police) prosecutes people they believe to have broken these laws. Judiciary branch acts to determine if a person has broken these laws. Prosecutors and police are not expected to be impartial. They would not arrest/prosecute a person if they didn't believe they had the guilty person. Judges and jury's are the ones expected to be impartial.

                            Comment

                              #15
                              I would think that any definition of The Attorney General of the United States that includes "top cop" is suspect. Maybe not.

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 template Next
                              Working...
                              X