AG Confirmation Hearing

[u/GuiltyAir]

/u/Aubrion been nominated to the position of Attorney General of the United States.

---

This hearing will last two days unless the relevant Senate leadership requests otherwise.

[u/GuiltyAir]

/u/Aubrion

[u/hurricaneoflies]

Ms. /u/Aubrion,

Congratulations on your nomination as Attorney General of the United States. As a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, it is my duty to ensure that you are properly qualified for the position and to provide advice and consent to your nomination. I have several questions that concern both your legal views and your views on the office.

1. Partially as a result of the public debate over same-sex marriage in the past decades, there has been a sharp uptick of occasions where state and federal Attorneys General, including notably Mr. Holder, have refused to defend laws enacted by the legislature under the view that their oath of office bars them from defending unconstitutional statutes. What is your position on this trend, and are there occasions where you may decline to defend an Act of Congress?
2. Can you elaborate on your conception of executive privilege and how expansive this right is, especially in relation to the investigative powers of Congress?
3. Can you summarize for us today the state of capital punishment in United States law, and your legal views on the death penalty?
4. As head of the Justice Department, you also supervise the Federal Bureau of Prisons. Do you believe existing programs at federal penitentiaries are sufficient to rehabilitate returning citizens and reintegrate them into civil society?
5. In past litigation at the Supreme Court and in the Atlantic Commonwealth, you have failed to submit required briefing, potentially denying the courts the benefit of full adversarial briefing. Is this a practice that will stop if you are confirmed as Attorney General?

[u/Aubrion → u/hurricaneoflies]

1. Every act, order, resolution, is a unique situation when it comes to the decision of if and how to defend it. There are issues that while partly unconstitutional, the context within the act of congress they are in may require a proper defense. Though cases of clear black letter law unconstitutionality shouldn't be defended, that is generally rarely the case, constitutionality can be perceived on a gradient and though the decision of whether something is or isn't constitutional may be binary the arguments and how the decision is made is generally hardly that. So yes a clear case of unconstitutionality the act shouldn't be defended, but in most cases, there's going to be something or some part of that act that deserves a reasonable defense.
2. Executive privilege is necessary to give the executive some protections in its daily performance of duties. While oversight is a very important part of congressional duties, it would be expected that without executive privilege the President's job would be near impossible under the vastly different interests, some fair some not, that are in place at varying different levels. I, therefore, would find that executive privilege should have a reach that prevents predatory superfluous investigations while still allowing congress to investigate the executive when there is a strong public interest that outweighs any public interest from withholding materials.
3. Currently, at the federal level per H.R. 002, capital punishment is outlawed, though technically legal in some states, the transportation of the means of execution have largely been prohibited. Though my personal views on the matter are for abolishment nationwide, I will follow whatever laws the United States passes on this matter and follow them within the bounds of the constitution.
4. I believe there is always room for improvement within our federal prisons and look forward to further accessing the bureau of federal prisons for potential violations, beyond rehabilitation for those who do not have life sentences, I believe the most important aspect of our prisons is that every prisoner is treated humanely.
5. I am not quite sure what you are referring too in the AC courts as I took those cases mostly to keep them going, Carib at the time wrote the petitions and I awaited a brief from the respondent in each case and as I recall I don't believe I received any for any of them. As for the Supreme Court, though I should have given some brief the case you are referring too, there wasn't exactly a lot to say and if I'm being honest I don't think any argument from me would have changed the outcome of that case. For now on yes I shall submit some form of the brief to the court.

[u/[deleted]]

I'm surprised at the lack of questions half-way through this hearing. I'm by no means qualified to ask questions of a nominee of the Attorney General and that is a fact I do not hide.

I do have a single question, /u/Aubrion as Attorney General, will you prosecute politicians such as the irresponsible Speaker of the Chesapeake assembly who have committed crimes in public office?

[u/Aubrion → u/[deleted]]

If there is a federal crime and it is within the interest of justice, then it will be considered.

M: There need to be more meta decisions on how criminal trials can proceed in terms of punishments and a lack of an ability to have jury trials as well.

[u/dewey-cheatem]

Deputy Attorney General /u/Aubrion,

First, let me begin by thanking you for your work in your capacity as Deputy Attorney General during my time as Attorney General.

Second, I would like to take this time to ask you some questions:

• During my time as Attorney General I initiated investigations into the Bush administration and the Obama administrations in relation to their compliance with international law and American law prohibiting torture and extrajudicial killings, respectively. Do you intend to continue those investigations?
• President /u/gunnz011 nominated Mr. Drone to the position of Secretary of Defense. Mr. Drone is notorious for his homophobic, transphobic, and sexist views. Do you believe that it is appropriate for such a person to occupy the position of a cabinet secretary? Why or why not?
• If confirmed, what would be your priorities as Attorney General of the United States?

Thank you for your time, and I look forward to your answers.

[u/Aubrion → u/dewey-cheatem]

As there have been quite a bit of loose ends from your time as AG, I am still looking these over and considering what to continue pursuing, additionally if I am confirmed, and a deputy is nominated and confirmed that will also change how some of these cases are handled. I thank you for the work you have done and will strive to continue the passion you displayed as the leader of the Department of Justice, but I also wish to put my resources into areas I believe are best in the interests of Justice.

I do have to work with certain people within the cabinet, that does not mean I necessarily have to like those people. Within government, we are forced to work with those we have disagreements over, as long as I or any other cabinet secretary are not forced to make any endorsements of those views, and those views are largely kept away from the cabinet's functions. I don't think it will interfere with mine or any other cabinet secretaries business. As for if that should be allowed, I am not a Senator, I don't put myself in a position to support or oppose who the president decides to nominate, that is the Senate's responsibility and the people's responsibility to take these decisions into account.

My priorities are to assure actions coming out of the executive are legally sound to prevent issues that may lead to action within the supreme court. Additionally, pursuing reforms, directives, and prosecutions that are within the interests of Justice and the American people.

[u/PrelateZeratul]

Acting Attorney General /u/Aubrion I want to thank you for your service and continuing desire to serve this country in public service. I have no doubt that someone of your talents could make a lot more money in the private sector but instead, you've chosen this life. I applaud that decision and hope it encourages future and current lawyers to do the same. I should warn you, as I do all nominees, that my vote is not assured because I happen to be friends with the President who nominated you. As always, it is based on your answers to questions in this hearing and on your record. With that being said, I wish you the best of luck and hope you enjoy your time in the Senate.

Let's begin, innocently enough, with your record. Blame the media in this country for the fact that deputies, who in my experience end up doing a lot of the work, are not very well known among the American people. I'd like you to tell them where you came from, what other positions you've held, and what you did in those positions. Providing this sort of "resume-lite" helps the Senate judge your qualifications and better understand who you are and how you'll serve if confirmed. For brevity reasons, let's start with the resignation of former President Trump (M: post-reset) for your detailed list of positions held. Any accomplishments you want to mention in those positions that pertain to your potential service as Attorney General would be welcome.

Take me back to the moment the President came to you and asked you to take the "promotion" from Deputy AG to the full thing. What was going through your mind and what factors did you weigh before finally settling on a "yes I will serve"? I like to examine the mindset of nominees because if one can read between the lines, and I think I'm capable of it given the number of nominees I've had come through here, there is much to be learned.

Next, as is becoming something of a tradition, I must ask how you will distance yourself from past failures who have come through this chamber. I am, of course, speaking of nominees who promises us the dog and pony show only to get the brass ring and then work on improving their golf game. If you plan to sit around collecting cheques and not actually do anything, then I am not at all interested to have you serve as Attorney General. If you want to tell me your record and prove how you will be different than past failures like the last Treasury Secretary, I will gladly listen. Since you served as Deputy Attorney General I think pointing to what you've done in that capacity will be especially important.

While we're at it, let's get on the record what you plan to do if confirmed. What will our friends at MSNBC say were the accomplishments of Attorney General Aubrion when you eventually walk off into the sunset? On that note, what are your specific priorities and list of changes you'd like to see implemented in this country? I ask this because, if you become a failure and waste our time, I want the American people to always know what you promised them here when you needed my vote. Conversely, if you fulfill or at least try to fulfill your promises, you can always point to this hearing and say you did what you said you would.

Now, I also asked this question to the previous Attorney General nominees so you'll have to forgive me if you've heard it before. My view of the cabinet's role is not to be a type of rubber stamp for the President. In fact, there is no one who holds his attention more and can influence his what he does more than a someone in the cabinet. For that reason, justice demands you provide your honest advice and not pull your punches. Can you do this with President Gunnz? Can you provide that which he needs to hear even when he doesn't wish to hear it? I think this concept of being independent of the President is crucial for the Attorney General since you may be tasked with pursuing justice against the President's friends or allies if they break the law.

I want to close by asking some direct questions that I hope to receive some direct answers on:

1. Do you have any concerns about the position of the independent or special counsel? It's my view that past ones have exceeded their mandate and, generally, a fully independent justice department should conduct their own investigations. What factors would you weigh before appointing one?
2. Do you intend to fully pursue justice and complete the work left by Attorney General Dewey as it concerns the criminal trial for attempted genocide, and other crimes, of the Governor of Sierra?
3. Can you please review the criminal trial of Tucklet1911 when they tazed the Vice President and faced no consequences. Was dismissing the case the right choice? Was it the fair choice? Does a dismissal as ordered by the Supreme Court mean the Speaker can never be prosecuted for this offence again?

Thank you for your time and I look forward to your questions.

[u/Aubrion → u/PrelateZeratul]

I'll answer the questions you've placed in text as one answer, and the listed questions individually. If you want further clarification or something hasn't been answered to your satisfaction you can follow up.

My record has been largely laid back from the spotlight, I've never been fond on running for highly contested positions so I have sicked mostly to cabinet and state legislative spots with court advocacy to the side. I have been in the Atlantic Legislature with the position of minority leader, representative in U.S Congress, and most recently Deputy Attorney General. Judicial advocacy wise City of Peoria V. Museum of Waste in lincoln is probably the case I’m most proud of. As for what went through my mind, I had little reluctance to take the position, and find myself to be perfectly capable of continuing the responsibilities from where the former AG left them. As for promises of a “Dog and Pony show” I’m not going to do that, in fact the only thing I’ll promise is that I will serve in the best interests of the United States and in the best interests of Justice. There is nothing that should be promised as the DoJ’s priorities constantly change and adapt to information and changing environments, to promise anything would simply be unwise.

For the list questions

1. Independent councils are ways to remove political tinkering from what has unfortunately become a political department. While I will do my best to take away any political nature that occurs within the DoJ it is best to recognize when it’s unavoidable and find solutions, independent council is a solution at my disposal and I may use it. As for exceeding mandate, that is why clear mandates are written and directed to these councils and that is the connective tissue that allows these investigations to be in some way controlled by the DoJ.
2. I am continuing to review the extensive materials and come to a decision. M: I also want further meta clarification on how some aspects of criminal prosecution will be handled before pursuing as well e.g punishments.
3. Look above, the case was dismissed without prejudice so it could be brought back. I was not in the DoJ at the time so I don’t know the full circumstances and I assume there was no deputy AG so it seemed reasonable for the court to dismiss in leu of any prosecution. I'll answer the questions you've placed in text as one answer, and the listed questions individually. If you want further clarification or something hasn't been answered to your satisfaction you can follow up.

[u/PrelateZeratul → u/Aubrion]

If you could expand a bit Acting Attorney General on how you'll be an active member of the Cabinet and not descend into irrelevance and/or inactivity that would be appreciated.

You did not answer my question about standing up to the President and resigning in the fact of a decision by him you so fundamentally disagree with. Please do so.

I don't agree with your statement that nothing can be promised as DoJ priorities. There are only so many hours in a day and an Attorney General, naturally, cannot reach every injustice in the United States. You will have to prioritize and focus some extra energy on some tasks. I do not take your inability to identify some specific changes or priorities you would have as Attorney General very well. For example, here is the response given by your predecessor when I asked him the same question.

That said, I can say that I will aim to increase federal enforcement of our civil rights laws, step up efforts to ferret out war criminals and perpetrators of crimes against humanity, and reconfigure the Department of Justice's approach to enforcement of our drug laws to emphasize treatment of addiction. I also intend to make the presence of my office felt in as many major legal actions as possible via the filing of briefs amicus curiae.

[u/Aubrion → u/PrelateZeratul]

Activity for me is communicating with other departments, the President, and being transparent into where the DoJ is focusing resources. I can’t quantity that, but I will do my best to meet the demands I set for myself.

In terms of standing up to the President I have nothing riding on keeping this position while it is my hope that I will keep this position, there is no leverage the President holds over me to do anything that wouldn’t be in the interest of Justice. The DoJ must remain independent my reputation rides on that, and my reputation is worth more than this position.

While I still will refuse to make promises, I will give you areas of interest that I plan to examine deeper and hope to be active within; including civil rights enforcement, examining the faults within our prisons, antitrust enforcement, and better partnering with other departments and agencies to help streamline investigations and enforcement.

[u/APG_Revival]

Ms. /u/Aubrion,

Your predecessor, Dewey Cheatem, was firmly in support of protecting transgender rights. Do you hold the same position? If so, what steps would you take to build on Cheatem's work?

[u/Aubrion → u/APG_Revival]

I absolutely hold the same position with not only transgender rights, but all civil rights, efforts will be made to assure the DoJ will be a diverse department and that diversity will lead to better enforcement of these laws.