It turns out, contrary to what Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and other Justice Department officials told Congress, that the White House was involved in the firing of eight U.S. attorneys. Big surprise.
Presidential adviser Karl Rove fielded a politically motivated complaint about one of the fired attorneys and participated in some discussions about firing attorneys. President Bush passed on complaints about some attorneys to Gonzales last October, shortly before seven of the attorneys were asked to resign. And former White House counsel Harriet Miers (in photo) recommended in February 2005 that all 93 U.S. attorneys be dismissed and replaced, the Washington Post reported.
Gonzales rejected Miers’ idea as impractical and too disruptive. But his chief of staff, D. Kyle Sampson, who resigned Monday, wrote to Miers in January 2006 that a "limited number of U.S. attorneys could be targeted for removal and replacement, mitigating the shock to the system that would result from an across the board firing."
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- okobserver on Open thread 11/23
- Chas on Open thread 11/23
- CapnAmerica on Too many exemptions
- CapnAmerica on Open thread 11/23
- CapnAmerica on Open thread 11/23
- Regular on Open thread 11/23
- okobserver on Open thread 11/23
- okobserver on Open thread 11/23
- Chas on Open thread 11/23
- Chas on Open thread 11/23
107 Comments
So, if U.S. Attorneys serve at the pleasure of the sitting President and they displeasure him, where’s the beef?
If U.S. Attorneys did not prosecute Voter Fraud cases, who will?
Yeah, that’s why they were fired, ye of the many nics.
Because they weren’t doing their jobs (heavy sarcasm).
People who don’t do their jobs like George Tenet and “HeckofaJob” Brownie and Donald Rumsfailed don’t get fired. They get a medal pinned on their chests.
Incomptence is the only thing that GW respects, except for venality, of course.
Of course, the White House was involved, and of course the attorneys looking at RePuke crimes were pulled.
After the Valerie Plame outing and the Swiftboating and the WMD’s that Saddam could launch in 45 minutes, how could the White House not be responsible for more of the same?
RepubiKKKahn,
The beef is the politicization of prosecutions under the direction of the Attorney General and the Department of Justice. If you don’t think this is a problem, well, I guess that makes you a good Repubican–and a lousy American.
Most of those ‘voter fraud’ cases came to nothing, whereas the prosecution of prominent Repubican office-holders came to something–at least until these prosecutors were fired for fictitious ‘performance issues.’
RepubiKKKhan models the GOP blind obedience to protecting their own. The impartiality of justice and the answerability of the law to a nonpartisan standard, not so much.
Alberto Gonzalez needs to resign or be impeached. It’s also looking like Sen. Pete Domenici is implicated in leaning on David Ignatius, the former US Attorney from New Mexico, to prosecute these phony voter fraud cases that Karl Rove has been propagandizing for a couple of years now.
The real question here, RepubiKKKahn, is prosecutorial perogative: career prosecutors should be the ones to decide what cases rise to the standard of meriting prosecution. And when political pressure is brought to bear on them by the White House and its allies, the fact that YOU don’t see a problem is really the problem.
Is there any part of the Constitution this White House won’t try to game for its own political advantage? It’s time for the showdown with this renegade “Administration.”
CF–
Have you checked your “in” box lately?
So CF, you are saying give US Attorneys a blank check and no supervision to do their job?
As far as the Voter Fraud cases, I’ll be looking for the real facts, so be prepared. :)
Ya, these whack jobs in the Bush administration are just trying to stack the system with people who will be friendly towards their own political interests.
I’m conservative as far as the economy (business/taxes etc) and having a small government with very limited power, HOWEVER, our legal system is one area where extreme liberalism is called for, otherwide the intentions of our founding fathers cannot be preserved.
RepubiKKKahn,
‘Supervision’ for the U.S. Attorneys comes from the Department of Justice–not the White House.
What is it about independence and non-politicization of branches of government that Repubicans find so objecionable?
The party that fired the non-partisan lawyers is the same party that whines about activist judges. Wake me up when Rethuglicans do something that isn’t corrupt or hypocritical.
CapnAmarika CF
Don’t bother reading the following link.
For anyone wanting a reasoned and logical explanation of what’s going on here try this.
http://powerlineblog.com/archives/017018.php
Well, we have definitely heard from the far-right BushBots! This latest scandal; coming on the heels of Walter Reed, more war escalation, contacting scandals in Iraq, etc, will finally drive a wedge between the evil cabal in the White House and the remnant of somewhat honest people in the Republican Party.
“You’re doing a heckuva job Al”
“Gonzales: Attorney firings mishandledAssociated PressWASHINGTON – Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said mistakes were made and he accepts responsibility for mishandling the way eight federal prosecutors were dismissed.”
http://www.kansas.com/mld/kansas/news/breaking_news/16889938.htm
Quick extract from the DOJ news conference by the Attorney General:
- Request from White House Two Years Ago Process of evaluating strong and weak performers
- Chief of Staff DOJ evaluating performers where we could better for people in that parts of thatcountry.
-Chief of Staff Sampson resigned as Chief of Staff
- Information that Sampson was not sharing to the Department of Justice or Congress
- Attorney General _ All Political Appointees can be removed withoutreason and that’s all I have to say about that. End of News Conference.and stand by that decision
The President did not make any specific
recommendations on who should be fired.
Of course he didn’t. Rove did.
Does Republikhan actually think the inept frat boy is in charge? This is the same guy who continually ran businesses into the ground and had his daddy and his daddy’s friends bail him out.
If Bush became responsible and a leader he wouldn’t have to surround himself with criminal fascists. But he isn’t, so he’ll hold onto Rove, Rumsfeld, Cheney and anyone else who is deserving of prison stripes.
I don’t know Doug. It’s your conspiracy theory, which I might add is just a speck in the long list of conspiracy theories that Liberal Democrats love hog-rolling in.
Sure Khan, that’s why Bush couldn’t talk to the 911 Commission alone, he had to have Cheney to babysit him.
RepubiKKKhan,
As opposed to those zany ‘coincidences’ that Repukes insist on as the fig-leaf to cover up what everybody knows to be true.
Seriously. You’re asking us to believe that everything the Administration has pulled, is pulling, or is going to pull is just a ‘coincidence.’ And that’s more plausible than a ‘conspiracy’…how, precisely?
This has been another edition of “Who are you gonna believe–me or your lyin’ eyes?”
Brought to you by the RepubiKKKan party.
I hope they do investigate this,
It keeps their mind off other things..
Like that minimum wage increase..
and the new marxist tax code they want..
I love the smell of singed Liberals in the morning. :)
Yeah, gloat away, KKKhan SPAWN.
More victories like November, and the Republicans will be changing their name back to Whig . . .
This is beginning to be fun – another resignation coming? To join all those falling on their swords over Walter Reed?
Too bad the evil laftie press cares more about our wounded soldiers than the rightie press and the BushBots. This should have been covered up better!
No argument from me on the Walter Reed case HardTruth. The people in the Department of the Army were responsible and now being held to account.
Welcome to Goverment Health Care.
“Attorney General Janet Reno today demanded the prompt resignation of all United States Attorneys, leading the Federal prosecutor in the District of Columbia to suggest that the order could be tied to his long-running investigation of Representative Dan Rostenkowski, a crucial ally of President Clinton. Jay B. Stephens, the …”
Just a little historical note to bring perspective to this discussion. It is a political move, pure and simple. I am one conservative who will admit this. I will also say as the above paragraph says ‘they serve at the pleasure of the President.’
So before we all get hysterical lets wait until the real story comes out. I’ll just bet there is more to this that the mainstream media is presenting.
“The people in the Department of the Army were responsible and now being held to account.”
And who is their Commander-in-Chief? Is HE being held to account?
HardTruth,
People in Departments such as the Department of the Army go beyond the span of Presidential Terms. The Generals in Charge of Walter Reed and the Army Surgeon General were in the Army long before even the first Bush entered office.
Your argument is weak and has no measure.
Grannie ignores facts if they don’t agree with her position.
“long-running investigation of Representative Dan Rostenkowski”
So, as a result, Rostenkowski got off scot-free and went on to be a wealthy land-owner in Northern Virginia.
Oh, wait!!! That is wrong. Rostenkowski was convicted, humiliated and went to prison where he went on to a totally new career. His fellow inmates call him Monica.
Posted by: WSClark | March 13, 2007 at 01:49 PM
“Is HE being held to account?”
If the Dems had one ounce of courage he would be. Why won’t they listen to you? You should write them.
More Mea Culpas from Gonzales:
http://www.kansas.com/mld/kansas/news/breaking_news/16889938.htm
Justice Department officials, led by Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty, told lawmakers under oath that the decision to fire eight U.S. attorneys in December was made solely by the Justice Department and said the decision was based on performance, not politics.
E-mails released Tuesday, however, revealed that the firings were considered and discussed for two years by Justice Department and White House officials.
“Obviously I am concerned about the fact that information – incomplete information was communicated or may have been communicated to the Congress,” Gonzales said. “I believe very strongly in our obligation to ensure that when we provide information to the Congress, it is accurate and it is complete. And I very dismayed that that may not have occurred here.”
Lets see … they swore under oath and now they say “OOPS!”
Typical fleet – PASS THE BUCK! Just like BushCo!
And then when they do you whine that they are picking on poor Bush.
hardly truth-I have been voting that it’s you people who should stop the whining and do something about it.Since you can’t seem to get that minimum wage deal passed, maybe you could start the impeachment or get us out of the war.
“you could start the impeachment”
Sixty-seven votes, moron.
Be a doer, not a vote counter.Have the courage of a conviction, for once.
Fleet, you are just willfully ignorant. What would be the point of impeaching a president KNOWING that you don’t have the votes to convict?
Wait, that’s right, you are a Republican kool-aide drinker.
YOU PEOPLE did that. You KNEW that there was no way in Hell that Clinton could have been convicted, but you did it anyway to embarass him.
As I said, Fleet, you are willfully ignorant.
BTW – Did you know that a DA cannot bring charges if they KNOW that they cannot get a conviction.
Everyday, Fleet, everyday.
You live up to your nickname everyday.
BDP Fleetwood.
BDP fleet?
You mean spin wheels for no good reason other than meaningless attack.
That’s YOUR party. Their use of same just MAY have distracted the President from doing his job and allowed 911 to happen.
Oh hey but you got to prove Clinton got a blow job!
Good for you!
WSClark..sounds allot like the war resolutions that don’t do a damn thing but embarrass the president…
So, Bush didn’t lie, Cheney didn’t illegally get business for Haliburton, they didn’t do all those things you people say he did? Either they did or they didn’t. The way you people talk, what Bush has done is much worse than lieing to a grand jury.I can only conclude you people just make unfounded attacks. If there is foundation,do something.It makes you look impotent.
I would have to say that impeaching a twice elected president with a 67% approval rating just to embarass him is a WEE bit more serious than a non=binding resolution to express the will of the American people.
All the polls I seen said it was a stupid resolution and a total waste of time..
Fleet, I was going to suggest that you are an asshole, but then I remembered that everyone NEEDS an asshole and no one needs you.
So that would not be fair to assholes.
Speaking of impotent. “We’re in charge now. You lost, so STFU”How’s that working out for you? If only you people had a backbone.
“Leaders also omitted language wanted by several liberal members that would have specifically prohibited funding of military operations after fall 2008…”
“All the polls I seen said it was a stupid resolution and a total waste of time..”
What is the total most recently? Seventy percent of the American people want the War on Iraq ended?
Fifty-eight percent think that the war was started under false pretenses?
The polls show OVERWHELMINGLY that the American people want us out of Iraq. It was just the spineless REPUBLICAN Senators that refused to stand up to their party.
Bush has an approval rating of LESS THAN thirty percent.
A large rock with a smiley face painted on it would do better than that.
“I remembered that everyone NEEDS an asshole and no one needs you.”
That is not the whiff of intelligence.
“What is the total most recently? Seventy percent of the American people want the War on Iraq ended?”
So, what’s stopping you?hmmmmmm?
“The polls show OVERWHELMINGLY that the American people want us out of Iraq. It was just the spineless REPUBLICAN Senators that refused to stand up to their party.”
That reading comprehension class really didn’t work out for you did it, Fleet?
Or are you just willfully ignorant?
“That is not the whiff of intelligence.”
Yes, but it is absolutely true, Fleet. Your best career move right now would be to apply for a job as fertilizer.
Yes, they want us out.. but they also want us to go out winners..
“It was just the spineless REPUBLICAN Senators that refused to stand up to their party.”"
Now, I’m confused. Just who is in charge? If things are as you say, why don’t your leaders be the heroes and do something. Could it be that things are not as you say? Or are your leaders gutless?
“Yes, they want us out.. but they also want us to go out winners..”
And how do you define winning? How long will that take? How many more lives? How much more money? How many more terrorists created?
Who is going to surrender when we win?
All I really know is since thiswar began we haven’t had a terrorist attack on us any where in the world!!! and I believe this will be the longest streak we have had in the last 20 years??
“Now, I’m confused. Just who is in charge?”
I would expect you to be confused, Fleet Idiot. They don’t call you the Blog’s Dumbest Poster for nothing.
But let me explain. I’ll type real slow for you.
We live in a Republic, Fleet. We have representative and senators in Congress.
The Democrats hold a majority in both Houses of Congress, but we DO NOT hold absolute power, as intended by our Founding Fathers.
So the Democrats cannot do just anything they want.
It is a little like the last twelve years, when the Republicans held both Houses of Congress.
The difference is, YOU PEOPLE have also held the Presidency for the last SIX years.
So, how did it go for those last six years…….
Stop abortion?
Put prayer back in schools?
Fix Social Security?
Balance the budget?
Eliminate welfare?
Handle illegal immigration?
Hmmmmmmmm…….
Undoubtedly, you are not only willfully ignorant, but you have easily earned your nickname today.
“All I really know is since thiswar began we haven’t had a terrorist attack on us any where in the world!!!”
So those 3,200 members of our Armed Forces died of natural causes? There were no terrorist attacks on England or Spain?
Hmmmmmmm……..
“Seventy percent of the American people want the War on Iraq ended?”
I wish we had an issue where 70% were behind us, like you say you do. Keep up the strident language. You make me look good.
“Keep up the strident language. You make me look good.”
Fleet, an army of Hollywood make-up artists couldn’t make you look good. You can only put so much lipstick on a pig.
So, when Clinton had Reno fire ALL 93 of the same lawyers, that is OK. Reno fired all 93 on March 24, 1993.
And it now seems Bush was going to fire them all to…but Rove said not to cause it looks bad…heh.
Bill Clinton’s brand new Attorney General Janet Reno demand resignations from all 93 U.S. attorneys on March 24, 1993.
The Washington Post has filed six heavy-breathing front-page stories on their newest Bush scandal, back in 1993, the story was over within a day or two. They reported Janet Reno’s purge on the front page, utterly without suspicion: “The Clinton administration yesterday requested that the nation’s 93 U.S. attorneys submit their resignations, a move that likely will mean the quick departure of two figures who have played prominent roles in the politics of the District and Virginia.”
The headline was simply “Washington Area to Lose 2 High-Profile Prosecutors; All U.S. Attorneys Told to Tender Resignations.” They then added helpfully that Reno said it was routine.
The Post noted mildly that the canned D.C. prosecutor was Jay Stephens, who was right in the middle of investigating corrupt Rep. Dan Rostenkowski, the man who was sure to play a major role in passing Hillary’s socialist health-care plan. Was the mass firing a way to get rid of him? Stephens protested. The Washington Post editorialized and answered: Get lost. “Jay Stephens Strikes Out” was their headline.
The suggestion that the White House had a political agenda was a contemptible reach, editorialized the Post: “The innuendo in which U.S. Attorney Jay Stephens has indulged in the past few days can only be calculated to undermine the integrity and reputation of the prosecutorial process he claims it is his goal to protect. Attorney General Janet Reno announced at a news conference Tuesday that all U.S. attorneys across the country were being asked for their resignations. No surprise there. These are political appointees who owed their jobs to the last administration and have expected to be replaced ever since last November’s election.”
So in 2007, the firing of a U.S. Attorney is an egregious ethical offense, but in 1993, it was merely a customary transition of administrations.
In other words…we call Bull Shit.
Sorry Bill, it’s routine for a new administration to clear out all the Presidential appointments of a different party from a prior administration. So that isn’t news. What is news is that Bush had lawyers fired because they refused to violate the law and use their position to further political agendas. Clinton didn’t break the law but it’s no matter, he hasn’t been President for over 7 years.
It’s absolutely pathetic that neo-cons have to go waaaaay back and say that some Democrat did something wrong therefore the entire list of Republican crimes is justified. What about being the party of responsibility? That’s what we call bull shit.
So, doug, are we back to defending that which cannot be defended or the hypocracy of the phony outrage.
Don’t let me intrude but,
WS do you notice something?
NO ONE else is trading posts with BDP fleet.
There’s a reason for that.
Fleetie is a rare and dumb animal. The working class musician conservative.
How many of them do you know?
He has to be a world class idiot. And his posts show it. The guy is somewhere above Beavis and a little behind Butthead.
Hell you ignore him long enough and he’d probably go out and bang his head on the driveway for entertainment.
“And it now seems Bush was going to fire them all to…but Rove said not to cause it looks bad…heh.”
Nice try, Mr. Bill. Bush let damned near all of them go. That is a fact, and I posted Rove’s comments about it yesterday. If you have proof otherwise, show us a link to backit up.
As for Rostenkowski – if Reno fired all of the prosecutors to protect him, why was he run out and Congress and imprisoned?
Or are you just making up shit?
What hypocrisy? Clinton isn’t in office but if it makes you feel better I won’t endorse him for President in 2008. As you and your dimwitted neo-cons fail to realize is that Bush is President and Clinton isn’t responsible for his actions.
Right before the election when the Bush appointed hitmen created their charges against Democratic political opponents why did we hear nothing about these cases after the elections? If Republicans could actually pin a crime on them they’d be sitting in prison now.
No, the Republicans just love to spend more taxpayer money for their ever increasing Big Brother government. Bush is happy with his little gestapo. So everytime we hear of a scandal involving a Democrat rest assured it’s probably just another phony scandal dreamed up by the conservatives who lie so often anyone who calls himself a conservative should be laughed at (but be sure to hold onto your wallet because he may steal it when you are distracted).
“NO ONE else is trading posts with BDP fleet.”
Well, J R, I have tried to be nice to Fleet and several others, but they just don’t seem to get it.
I will agree with you, Fleet IS uncommonly stupid and it is a bit like kicking a kitten, but he just so DESERVES to have his ass kicked for his repeately insulting comments.
And he obviously needs help with remedial reading and mathematics.
“So in 2007, the firing of a U.S. Attorney is an egregious ethical offense, but in 1993, it was merely a customary transition of administrations.
In other words…we call Bull Shit.”
Maybe you missed this.
When Bush “cleaned house” in 2001 it was normal and acceptable. Nothing was said about it. What we are seeing now is different. Professional prosecuters, trying to do their jobs, being pressured by Rove of BushCo to carry out political vendettas. then when they don’t the White House fires them – and lies – under oath – about it.
“Justice Department officials, led by Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty, told lawmakers under oath that the decision to fire eight U.S. attorneys in December was made solely by the Justice Department and said the decision was based on performance, not politics.
E-mails released Tuesday, however, revealed that the firings were considered and discussed for two years by Justice Department and White House officials.”
http://www.kansas.com/mld/kansas/news/breaking_news/16889938.htm
It’s a problem when the attorney is fired to cover up crimes that the administration knows about. Or perhaps you forgot about Jack Abramoff? Oh wait, you’re a moron fleet so you probably did or else just blamed it on Clinton.
Seems like all the stink in Washington has it’s source in the WH.
Again, Fleet Idiot, you are willfully ignorant.
Let’s try again.
When a new president takes office, it is customary for him to replace all 93 USA’s. Bush did it. Clinton did it.
What is unusual is that there have only been FIVE USA’s replaced in the last 25 years due to cause until last week, when Bush fired EIGHT.
Now either Bush did a damned poor job of appointing the 128 USA’s that he has nominated, or he fired EIGHT USA’s for other reasons.
Now, Fleet, have someone read this for you and make sure you understand before you post again.
BILL CLINTON!
MONICA!
9/11!
MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!
The Bush regime even had to lie saying the fired prosecutors due to poor job performance. In reality they had positive job reviews. The Bush regime can’t do anything without lying about it. Conservatives are only upset about lies when it involves a Democrat having sex.
they have been so accustomed with a compliant Congress they just don’t know how to react when somebody questions their actions. This is getting to be fun!
Even Republicans calling the firings bad:
” And Republicans also said they were outraged at being misled over the circumstances of the firings. GOP Rep. James Sensenbrenner, who sits on the House Judiciary Committee, said the situation could cause Gonzales to “die by a thousand cuts.”
Sen. John Ensign (news, bio, voting record), R-Nev., said the dismissal of the U.S. attorney in Las Vegas was “completely mishandled by the United States attorney general.” And Sensenbrenner warned that the Justice Department was “going to have to come up with some answers” in explaining the firings.
“If they don’t, they’re going to lose everyone’s confidence,” Sensenbrenner said. “What I’d like to hear is the truth.” ”
http://www.netscape.com/viewstory/2007/03/13/gonzales-to-take-questions-about-firings/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.yahoo.com%2Fs%2Fap%2Fcongress_prosecutors%3B_ylt%3DAqWFmvIY0pjbaT5UTFBmbc.s0NUE
HardTruth,
Part of the acting by Politicians ‘being outraged’ is standard. Perhaps they are really outraged and perhaps they aren’t.
More than likely, they are putting on their “I’m am outraged face” when meeting the Public or talking to reporters.
MSNBC: WASHINGTON – Attorney General Alberto Gonzales acknowledged that mistakes were made and accepted responsibility Tuesday for the way eight federal prosecutors were fired.”
So, everything was above board, right?
If that is the case, why did Gonzo apologize? What mistakes?
Good point Khan – I am probably giving the Republicans too much credit!
“So, everything was above board, right? If that is the case, why did Gonzo apologize? What mistakes?”Posted by: WSClark | March 13, 2007 at 06:03 PM
Political appointees such as Gonzales fall under the perception of wrong doing, even if no wrong doing was done.
If the perception is there, people screaming loud and long enough may get their wish for him to be fired even if he didn’t do anything wrong.
Which is wrong within itself.
That’s life though.
So, the AG’s Chief of Staff resigned because he was bored with the job?
now we know why dimson tried to run Miers through to the supreme court…
protection for all of his corruption
Rebub you are dealing with the deranged on this blog. No matter what happens in this world, good or bad, they will bitch and complain. Blame it on Bush they say, without any logic whatsoever. You know its a big conspiracy by us, to spend our tax cuts as we see fit instead of their pea brained minds deciding it for us. Time to round up the real people in this country instead of the few gay loving shallow minds.
May peace and God be with you all.
Welcome back deranged BushBot Slob. You are aptly named!
Oh . . . my . . . gosh . . . Slob! you’re . . . you’re . . . RIGHT!
I shouldn’t blame BUSH on getting us in the quagmire in Iraq. Satan had taken over his body. It only sounded like Bush.
And doing nothing to save people trapped for weeks in flooded New Orleans?
Satan, again!
Or 9-11 where Bush did nothing about the Al Qaeda bombing of the USS Cole and the terror warnings coming across his desk daily?
Yup . . . Satan.
Thanks for taking the scales from my eyes with all your convincing evidence, Slob.
I once was blind, but now, I see.
I am kind of in the middle here. Of course they were fired for political reasons and the people that fired them are probably all criminals themselves but on the other hand they serve at the behest of the President and are not covered by Civil Service or union contracts and as such the President has the right to hire and fire as he pleases. And we certainly don’t want our next President to be stuck with Bush’s political hacks do we??
Clinton fired them all and these media pigs said nothing. Bush fires 8 and these hypocrites go bonkers.
The biggest problem with America isn’t the Democrat or Republican Parties, it’s the lying bigots in the media who gin up one hate campaign after another. The average American journalist would have been quite at home writing for Der Sturmer.
Clinton fires 93, no problem – Bush fires 8 it’s a big deal. Brownlee you hypocritical bigot.
One more reason to hate American politics.
Hillary is going to get eaten alive on this issue:http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110009784
Hey Ben, when Bush fired all the Clinton appointees nobody made an issue of it because it was expected. Too bad you’re too stupid to realize there isn’t any hypocrisy to whine about. Perhaps if you didn’t get your talking points from Hannity and Rush you’d sound a bit more intelligent.
We get a Lib who didn’t join the Cut and Run alliance and look what we get. More,… what was it…, oh, edification. Join them doug.
“Too bad you’re too stupid to realize there isn’t any hypocrisy to whine about. Perhaps if you didn’t get your talking points from Hannity and Rush you’d sound a bit more intelligent.
Posted by: Doug | March 14, 2007 at 11:15 AM”
Tsk, tsk, tsk, Doug.This is a new day dawning in Blog World, where we can actually have meaningful discourse without spewing venom.
Yeah Sanford, I’m the first one who ever insulted anyone here. Gee, you’re frickin’ brilliant. Pin the Nobel Prize on this genius. Get a brain moron.
Potential leakers.
Hey Ben, when Bush fired all the Clinton appointees nobody made an issue of it because it was expected. Too bad you’re too stupid to realize there isn’t any hypocrisy to whine about. Perhaps if you didn’t get your talking points from Hannity and Rush you’d sound a bit more intelligent.
Posted by: Doug | March 14, 2007 at 11:15 AM
——————————–
Doug, When did Bush fire all the Clinton AG? Sorry, I was not aware he had.
“Yeah Sanford, I’m the first one who ever insulted anyone here. Gee, you’re frickin’ brilliant. Pin the Nobel Prize on this genius. Get a brain moron.
Posted by: Doug | March 14, 2007 at 11:32 AM”
More LibTalk from he who was not invited to Cut and Run.”Those who cannot post without insults are Libs.” A. Lincoln
“Yeah Sanford, I’m the first one who ever insulted anyone here. Gee, you’re frickin’ brilliant. Pin the Nobel Prize on this genius. Get a brain moron.
Posted by: Doug | March 14, 2007 at 11:32 AM ”
Wow, you guys make this sooo easy.
WEBlog Editors, I hope you’re taking notes on this stuff.
At least one republican has some integrity:
“Republican says Gonzales should be firedLAURIE KELLMANAssociated PressWASHINGTON – Sen. John Sununu of New Hampshire on Wednesday became the first Republican in Congress to call for Attorney General Alberto Gonzales’ dismissal, hours after President Bush expressed confidence in his embattled Cabinet officer.
“I think the president should replace him,” Sununu said in an interview with The Associated Press.
http://www.kansas.com/mld/kansas/news/breaking_news/16901305.htm
Reagan in 1981, Clinton in 1993, and Bush in 2001 ALL cleaned house. That is the norm with a new administration. The difference here is the attempts to intimidate them afterward and to fire those who don’t cave to pressure. That, and lying under oath about it.
Is testifying to Congress and lieing under oath the same thing?It might be, or not. Anyone know for sure?
LOL Fleetwood!
Hey Ben, when Bush fired all the Clinton appointees nobody made an issue of it because it was expected. Too bad you’re too stupid to realize there isn’t any hypocrisy to whine about. Perhaps if you didn’t get your talking points from Hannity and Rush you’d sound a bit more intelligent.
Posted by: Doug | March 14, 2007 at 11:15 AM
——————————–
Doug, When did Bush fire all the Clinton AG? Sorry, I was not aware he had.
HardTruth, I agree with you but when did Bush fire all the Clinton AG. Maybe a better question would be: Why didn’t he right after he got elected? Was he trying to be nice or what.
Depends on whether the testimony to Congress is under oath!
He did in the months after his election. Much like Clinton before him and Reagan before him.
UNDER OATH:
Justice Department officials, led by Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty, told lawmakers under oath that the decision to fire eight U.S. attorneys in December was made solely by the Justice Department and said the decision was based on performance, not politics.
E-mails released Tuesday, however, revealed that the firings were considered and discussed for two years by Justice Department and White House officials.”
See link above March 13 3:51 pm
He did in the months after his election. Much like Clinton before him and Reagan before him.
Posted by: HardTruth | March 14, 2007 at 05:24 PM——————————–If that is correct, I cannot find it by Google, do that mean he fired his own appointments?
Yes
Note the last sentence:
“Q: How often are U.S. attorneys fired?
A: Excluding the current controversy, the Congressional Research Service found just five instances over 25 years in which U.S. attorneys were fired by the president or resigned following reports of questionable conduct. A Reagan-era prosecutor was fired and later convicted in federal court in connection with charges that he leaked confidential information. A Clinton appointee resigned over allegations he bit a topless dancer on the arm during a visit to an adult club following a loss in a big drug case. The CRS study did not include departures that followed a change in presidential administration, when turnover is common.”
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070306/ap_on_go_ot/prosecutors_q_a
More … to protect Abramoff …
The First US Attorney FiringThe current scandal over political use of US Attorneys is not the first one. In 2002 Bush blocked a corruption investigation into Jack Abramoff by firing the US Attorney just as he was closing in. Bush replaced him with a cousin of one of the targets — who had been recommended by the local Republican Party.
A 2005 story, Bush removal ended Guam investigation,
A US grand jury in Guam opened an investigation of controversial lobbyist Jack Abramoff more than two years ago, but President Bush removed the supervising federal prosecutor, and the probe ended soon after.Go read about it.
The Republican corruption machine was in full operation by 2002. Here was Bush covering up Abramoff’s crimes by firing a prosecutor.
The statute of limitations has not yet run out on this.
http://www.seeingtheforest.com/archives/2007/03/the_first_us_at.htm
and …
“More troubling: Is the Bush administration seeking to circumvent the requirement that U.S. attorneys be confirmed by the Senate? The administration tucked into the renewal of the USA Patriot Act authority for the attorney general to name prosecutors who could serve indefinitely without confirmation. Justice viewed the previous law, under which unconfirmed replacements could serve for only 120 days, after which the district courts would name a successor, as an improper incursion of judicial authority into executive branch appointments. Yet the new arrangement presents the greater risk of the executive branch doing an end run around Senate confirmation. The best way to prevent that would be to return the law to its previous state.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/02/AR2007030201485.html
Demon.C.RATS are hypocites. They can fire 93 attorneys and nobody says anything. Bush fires 8 and they go bonkers. Bush should fire 8 more, it will be fun to see them go totally mad. As for the 5 who went after democrats, Bush should rehire them and let them finish their jobs.
More BushBot BULLSHIT I see. Nobody said anything when Bush replaced them all in 2001 either; nor when Reagan did in 1981. The unique thing here is that it is mid-term and mid-investigation. Like the one in 2002 to protect Abramoff.
Typical RepukeiCON!