About those fired U.S. Attorneys

Power Line ^ | March 13, 2007 | Paul Mirengoff

[woofie]

Sherrif Darren White should become the voice of reason for this story. He is really good


Attention Media Folks
Hannity,OReilly, Limbaugh

[zeaal]

Oh brother ...

[DJ MacWoW]

In my opinion, this is because he takes his Christian beliefs very seriously and prefers to turn the other cheek to those who strike him in the face.

You may be right. If that's the case then he is wrong. Whenever he doesn't stand up and shout the truth, he is committing a sin of omission by allowing a lie to stand.

[Nailbiter]

ping

[ClancyJ]

It does not matter a whit what he does - the dems will just move on to another area where they can instill doubt in the president and his administration.

The dems have the media that carries the plan for them and we have never learned to fight back against the dems. We just jump on the bandwagon and complain about Bush.

So, all the while criticizing Bush we might just look at how we allow the dems to be corrupt without repercussions, allow them to tell our administration what must be done, allow them to make black white, allow them to tell us what words we can use.

We are idiots for not throwing these accusations, wherever they appear, right back at them and then ignore them. Same as they do to any of our complaints - ignore and do exactly what they want to do.

Will we ever, ever learn we are stronger when we work together in the party instead of continually eating our own under the guize of "pure conservatism" or, in reality, purely childish tirades to boost our own petty egos?

I would frankly like to see a few just stand up here and let the dems know - "back-off".

[Berosus]

Oh puh-leaze. Even if Gonzalez did anything worthy of being fired, I wouldn't want to get rid of him with Harry Reid's filibuster-happy crowd in control of the Senate. They haven't yet voted on a replacement for John Bolton, have they?

[ReleaseTheHounds]

The real scandal is that NOBODY ever gets fired in the DC bureaucracy! The great Jack Welch, former CEO of GE, would famously demand of his managers that the cull out the lowest 10-20% of performer each year, arguing that there is always a bell-curve, and that there always are sub-par performers (by definition). Only in government bureaucracies does incompetence get rewarded again and again by that blind eye of neglect.

[Loyal Buckeye]

The great Jack Welch, former CEO of GE, would famously demand of his managers that the cull out the lowest 10-20% of performer each year.

My old firm did exactly that, and I'm sure we were not alone.

[boris]

Was it not Clinton who, in 1993, fired all but one U.S. Attorney--most appointed by Republicans? Where was the outcry then?

[Steve_Seattle]

No modern president ever launched a more aggressive attack on a federal prosecutor than Bill Clinton did against Kenneth Starr. This was a 24/7 smear campaign designed to turn public opinion against Starr and subvert his investigation. It ptobably involved illegal acts such as leaking grand jury testimony and then accusing Starr of doing it.

What we have here is a handful of Republicans making requests for prosecutors to investigate allegions of election fraud, at a time when allegations of such fraud were very much in the air, on both sides. I don't know if that's proper or not, but it was hardly a full-scale, coordinated effort at "intimidation." And I would be amazed if no Democrat ever called a friendly prosecutor to try to get him to investigate this or that. In fact, knowing what I know of Democrats, it is unthinkable that they wouldn't have done that.

So where was Chuck Schumer when Clinton was waging war against Starr?

[norton]

"President Clinton, through Janet Reno, fired all of the U.S. Attorneys after he was elected. Clinton used the mass firing as a means of covering up his real intention -- to fire the U.S. Attorney in his home state of Arkansas. They didn't call Clinton "Slick Willie" for nothing."

I'm seeing conflicting reports on this and I don't remember myself which is correct:

Did GWB also fire all (or most) US Atty's following is election or did he not?

[SunkenCiv]

Dunno yet. Found this though:

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MDZmMzQ5Zjg4ZGI1OTgxODA1OWM5YzFjYTRmYTlhNzk

"One of President Clinton’s very first official acts upon taking office in 1993 was to fire every United States attorney then serving — except one, Michael Chertoff, now Homeland Security secretary but then U.S. attorney for the District of New Jersey, who was kept on only because a powerful New Jersey Democrat, Sen. Bill Bradley, specifically requested his retention."

[dervish]

you might be interested in this

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/keyword?k=giuliani

[spinestein]

[Whenever he doesn't stand up and shout the truth, he is committing a sin of omission by allowing a lie to stand.]


I agree with this (and I know I'll make a few people angry by saying this) but too many Christians interpret the "turn the other cheek" lesson as an excuse to do nothing in the face of adversity. In W. Bush's case it means he allows greedy, corrupt politicians to win the day by not being more aggressive in his opposition to them, but it also happens that many "pacifists" stand by and allow genuine brutality against the innocent to take place while they shake their heads and tsk-tsk about how it's such a shame that things like that have to happen.

[Steve_Seattle]

"Did GWB also fire all (or most) US Atty's following is election or did he not?"

It's customary for most attorneys to be replaced when there is a change of administration, and that happened under Bush as well as Clinton. What made the Clinton situation different is that they were fired all at once, in a very abrupt and peremtory manner. They were told to go - NOW. The usual situation is that the old attorneys are eased out over a period of months.

[KYGrandma]

My father-in-law(a liberal) just said that the clinton administration did not get rid of the US attorneys. Any help in refuting him will be greatly appreciated.

[DJ MacWoW]

Hope that you don't mind the late reply.

The dems have the media that carries the plan for them and we have never learned to fight back against the dems.

Reagan never seemed to have that problem, did he.

[DJ MacWoW]

but too many Christians interpret the "turn the other cheek" lesson as an excuse to do nothing in the face of adversity.

I certainly agree with that!

[spinestein]

I found this little exchange at NPR (it doesn't matter who, just a couple of pant stains posing as NPR journalists). I just marvel at the amount of shit these guys can shovel and not gag on the stench.




How unusual is it for a U.S. attorney to be fired?

It's very unusual. Richard Nixon fired one when he was in office. [Jimmy] Carter fired a U.S. attorney who was making an investigation of a Democratic House member that he wanted to keep in office. Bill Clinton fired one. But it's really very rare for this to happen.

In this case it was eight attorneys.

That is close to unprecedented. … I did a book on the Justice Department, and I just have never seen something like this.

Now, that being said, when a president comes into office, historically, all the U.S. attorneys leave. And he appoints a new set of these individuals — there are about 90 of them.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=8356415


I guess we're supposed to learn from this exchange that when Bill Clinton came into office and all 93 U.S. attorneys abruptly cleaned out their offices and left at the same time to be replaced by a new set of individuals it was NOT because they were FIRED by the new administration. No, of course not. They just LEFT. Because that's what HISTORICALLY happens. ALL the U.S. attorneys JUST LEAVE. On their OWN. For NO REASON!


Pardon me if I sound a little bit incredulous.

[SunkenCiv]

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_n16_v50/ai_21123146