Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by mikey, Mar 13, 2007.
Nixonian politics. I think it's a sign of worse things to come as the Congress digs deeper.
If the prosecutors were acting in a political manner as to who they were or weren't prosecuting they should be fired.
Bush made the mistake of thinking that CLinton appointed US Attorneys would acutally do their jobs, he should have FIRED THEM ALL THE DAY HE WAS FIRST ELECTED.
Just like Clinton did!!!!!
Um...FTW...these were Bush appointees and he did do exactly what Clinton did.
Theres alot of dirt coming out now that the GOP is eating their own. Damn, who woulda thunk that the voice of America having been heard in November could change so much so fast.
I'll give Gonzo a month before he is just that...Gonzo.
No, Bush made the mistake of thinking Bush-appointed US Attorneys would actually do his job.
Let's see who the attorneys are:
1. Carol Lam, appointed by Bush
2. David Iglesias, appointed by Bush
3. H. E. Cummins III, appointed by Bush
4. Paul K. Charlton, appointed by Bush
5. John McKay, appointed by Bush
6. Kevin V. Ryan, appointed by Bush
7. Daniel Bogden, appointed by Bush
8. Margaret Chiara, appointed by... you guessed it, Bush!
See a pattern?
The article says they were upset with the lack of voter fraud cases being brought to court. It does mention a lack of litigating Democrats, but it's tied to a voter fraud case. Obviously, these firings are political, but I saw an article on Drudge where Janet Reno did the same thing in 1993. Is this common, or is this something that's never done?
This is all coming out now. Pressuring appointed attorneys for a specific political agenda is a very very serious offense. The wheels are falling off this crooked administration. Incredible.
This is why I take all these incidents with a grain of salt. I'm not familiar with the incident below, as I was 18 years old in March of 1993. Does anyone a little older remember this, or know more about it? In looking at the date, I would think that this was 2 months into Clintons Administration, so the circumstances might be a bit dissimilar. Anyhow, looks like a Coke or Pepsi thing.
ATTORNEY GENERAL SEEKS RESIGNATIONS FROM PROSECUTORS
*Please Note: Archive articles do not include photos, charts or graphics. More information.
March 24, 1993, Wednesday
By DAVID JOHNSTON, (Special to The New York Times); National Desk
Late Edition - Final, Section A, Page 1, Column 1, 1053 words
DISPLAYING ABSTRACT - 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 ...
Yes, Real World, that is how the reich is spinning this. It happens all the time when an incoming administration is of a different party. They replace those with their own.
Heres the difference. These 8 Bush appointees were fired allegedly for performance issues. In fact, as we will soon find out, they were fired for something that appears to be political.
This looks bad, but smells worse. This is why Pete Dominici and Heather Wilson are lawyering up.
It does look entirely political. I'll be curious to see what comes up next week in front of the Senate panel. I guess a question I would have is, if they are political appointments to begin with, then does the (any) admin have the right to replace them as they see fit? Were laws broken in terminating them, or does this simply stink of politics as usual? I saw where one, Span I think, put a congressman (R) in jail for 8 years. To me, when you do that, you deserve a promotion and not a pink slip.
Clinton fired ther US attorney investigating White Water in Ark when he was elected and replace the US Attorney with one of his ex students ( a woman as it happens). I don't recall the demRATS being the least bit bothered by this conflict of interest.
Now if Bus fired Attorney's for being too aggressive going after pubbies you would have a point. Say he fired the guy who went after Randy Cunningham ( a disgraced actual hero as opposed to some of the phonies you idolize), that would be wrong. Getting rid of guys who are letting people skate on voter fraud is wrong. get rid of them.
BTW Since they serve at the pleasure of the president the reason he sack them doesn't matter legally.
The reason matters if George Bush was using the Justice Department as an extension of the Republican party to go after the Democrats.
The most egregious example is Sen Pete Domenici (R) and Rep Heather Wilson (R) who called prosecutor David Iglesias at home to intimidate him to bring charges against the Democrate before the 2008 election.
I hope congress also look into the case of NJ federal prosecutor Christopher Christie (R), who issued a subpoena against Bob Menendenz (D) just before the 2008 election. The curious thing is that nothing came out of the subpoena after Mendez won. The question I want to know is if Christie was instructed by George Bush to influence the NJ election.
I take it you weren't bothered by the prosecution of Randy Cunningham and the investigation into Rep Weldon just before the 2006 election........
Do you think Schumer has ever made an inquiry into a investigation??? Should CLinton have fired the Fed Attorney who was investigating him nad replaced him with a en student of Clinton's
Should investigations of voter fraud be delayed until after elections???/
The question here is simple:
Did George Bush use the Justice Department as a politcal tool to go after the Democrats just before the 2008 election?
Did George Bush influence Christopher Christie to issue a subpoena against Bob Mendendez before the election??
Answer it doesn't matter since Bush allowed the justice dept to go after pubbies before the election also. Crooks shouldn't be in congress regardless of party. I live in NJ and Menendez is a crook. Just like Cunningham is and should end up in jail like Cunningham.
Drudge has an Op-ed from the WSJ about the Clinton firings in '93, and some details about why some of the attorney's were fired by Bush.
Yeah but thats different. I'm not sure why yet but I'm sure we'll be hearing from the double standard group shortly.
Forget Clinton, I wonder what's going to happen to Gonzo.
Separate names with a comma.