Welcome to PatsFans.com

Why have so many U.S. attorneys been fired lately?

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by PressCoverage, Feb 27, 2007.

  1. PressCoverage

    PressCoverage Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2005
    Messages:
    8,609
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/26/opinion/26mon4.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

    Why Have So Many U.S. Attorneys Been Fired? It Looks a Lot Like Politics

    By ADAM COHEN
    Published: February 26, 2007

    Carol Lam, the former United States attorney for San Diego, is smart and tireless and was very good at her job. Her investigation of Representative Randy Cunningham resulted in a guilty plea for taking more than $2 million in bribes from defense contractors and a sentence of more than eight years. Two weeks ago, she indicted Kyle Dustin Foggo, the former No. 3 official in the C.I.A. The defense-contracting scandal she pursued so vigorously could yet drag in other politicians.

    In many Justice Departments, her record would have won her awards, and perhaps a promotion to a top post in Washington. In the Bush Justice Department, it got her fired.

    Ms. Lam is one of at least seven United States attorneys fired recently under questionable circumstances. The Justice Department is claiming that Ms. Lam and other well-regarded prosecutors like John McKay of Seattle, David Iglesias of New Mexico, Daniel Bogden of Nevada and Paul Charlton of Arizona — who all received strong job evaluations — performed inadequately.

    It is hard to call what’s happening anything other than a political purge. And it’s another shameful example of how in the Bush administration, everything — from rebuilding a hurricane-ravaged city to allocating homeland security dollars to invading Iraq — is sacrificed to partisan politics and winning elections.

    U.S. attorneys have enormous power. Their decision to investigate or indict can bankrupt a business or destroy a life. They must be, and long have been, insulated from political pressures. Although appointed by the president, once in office they are almost never asked to leave until a new president is elected. The Congressional Research Service has confirmed how unprecedented these firings are. It found that of 486 U.S. attorneys confirmed since 1981, perhaps no more than three were forced out in similar ways — three in 25 years, compared with seven in recent months.

    (continued)
  2. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    39,192
    Likes Received:
    129
    Ratings:
    +359 / 1 / -9

    No Sh!t :confused:
  3. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,643
    Likes Received:
    67
    Ratings:
    +128 / 7 / -13

    What's your point?
  4. Fogbuster

    Fogbuster Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2005
    Messages:
    13,674
    Likes Received:
    10
    Ratings:
    +10 / 0 / -0

    Maybe Tony Soprano is a Republican??


    :eek:

    //
  5. maverick4

    maverick4 Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2005
    Messages:
    7,669
    Likes Received:
    17
    Ratings:
    +17 / 0 / -0

    A complete travesty. Carol Lam was fired for exposing corruption and doing a too good job at it. This administration = worst in history.
  6. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,643
    Likes Received:
    67
    Ratings:
    +128 / 7 / -13

    Every administration does this Clinton fired all but 1 when he came in, the guy he didn't fire (chertoff) was a reault of a direct request from Bill Bradley.
  7. PressCoverage

    PressCoverage Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2005
    Messages:
    8,609
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0


    did you read the f&cking story? if you did, the point is beyond obvious...

    further, why do you have to lie about Clinton, when the story clearly says only 3 have been fired in this fashion since 1981?
  8. maverick4

    maverick4 Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2005
    Messages:
    7,669
    Likes Received:
    17
    Ratings:
    +17 / 0 / -0

    patsfans, you lost a lot of credibility with me with that post. did you even read the article?
  9. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,643
    Likes Received:
    67
    Ratings:
    +128 / 7 / -13

    What lie? Clinton fired every US attorney except 1 when he came into office. Are you disputing that historical fact???
  10. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,643
    Likes Received:
    67
    Ratings:
    +128 / 7 / -13


    Clinton did fire every UA Attorney upon entering office.:

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

    If any investigation had been tampered with there might be a point but to cite an example a crook like Cunningham (a disgraced ex pow now) got a much heavier sentence than most crooks (like Murtha who cut a deal).

    If you read the article I posted you will see that the previous administration did the same sort of recess appt without senate hearing without the process being authorized in a law.
  11. PressCoverage

    PressCoverage Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2005
    Messages:
    8,609
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0


    UNBELIEVABLE.... read it again... especially this part:

    Although appointed by the president, once in office they are almost never asked to leave until a new president is elected. The Congressional Research Service has confirmed how unprecedented these firings are. It found that of 486 U.S. attorneys confirmed since 1981, perhaps no more than three were forced out in similar ways — three in 25 years, compared with seven in recent months.

    stop me if i'm wrong, but Clinton was a new president when he let those guys go...
    Last edited: Feb 27, 2007
  12. Fogbuster

    Fogbuster Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2005
    Messages:
    13,674
    Likes Received:
    10
    Ratings:
    +10 / 0 / -0



    What's so "unbelievable"?? New pres, old pres -- what's the diff??


    ?????


    //
  13. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,643
    Likes Received:
    67
    Ratings:
    +128 / 7 / -13

    The law has been updated to allow the attorneys to be replaced like other executive positions this wasn't the case in previous administrations.
  14. iguide

    iguide Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Messages:
    159
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    From the NY Times. The Leading Leftist Bomb throwing liberal rag. If they print it about Bush we should all bow down to their Leftist Liberal Superior Intellect. For it is the truth and no one else knows anything.
  15. Pujo

    Pujo Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2005
    Messages:
    6,572
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    Ok, so we all agree they were fired for politically motivated reasons. Some of us also pointed out that all US attorneys have been fired for political reasons by other presidents as well.

    The question I have, then, is why did the GOP allow the independant counsel statute expire after they finished the Clinton investigation?
  16. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    39,192
    Likes Received:
    129
    Ratings:
    +359 / 1 / -9

    Get Bush---------
  17. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,643
    Likes Received:
    67
    Ratings:
    +128 / 7 / -13

    IIRC that was a bi partisan concencus while the prior administration was in office.
  18. Pujo

    Pujo Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2005
    Messages:
    6,572
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    I don't remember anything terribly bi-partisan about it. The GOP controlled the House and the old statute had a sunset provision. They just let it lapse.
  19. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,643
    Likes Received:
    67
    Ratings:
    +128 / 7 / -13

    After the issues the dems had with the IC who investigated they had no interest in renewing the act, their friends in the press thought this was a good idea. Remember the dems thought Algore was a lock to succeed Clinton. After all Bush who figured to be the pubbie niminee was considered a bumbler politically by the dems (misunderestimated him).

    If you have anystatements from dems requesting the renewal if the IC statute I'd love to see it.

    BTW I agree that executive branch appointments are and IMO have always been political, Spoils of war and all that.;)
  20. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,840
    Likes Received:
    150
    Ratings:
    +316 / 4 / -2

    Clearly politics here. The thing is, were these lawyers initially appointed by the Bush Administration, or were they hold overs from Clinton? If they were hold overs, then I guess it might shed some light as to why they were canned. Of course, I still don't like it. If they were all doing their jobs, and in Ham's case, sending crooked pols to jail (horray for her, seriously), then their being let go is clearly political BS.

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>