Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

White House Mulled Firing All Prosecutors (AP)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Eugene Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-13-07 03:32 AM
Original message
White House Mulled Firing All Prosecutors (AP)
White House Mulled Firing All Prosecutors

By LARA JAKES JORDAN
The Associated Press
Tuesday, March 13, 2007; 4:19 AM

WASHINGTON -- The White House considered firing all 93 federal
prosecutors at the start of President Bush's second term, but
yielded to Justice Department objections and eventually agreed
to a smaller list of dismissals compiled by Justice officials,
a spokeswoman said Monday.

Dana Perino also said President Bush may have informally passed
on to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales complaints the White
House was receiving about the performance of some of the U.S.
attorneys.

She said then-White House counsel Harriet Miers raised the idea
with Gonzales aid Kyle Sampson of asking all 93 U.S. attorneys to
resign in 2004, wondering whether the start of a new White House
term marked a logical time to start with a new slate of U.S.
attorneys, who serve four-year terms at the pleasure of the
president.

Sampson disagreed, saying a wholesale firing would be disruptive.
Perino said deputy chief of staff Karl Rove, the president's top
political adviser, vaguely recalls telling Miers that he thought
firing all 93 was ill-advised.

-snip-

Full article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/13/AR2007031300140.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Eurobabe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-13-07 03:37 AM
Response to Original message
1. Can we impeach these assholes YET??
nothing like making a mockery of the US Judicial system with their "political" appointees. Good God. :wtf:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fasttense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-13-07 04:46 AM
Response to Reply #1
4. No, it seems we have to wait until they kill America before we can Impeach them.
Seems a preemptive Impeachment of everyone in the white house would save America from a depression/recession, bankruptcy, war and further scandal. Unlike the sociopaths in the white house, we as a nation follow laws, well sometimes. Does it take a sociopath to take catch another sociopath?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-13-07 03:55 AM
Response to Original message
2. ah, nice little gentle in-love with Bush Harriet????
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberal renegade Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-13-07 04:22 AM
Response to Original message
3. I think they've got
that backwards, it should've read America mulls over firing the Blighthouse.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
luckyleftyme2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-13-07 05:13 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. corruption

seems corruption abounds in this administration,surely we deserve better!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ian David Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-13-07 07:12 AM
Response to Original message
6. The Pearl Harbor Day Massacre goes ALL way to Bush,
And I can't remember how many times I have said this, about HOW many different things they've done...

But, at long last, shouldn't THIS be enough to IMPEACH him?


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlueManDude Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-13-07 07:18 AM
Response to Original message
7. Classic spin -"hey we were gonna fire all of 'em" - yeah right.
No surprise the WaPo is helping them try to minimize this scandal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tanyev Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-13-07 08:08 AM
Response to Original message
8. I can understand why a new president would want to clear the decks
when they first come in to office. I don't get why they would want to do it again at the start of a second term, clearing out 93 people that they hired only 4 years previously. Other than wanting to use those posts for political rewards and retributions, of course.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cessna Invesco Palin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-13-07 08:18 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. I suspect...
...that it has a lot to do with the revisions the Patriot Act made to the law about appointing interim federal prosecutors. Interim federal prosecutors can now serve indefinitely (used to be a 120 day maximum, as I recall) and do not need to be confirmed by the Senate. Thus, Bush could appoint whoever he wanted, without interference from the Senate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tanyev Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-13-07 08:23 AM
Response to Reply #9
10. Oh, yes. I'm sure you're right
I should have said I can't think of any legitimate reason why a president would want to replace his entire US Attorney team at the start of his 2nd term.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
goodhue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-13-07 08:43 AM
Response to Original message
11. Harriet Miers clearly is clueless
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue May 14th 2024, 04:18 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC