Digg

Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Bush Falsely Claims His Prosecutor Purge Is ‘A Customary Practice By a Pres

thinkprogress.org — Today during a press briefing in Mexico, President Bush attempted to defend his prosecutor purge, stating that firing prosecutors “has been a customary practice by presidents. U.S. attorneys and others serve at the pleasure of the President. Past administrations have removed U.S. attorneys.

Bury

mattman12345 1 year 211 days ago

36 diggs
digg it

anastrophe, on 10/12/2007, -5/+5http://digg.com/politics/Hillary_Clinton_knows_all_about_sacking_U_S_Attorneys

explain it away. i dare you. i double-dog dare you.
- ClosedCaption, on 10/12/2007, -4/+5What does that have to do with Bush? In fact Kyle Sampson (Alberto's # 2) said:
  
  In recent memory, during the Reagan and Clinton Administrations, Presidents Reagan and Clinton did not seek to remove and replace U.S. Attorneys to serve indefinitely under the holdover provision.
  
  Either Sampson was wrong or he was right. If he was wrong how could he remain in the job not understanding this easy piece of recent history?
  
  Also, If you're saying that Clinton did it too. Are you saying that Clinton was wrong and Bush is right for doing, what you claim falsely, the same thing? Or that Clinton is right and Bush right? Or that both are wrong? What are you saying?
- ClosedCaption, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3BTW the DOJ told Chuck Schumer in a letter that Rove wasnt involved. But he was. Is that also "common"?
anastrophe, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6US attorneys serve at the pleasure of the president. period. *when* they are fired may have some nominal 'customary' practice, but that's utterly meaningless in the context of what is legal or not. that incoming presidents tend to clear out past administration US attorneys after coming into office is no less or more "wrong" than doing it at any other time.

"United States Attorneys are appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate for a four-year term. See 28 U.S.C. Sec. 541. Upon expiration of this term, the United States Attorney continues to perform the duties of the office until a successor is confirmed. United States Attorneys are subject to removal at the will of the President. See Parsons v. United States, 167 U.S. 314 (1897). "

i see nothing in there stating "are subject to removal at the will of the president so long as it is right after the new administration comes into office. at any other time, it is considered malfeasance and will be cause for much uproar and righteous indignation".

do you?
- ClosedCaption, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3So, the emails promoting firing an attny because he wouldnt prosecute dems is ok? The attnys fired got calls saying dont go in front of the congress "unless" and they (all republican) said that that was Obstruction of Justice is ok? and Gonzalez first sayin that it was because of performance in front of congress, which he later took back, is ok too even tho its a felony?
- anastrophe, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5one more time: everything you cite is within the bounds of 'at the will of the President'. dropping all 93 US attorneys at the start of a term is 100% purely politically motivated - it has nothing to do with the US attorney's actual performance, it's a mini political purge.
  
  do you have a citation for gonzalez testifying before congress that they were fired for performance? if so, then you may have some basis for suggesting a 'felony' has occurred.
- ClosedCaption, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Citation? No...I go by what he said..Simple
  
  And this didnt occur at the beginning of any term, if it did, the Clinton example would be valid.
- anastrophe, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2uh, what he said was in an opinion piece in the washington post. you're suggesting he's committed a felony doing that? then you're an asshat.
  
  and as i've pointed out, but which you fail to acknowledge, it doesn't matter WHEN the firing comes. it's totally irrelevant to the matter of whether it's politically motivated. clinton's firings were 100% politically motivated. so were bush's. so were bush senior's. so were reagans. stop playing this moral outrage over something that is acknowledged to be purely politics. any position that serves at the pleasure of the president qualifies.
- ClosedCaption, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2And the calls from Republican senators applying pressure on Attnys is common too huh? And the obstruction of justice accusations from republican prosecutors is common too right?
  
  "Yes it is" - Stalin
  
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Purge
canyoudiggitman, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2Care for some cheese with this whine?
doctechnical, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Dear God! You mean there's... POLITICS going on in Washington DC?

I swoon....
Login or register to add a comment

Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.

Bush Falsely Claims His Prosecutor Purge Is ‘A Customary Practice By a Pres

Login or register to add a comment