Democrats Demand AG Gonzales Resign

[White_Male_Canada]

First the AP story, then the hilarious truth :

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales abruptly canceled travel plans Tuesday amid growing calls for his ouster over the firings of eight federal prosecutors during a White House-directed housecleaning of U.S. attorneys.

Gonzales also accepted the resignation of his top aide, Kyle Sampson, who authorities said failed to brief other senior Justice Department officials of his discussions about the firings with then-White House counsel Harriet Miers. Miers resigned in January.

Sen. Charles E. Schumer, who is leading a Senate investigation of the firings, called for the second time in three days for Gonzales to step down. Additionally, Democratic Party Chairman Howard Dean said Gonzales "ought to be shown the door _ he ought not to be in this administration. We have got to end corruption in our government. It is not OK to be corrupt."


http://www.breitbart.com/article.php...show_article=1

Now , the story goes onto say, " The government's 93 U.S. attorneys are presidential appointees who can be hired and fired at will. But critics say the fate of the eight who were dismissed last year appeared to have been politically motivated."

If they can be hired and fired at will then that means at will, for no reason.

That is why Bill Clinton's attorney general, Janet Reno, fired all 93 U.S. attorneys after her appointment in March 1993.Because they could.

Why all 93? The U.S. attorney for Arkansas at the time was George Banks. Dismissing him would raise eyebrows due to the criminal review of the Madison Gauranty. Dismissing all 93 U.S. attorneys to get rid of one potentially troublesome one would not.

[trish]

U.S. Attorneys are political appointees. Regrettably every new administration fires nearly all the U.S. attorneys appointed by the opposing party. The Clinton administration was no exception and neither was the Bush administration. What’s odd is that late in his second term the Bush administration fires not one, not two, not three, four, five, six or even seven…but eight of its own prosecutors. These were prosecutors who were investigating republican politicians for corruption and fraud. These were prosecutors whose investigations Bush and Rove discussed at length as being politically problematic. It’s true that U.S. prosecutors can be fired and hired at will…but it’s also the case that obstruction of justice is a criminal offense.

[qeuqheeg222]

thank you trish

[olite71]

U.S. Attorneys are political appointees. Regrettably every new administration fires nearly all the U.S. attorneys appointed by the opposing party. The Clinton administration was no exception and neither was the Bush administration. What’s odd is that late in his second term the Bush administration fires not one, not two, not three, four, five, six or even seven…but eight of its own prosecutors. These were prosecutors who were investigating republican politicians for corruption and fraud. These were prosecutors whose investigations Bush and Rove discussed at length as being politically problematic. It’s true that U.S. prosecutors can be fired and hired at will…but it’s also the case that obstruction of justice is a criminal offense.

What's with this perceptive analysis into the subtelties and nuances of this situation Trish? Are you trying to get at the truth? Shame on you.

[guyone]

Democrats will justify pearls on a pig as long as it fits their own purpose.

[White_Male_Canada]

U.S. Attorneys are political appointees. Regrettably every new administration fires nearly all the U.S. attorneys appointed by the opposing party. The Clinton administration was no exception and neither was the Bush administration. What’s odd is that late in his second term the Bush administration fires not one, not two, not three, four, five, six or even seven…but eight of its own prosecutors. These were prosecutors who were investigating republican politicians for corruption and fraud. These were prosecutors whose investigations Bush and Rove discussed at length as being politically problematic. It’s true that U.S. prosecutors can be fired and hired at will…but it’s also the case that obstruction of justice is a criminal offense.

Olite:

What's with this perceptive analysis into the subtelties and nuances of this situation Trish? Are you trying to get at the truth? Shame on you.

Nothing illegal occured PERIOD ! I challenge Trish to direct us to the proper US Code that indicates the AG or the Whitehouse obstructed justice!

I just love details, for instance,

Take sacked U.S. Attorney John McKay from Washington state. In 2004, the Governor's race was decided in favor of Democrat Christine Gregoire by 129-votes on a third recount. As the Seattle Post-Intelligencer and other media outlets reported, some of the "voters" were deceased, others were registered in storage-rental facilities, and still others were convicted felons. More than 100 ballots were "discovered" in a Seattle warehouse. None of this constitutes proof that the election was stolen. But it should have been enough to prompt Mr. McKay, a Democrat, to investigate, something he declined to do, apparently on grounds that he had better things to do.

In New Mexico, another state in which recent elections have been decided by razor thin margins, U.S. Attorney David Iglesias did establish a voter fraud task force in 2004. But it lasted all of 10 weeks before closing its doors, despite evidence of irregularities by the likes of the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, or Acorn. As our John Fund reported at the time, Acorn's director Matt Henderson refused to answer questions in court about whether his group had illegally made copies of voter registration cards in the run-up to the 2004 election.

As for some of the other fired Attorneys, at least one of their dismissals seemed to owe to differences with the Administration about the death penalty, another to questions about the Attorney's managerial skills. Not surprisingly, the dismissed Attorneys are insisting their dismissals were unfair, and perhaps in some cases they were. It would not be the first time in history that a dismissed employee did not take kindly to his firing, nor would it be the first in which an employer sacked the wrong person.

Now onto Clinton and his real obstruction of justice,

As everyone once knew but has tried to forget, Mr. Hubbell was a former partner of Mrs. Clinton at the Rose Law Firm in Little Rock who later went to jail for mail fraud and tax evasion. He was also Bill and Hillary Clinton's choice as Associate Attorney General in the Justice Department when Janet Reno, his nominal superior, simultaneously fired all 93 U.S. Attorneys in March 1993. Ms. Reno--or Mr. Hubbell--gave them 10 days to move out of their offices.

At the time, President Clinton presented the move as something perfectly ordinary: "All those people are routinely replaced," he told reporters, "and I have not done anything differently." In fact, the dismissals were unprecedented: Previous Presidents, including Ronald Reagan and Jimmy Carter, had both retained holdovers from the previous Administration and only replaced them gradually as their tenures expired. This allowed continuity of leadership within the U.S. Attorney offices during the transition.

Equally extraordinary were the politics at play in the firings. At the time, Jay Stephens, then U.S. Attorney in the District of Columbia, was investigating then Ways and Means Chairman Dan Rostenkowski, and was "within 30 days" of making a decision on an indictment. Mr. Rostenkowski, who was shepherding the Clinton's economic program through Congress, eventually went to jail on mail fraud charges and was later pardoned by Mr. Clinton.

Also at the time, allegations concerning some of the Clintons' Whitewater dealings were coming to a head. By dismissing all 93 U.S. Attorneys at once, the Clintons conveniently cleared the decks to appoint "Friend of Bill" Paula Casey as the U.S. Attorney for Little Rock. Ms. Casey never did bring any big Whitewater indictments, and she rejected information from another FOB, David Hale, on the business practices of the Arkansas elite including Mr. Clinton. When it comes to "politicizing" Justice, in short, the Bush White House is full of amateurs compared to the Clintons.

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editor...l?id=110009784

[trish]

Obstruction of justice is a criminal offense, no matter who commits it.

[guyone]

The Hubbell Standard
Hillary Clinton knows all about sacking U.S. Attorneys.

WSJ Wednesday, March 14, 2007 12:01 a.m. EDT

Congressional Democrats are in full cry over the news this week that the Administration's decision to fire eight U.S. Attorneys originated from--gasp--the White House. Senator Hillary Clinton joined the fun yesterday, blaming President Bush for "the politicization of our prosecutorial system." Oh, my.

As it happens, Mrs. Clinton is just the Senator to walk point on this issue of dismissing U.S. attorneys because she has direct personal experience. In any Congressional probe of the matter, we'd suggest she call herself as the first witness--and bring along Webster Hubbell as her chief counsel.

As everyone once knew but has tried to forget, Mr. Hubbell was a former partner of Mrs. Clinton at the Rose Law Firm in Little Rock who later went to jail for mail fraud and tax evasion. He was also Bill and Hillary Clinton's choice as Associate Attorney General in the Justice Department when Janet Reno, his nominal superior, simultaneously fired all 93 U.S. Attorneys in March 1993. Ms. Reno--or Mr. Hubbell--gave them 10 days to move out of their offices.

At the time, President Clinton presented the move as something perfectly ordinary: "All those people are routinely replaced," he told reporters, "and I have not done anything differently." In fact, the dismissals were unprecedented: Previous Presidents, including Ronald Reagan and Jimmy Carter, had both retained holdovers from the previous Administration and only replaced them gradually as their tenures expired. This allowed continuity of leadership within the U.S. Attorney offices during the transition.

Equally extraordinary were the politics at play in the firings. At the time, Jay Stephens, then U.S. Attorney in the District of Columbia, was investigating then Ways and Means Chairman Dan Rostenkowski, and was "within 30 days" of making a decision on an indictment. Mr. Rostenkowski, who was shepherding the Clinton's economic program through Congress, eventually went to jail on mail fraud charges and was later pardoned by Mr. Clinton.

Also at the time, allegations concerning some of the Clintons' Whitewater dealings were coming to a head. By dismissing all 93 U.S. Attorneys at once, the Clintons conveniently cleared the decks to appoint "Friend of Bill" Paula Casey as the U.S. Attorney for Little Rock. Ms. Casey never did bring any big Whitewater indictments, and she rejected information from another FOB, David Hale, on the business practices of the Arkansas elite including Mr. Clinton. When it comes to "politicizing" Justice, in short, the Bush White House is full of amateurs compared to the Clintons.

[chefmike]

Democrats will justify pearls on a pig as long as it fits their own purpose.

Dayum, G1...that pig might just be wearing pearls!

Congrats!

You might actually be correct for once...instead of just right(wing).

[trish]

It may be true that the Attn. General need give no reason for firing his appointees; however his chief of staff did provide a reason for firing the U.S prosecutor in Nevada, Daniel Bogdan. The reason given to the republican Sen. Ensign of Nevada is that Bogdan wasn’t sufficiently aggressive in pursuing obscenity cases. The office of the Attn. General conceded to Senator Ensign that Bogdan’s record of prosecutions of organized crime, gang crime, violent crime etc. is exemplary. It should also be noted that Bogden oversaw the prosecution of four Clark County commissioners accused of taking bribes. It was reported by the Las Vegas Eyewitness News that he was conducting an investigation of alleged fraud by Las Vegas doctors and lawyers. It is also reported that his office was looking into campaign law violations by one member of the state’s Congressional Delegation. He just wasn’t up to the fucking standards when it came to pressing those obscenity investigations. Yeah.