Wrong, this is a serious issue. The attorneys serve the AMERICAN PUBLIC, which is why they are given the title of "United States Attorney" and not "Presidential Attorney". mmitchelhouston, if these attorneys were so worthy of being fired, why would Bush hire them to begin with?
makes me think...was lewinsky the inability to find any evidence of wrong doing in whitewater?lew was it politically motivated by members of the republican congress? if it were to happen today, i would bring that reason of doubt up. the g.o.p plays their cheating cards so often that the truth just falls into the dems hands. let's hope the bungling dems can show how these so called christians are lying, hateful ultracons looking for POWER & MONEY at the expense of the poorer christians.
Republicans are so desperate they're eating their own young now. What hasn't been mentioned is that even BEFORE the firings, the Justice Dept. was investigating 5 times as many democrats as republicans, so the whole investigative process was skewed for political purposes already.
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.
This is such a non-issue. All US Attorneys are appointed and serve at the pleasure of the President, who doesn't have to give any reason for firing them. If this were not the case then they would be civil employees, not appointees. Oh, and if you want to talk about mass firings, go back to the Clinton era when Slick Willy fired 98 U.S. Attorneys, INCLUDING the one that was 30 days away from handing down indictments for Whitewater.
Wrong, this is a serious issue. The attorneys serve the AMERICAN PUBLIC, which is why they are given the title of "United States Attorney" and not "Presidential Attorney". mmitchelhouston, if these attorneys were so worthy of being fired, why would Bush hire them to begin with?
benfergy 5 years ago
makes me think...was lewinsky the inability to find any evidence of wrong doing in whitewater?lew was it politically motivated by members of the republican congress? if it were to happen today, i would bring that reason of doubt up. the g.o.p plays their cheating cards so often that the truth just falls into the dems hands. let's hope the bungling dems can show how these so called christians are lying, hateful ultracons looking for POWER & MONEY at the expense of the poorer christians.
wntoply6 5 years ago
impeach that lying bastard bush.
Beast9156 5 years ago
Republicans are so desperate they're eating their own young now. What hasn't been mentioned is that even BEFORE the firings, the Justice Dept. was investigating 5 times as many democrats as republicans, so the whole investigative process was skewed for political purposes already.
savagesteve13 5 years ago
NY Times (March 24 1993):
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.
wwm6w3 5 years ago
This is such a non-issue. All US Attorneys are appointed and serve at the pleasure of the President, who doesn't have to give any reason for firing them. If this were not the case then they would be civil employees, not appointees. Oh, and if you want to talk about mass firings, go back to the Clinton era when Slick Willy fired 98 U.S. Attorneys, INCLUDING the one that was 30 days away from handing down indictments for Whitewater.
mmitchellhouston 5 years ago