ousting U.S. Attorneys "mid-term" is extremely rare, "Bob", so why eight and why now? Oh dear, you don't suppose it had anything to do with that last-minute addition to the Patriot Act expansion that said the ATTORNEY GENERAL could decide on who their replacements would be? In the past, Bob, only a Federal Circuit Court judge could name replacement U.S. Attorneys and those would only be interim appointments for terms not to exceed 120 days. Permanent replacements would then have to be named and those replacements would have to be evaluated and confirmed by the Senate. The replacements for these U.S. Attorneys wouldn't have to be evaluated and confirmed by anybody and their terms would be indefinite, not temporary. Ostensibly that provision was added to the Patriot Act in case terrorists started blowing up Federal prosecutors. Well, call me cynical, Bob, but I think it's much more likely that that provision was added so that the White House could get rid of U.S. Attorneys who put their oath of office ahead of politics.

Now maybe YOU don't think Congress should be investigating this, Bob, and you've already said that you think the president should be able to "hire or fire them, at will, for any reason he deems appropriate" (and, presumably, circumvent Senate confirmation when he picks their replacements) but if that's the way the White House is going to operate then, doggone it, that sounds a lot more like a fascist regime than an American presidency, dontcha think? George Bush is under the impression that he's accountable to no one and for the last 6 years that's just how it's been. Surely you don't have a problem with him being "reminded" that HE serves at the pleasure of the American people, do you? And would now be a good time to mention that a lot of us think "executive privilege" has no place in a conversation about the possibility of Federal prosecutors being pressured to go after political opponents? Richard Nixon had some strong ideas about "executive privilege" too and we all know how THAT went.

I know how unsettling all this must be to you, Bob. And I know what you're thinking and you're absolutely right, none of this would be happening if the Republicans hadn't blown it by losing their majority last November. Who knows, maybe if those damned 8 fired prosecutors had just been willing to play along when they were asked to, it would be just like the good ol' days ... George Bush would be doing whatever he damn well pleases and Congress would be busy looking for more ways to make the rich richer and the poor poorer. Welcome to the Democrats' idea of the good ol' days, Bob.

Let's not (conveniently) forget to put all this in the context of Arlen Specter sneaking a last-minute provision into the Patriot Act reauthorization that allows the replacements for these ousted Federal attorneys to be named to more or less permanent terms without any Senate confirmation. (In the past Federal circuit court judges were the only ones who could name replacements for U.S. attorneys and their terms were limited to 90-120 days; after that, permanent replacements would have to be named and would have to undergo Senate confirmation.)

I'm sure bypassing Senate confirmation smells perfectly fine to A.J. and Joe but that's not surprising given where their noses usually are. To the rest of us "gullible Salonistas" it stinks!

According to TPMmuckraker.com, 79 percent of elected officials and candidates under federal investigation between 2001 and 2006 were Democrats, and only 18 percent were Republicans. As a country, shouldn't we be just as concerned, if not more so, about all of the Federal attorneys who WEREN't fired? With numbers like 79 percent vs. 18 percent, it seems pretty obvious to me that the White House has been using the Justice Department to try to destroy the Democratic Party from the bottom up and a helluva lot of Federal attorneys were apparently perfectly willing to go along.

Is this not a much more egregious offense than the Watergate break-in??? When the hell are Pelosi and Reid going to put impeachment back on the table WHERE IT BELONGS? When it becomes clear that the U.S. Attorney General and the United States Department of Justice have become nothing more than an extension of an Executive Branch that will stop at nothing to keep their stranglehold on power, isn't it finally time to throw these bastards out of office and into jail where they belong?

Dear Mr. Gergen,

I hope you can see my list from wherever your head is at. (Presumably it's up your ass so I've selected a nice ass-font for your viewing pleasure.)

• Abu Ghraib

• Guantanamo

• Eight fired (for no good reason) Federal prosecutors

• EPA's Christine Todd Whitman's proclamation that the air and water around "ground zero" in NYC was safe. (Tell that to all of the rescue workers who now have terminal illnesses)

• Secret CIA prisons and "extraordinary renditions"

• Redefining torture

• Habeas Corpus disappearus

• Using signing statements to exempt himself from compliance with Congressional legislation

• Outsourcing port security to the U.A.E.; see also

• Selling off our land and our infrastructure to the highest bidders

• Taking more vacation days than any president in U.S. history.

• Jeff Gannon, Armstrong Williams, Michael McManus

• Using recess appointments in an impure way

• Creeping out German Chancellor Angela Merkel by touching her in an impure way

• "Mission Accomplished" speech (cod piece optional)