Letters to the Editor
Published Letters: 206 Editor's Choice: 20
-
A key point that everyone misses:
[Read the article: Did the prosecutor purge wait for Bush's OK?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]If you connect the dots in this case, some frightening implications emerge - implications which to this point have not been brought up in the mainstream media.
The language allowing the DOJ to appoint US attorneys for indefinite periods without Senate approval was inserted into the Patriot Act on December 14, 2006.
Emails show that members of the DOJ and White House staff were discussing the replacement of US attorneys in early 2005, and possibly 2004.
The implication is clear that the modification of the Patriot Act renewal - a modification which usurped the authority of the legislative branch - was part of a long-standing plan by the executive branch. The language was inserted apparently without the knowledge of any Senator, and was accomplished by Brett Tolman, a conservative political operative who was made a staff member by Senator Arlen Specter to help appease right-wing politicos who were angry at Specter's "moderate" image. Tolman had prior connections to the DOJ, and was later made a US attorney himself.
This has every appearance of being a deliberate conspiracy by the executive branch to subvert the authority of the legislative branch and therefore the Constitution itself. If Bush himself was aware of this action (as is now clearly implied by newly-revealed emails), it is a violation of his oath of office.
If ever a case called for the appointment of a special prosecutor, this is it.
More information:
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/usa-timeline.php
-
No crime? Try FOUR crimes!
[Read the article: Did the prosecutor purge wait for Bush's OK?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Amazing how Republican trolls seem to think that no one will ever dare call them on their BS.
The USA scandal includes at least four possible crimes:
1. Lying to Congress
2. Obstruction of justice (Domenici and Wilson's pre-election calls to Iglesias about prosecuting Democratic candidates)
3. Witness tampering (threats to the fired USAs to prevent them from testifying before Congress)
4. Attempting to "corruptly obstruct, influence, or impede an official proceeding".
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/19/opinion/19mon4.html
I suspect that there may also be grounds for civil action against the DOJ and White House staff for defamation of character, since the recent emails and released job reviews make it clear that despite the official claims of poor job performance, most if not all of the fired USAs were actually doing an excellent job.
Sleazy, sleazy Republicans. If Bill Clinton had done something one TENTH as sleazy as this, people like Bob the Tomato would have been shrieking for their impeachment and public execution. And the funny thing is that in this case, the fired attorneys were all REPUBLICANS, appointed by George W. Bush himself! No honor among thieves, I guess.
Now, I suppose you'll try that "But Clinton fired all the USAs when he took office." I'll save you the effort by noting that replacing all US attorneys is standard practice when a President takes office. Reagan, Bush the 1st, Clinton, and your own so-precious Bush the #2 did it as well. The difference is that this mid-term firing, combined with a deliberate undermining of the Senate's authority to approve USA appointments, amounts to a direct attempt to subvert the American system of justice by the Republican party for political advantage - a crime that should outrage any real American.
But of course, right-wingers like Bob the Tomato have amply demonstrated that they're not real Americans at all. They'll happily sacrifice our troops on the altar of their own personal political fortunes, or rather those of their party. A party which, ironically, is itself happy to screw over those of their idiotic supporters who don't happen to be among the richest 1% of the population, who are the Republicans true constituency.
-
Sorry, boys, the Big Lie just doesn't work any more!
[Read the article: Did the prosecutor purge wait for Bush's OK?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"Bob the Tomato", "just wondering", it's almost a waste of my time to refute two obvious, anonymous Republican trolls such as yourselves - but for some reason I have no patience for sleazy Republican liars any more.
Unlike you two trolls, I can back up what I say with evidence.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dismissal_of_U.S._attorneys_controversy
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2007/03/20/the_us_attorney_mess/?p1=MEWell_Pos2
http://www.azstarnet.com/allheadlines/174130
I'm sure you two liars won't click on those links, so here's the text from the Wikipedia link:
At the beginning of each presidential term, it is traditional for anyone occupying a "political office" to turn in a signed letter of resignation. For example, when President George W. Bush took office in 2001, he received the resignations from 91 of 93 sitting U.S. attorneys.[66] A political office is generally considered one that the occupant "serves at the pleasure of the President." If there is a new President from a different party, it is expected that all of the resignations would be accepted.[67] The attorneys are then replaced by new political appointees, typically from the new President's party.[68] Presidents Reagan and Clinton immediately dismissed all 93 US attorneys when they came to office.
Emphasis added, of course, so you two can't claim to have been suddenly struck blind.
As is abundantly clear to anyone who doesn't have a terminal inability to recognize the truth even when it bites them in the ass, Reagan, Clinton, and Bush II got rid of all or nearly all US attorneys at the beginnings of their first terms. But don't let a little thing like the truth stop you from gabbling your lies over and over and over.
Keep hoping that it will work, boys. But I don't think it will. Looks like the American people have seen through your line of BS, and the time has come for a reckoning...