Letters to the Editor
-
He isn't my President
Not to nit-pick, but Geroge W. Bush isn't my President. It's a man whose name is spelled "George."
-
I'm no fan of Ms. Miers
But it seems like Harriet Miers is taking a lot of heat for suggesting to remove all 93 US attorneys, when in fact that might have come off a lot more even-handed.
As you pointed out, it's not at all unusual for the slate of US Attorneys to be cleaned every four years, since usually that's when the new Pres comes in and installs "his guys". Yes, it is unusual for a two-term president to clean the slate in his second term because that would mean removing his own choices, and one would assume that he would be happy with them.
But if he's not, or if he wants to give another 93 people this job on their resume, then it is reasonable, if unusual, for the second-term President to clear the slate just like a new President would do. That would make Miers' suggestion, if curious, at least in keeping with norms and propriety. Wiping out the whole lot of them says, "It's not because of anything anyone did, it's just that these are typically four-year jobs and we'd like to see a new group get this opportunity." They could have totally sold that, and brushed off accusations that this was overtly political punishment.
The part of this that is scandalous, IMO, is that Gonzales said "No, we're just going to kick out the ones that we really don't like, like Ms. Lam who made the Duke-Stir cry, that b#$ch has to go." That's what turned this from a run-of-the-mill act of (odd) executive reorganization into a purge of people who weren't loyal enough to the White House.
So, can we attribute our revulsion to the person who deserves it, Gonzales, and give the person a break who at least was trying to keep this hatchet job above scandal?
-
Shocked. I'm shocked.
Wow! You mean G. W. Bush is saying things that are factually inaccurate, and not allowing people who *do* know the facts to testify before Congress about their knowledge?
Like I say, I'm shocked.
All I can say is, we better pray to whatever deity exists, or not, that Giuliani isn't elected President. You think it's bad now...
Can anyone here *believe* that Giuliani is actually a serious candidate for President? I can't. To me, his candidacy is incontrovertible evidence that our electoral system is utterly broken. I shudder to think at what sort of monster it's going to produce 'ere long. What happens when things get really bad? Hmmm? Energy shortages, water shortages, economic failures, another major terrorist attack? All of these or more, more-or-less at once? What sort of beast do you think will come out of our electoral system then??
-
"Not happy" = Responsiblity and Accountability
How many times must we hear that the prez isn't "happy" or pleased about any one of the myriad of catastrophes that have occurred under his watch? He's not happy about how poorly his AG has controlled the planned US Atty. purge, he also wasn't happy about Katrina or Abu Ghraib either. Yet this repeated comment on his emotions seems to pass muster for his accountability, of which (needless to say), he has zilch. Does he think because he can comment to the press that he's displeased by the latest exposure of gross malfeasance in his administration that it satisfies the publics’ desire for basic accountability in our elected officials? King George indeed.
-
Please...
Meirs did nothing in appropriate when she suggested the 93 be let go at the beginning of the term, especially since Clinton set the precedent.
And the fact that they let 8 go in mid-term may not be precedent setting but it's also not significant.
Dems are hunting for any "scandals" they can find and this one won't fly.
-
Liar
Liar.
Lying liar.
Liar liar pants on fire.
Liar liar liar liar liar liar liar liar liar liar liar liar liar liar liar liar liar liar liar liar liar liar liar liar liar liar liar liar liar liar liar liar liar.
t.
PS Feeb.
-
Under oath?
..."we talked about his need to go up to Capitol Hill and make it very clear to members in both political parties why the Justice Department made the decisions it made..."
Have Gonzales do it under oath. I double dog dare you.
-
No, Joe, Scandal hunting was a practice of the MSM
during the Clinton administration. What is scandalous about these firings is that the Republican US attorneys themselves have identified the political motivations behind the purge.
There is no defending the administration on this one.
-
A couple of facts to reconcile
George W. and "Al" Gonzalez have gone on record saying what a fabulous job the justice department has done with THIS staff. "Heckuva job, Al". And yet...and yet...they wanted to jettison all 93 members of this well-oiled machine that Gonzalez says has protected us from all manner of child-molesters and other such depraved envoys of the devil. Trash a winning team? That depends on whether you feel they are YOUR team. Bush is all about team ownership.
As Glenn Greenwald points out, Clinton didn't fire the whole staff of prosecutors mid-term. He brought in his own team at the beginning of his presidency. It IS unheard of, and NOT standard practice to kick out your own draft picks in the middle of the game. (to coin another unfortunate sports analogy)
So....they've done a good job, and we want them gone, anyway.
Or...they haven't done a good job, and we're lying about our performance.
And the president didn't have anything to do with their firings.
Or they serve "at the pleasure of the president", who is the one who has the ultimate say in whether they do, or do not serve.
So many lies, so little time. How many "on-the-other-hands" could there possibly be in this rapidly imploding circus of prosecutorial persecution?
-
In defense of Meiers, her suggestion was a lawyerly attempt to solve the problem presented to her
(i.e. getting rid of the "bad apples") while under the attempted cover of some-sort-of-goddamned-precedent ... i.e. "start of new term" housecleaning ...
!! of course it was rejected !! -- they didn't have enough candidates to replace them all and besides it would have aroused all sorts of curiosity.
I suspect Meiers KNEW this suggestion would be rejected ... but "ask a stupid question and you'll get a stupid answer" and/or like Solomon and cutting the baby in half, she offered a solution ... that's what lawyers get paid to.
I bet she wishes she'd left sooner rather than later.
I keep wondering if GHWB's fainting spell was related to learning of this new scandal ...
I wanna hear from Ashcroft next ...