Quote:
Originally Posted by ReillyT  You want me to prove to you that the Clinton administration didn't do the same thing? Give me a break.
I have never heard that the Clinton administration politicized the non-political positions within the Department of Justice. If you think they did, then you find the evidence (although since there was never an investigation of the Clinton administration for this, the evidence might not exist). It does not make the Bush administration's activities any less illegal.
You have become quite a shill.
By the way, US Attorneys (not Ass't USAs) are political appointees. The problem with the Bush administration's earlier dismissal is that it was alleged they were dismissed to influence pending cases or potential cases. However, generally speaking, they are political appointees and it would not be uncommon for a new president to pick new appointments.
These positions referenced in the article are not political appointments. They are to be merit-based civil service appointments. It is apples and oranges. |
No it is not. Having failed to get anywhere with the 8 fired Attorneys the Democrats have turned to this.
And there is absolutely no way, in my opinion, that Janet Reno did not do just what is alleged here but the other way round. Ohh wait, it is not the Attorney General that hires and fires these Interns, it is a panel of 3 APPOINTED members that do so.
Yup political appointees under Clinton sure were know for their inclusive behavior.
Further the numbers are so small as to be meaningless.
Explain again why someone seeking a NON Partisan position would identify themselves as Liberals to begin with?