Discussion in 'Politics' started by CrimsonWhite, Mar 11, 2008.
Sounds like horseshit to me.
Of course... there wasn't anything wrong with the firing the US attorneys who didn't misuse their office for the benefit of the GOP...
nah... nothing to see there... move it along.
They had exceeded the original term of office, as a matter of fact, and were replaced. All with in the power of the President. Even if they had NOT exceeded the original term of office the President can remove a Federal Prosecutor for ANY reason he wants. They are political appointments and serve at the PLEASURE of the President.
That's not the point. The house supoened them to appear and they refused. That's why contempt citation were issued.
When the pleasure of the president includes firing an AG because Carl Rove wanted his friend in that position and then lied about their qualifications, I would think that even you might consider that a little off.
The issue at hand here is not whether or not there was wrongdoing with regard to the firing of these attorneys. Of course they serve at the pleasure of the president, and he can fire them for any reason or no reason at all. The issue is that Miers and Bolten were required to show up before congress and they didn't show up, or even send a letter saying they wouldn't show up.
Citing executive privilege only works when you may incriminate yourself, put national security at risk, or have committed a crime. Therefore, you cannot issue a blanket statement that says "I won't show up because whatever you ask me fits the definition of executive privilege." It's about having some respect for Congress and not robbing the House of its Constitutional powers.
No, actually he can't fire them because they aren't serving GOP political interests such as not indicting Democrats on fraudulent charges.
They are political appointees. They serve at the pleasure of the President. Congress has no oversight over this. That is why they refused to appear. I don't agree much anymore, but the President is right on this one.
Umm, not quite. They must be confirmed by the Senate. Congress DOES have oversight over them.
I'm amazed by the non-reaction this gets. What, the president fired Attorneys because they wouldn't prosecute Democrats or Democratic-linked individuals on ridiculous grounds? Eh, its all good. I mean why have a non-political prosecutorial system when we can prosecute people based on their political affiliation!
They should of done what Clinton did... Just fired them all.
Funny how law changes in the minds of conservatives when it has to do with them.
Separate names with a comma.