The U.S. Attorney Scandal, Explained!

[red states rule]

The U.S. Attorney Scandal, Explained!


Gwen Ifill: One more question for you, Doyle, on this point, which is there has been much back and forth about whether this is something which is unprecedented--this firing. Whether it is okay for the president to do it, because after all, as Tony Snow said repeatedly today, these people serve at the pleasure of the president. Is there a precedent for it?

Doyle McManus: Well, there is and there isn't. This one of those awful things where you go back into the history and everybody is still arguing about what the history means. Look, it's always been a bit of a tradition that when the White House changes in party, when Richard Nixon was succeeded by--who was that? No, that was Gerald Ford. When Gerald Ford was succeeded by Jimmy Carter, when Bill Clinton was succeeded by--when Clinton took over, and when President Bush took over from Clinton, at that point it's pretty much customary for the U.S. attorneys in place to submit their resignations. Now, Republicans are arguing that Janet Reno under Bill Clinton went farther and demanded the resignations, but even then Bill Clinton didn't fire everybody.

This is different. It's in the middle of a term. It's within the president's right to do it. That's technically true. But what even some conservative Republican legal specialists are worried about is this: are we sliding toward a politicization of that job of U.S. attorney? There's always been politics involved. Senators get involved. But are we sliding towards--and that was what was, of course, ugly in those e-mails.

Alexis Simendinger: Yes. And I think we should add, too, that we're talking about eight individuals who were appointed--politically appointed by the president of the United States. They were chosen by this president, so we're not talking about him being concerned about Democratic holdovers or some other president's choices. We're talking about his own choices.

To sum up:

1. It was OK for Bill Clinton to fire 93 U.S. attorneys, because he "didn't fire everybody." But it was not OK for Bush to fire eight of them.

2. Firing U.S. attorneys of the opposite party is fine, but firing U.S. attorneys of your own party is evidence of "politicization."

Makes sense, doesn't it?


http://www.pbs.org/weta/washingtonweek/transcripts/transcript031607.html

 

[red states rule]

GMA's Cuomo Offers Visual Aid in Continuing Campaign Against Gonzales
Posted by Scott Whitlock on March 20, 2007 - 11:54.
On Tuesday’s "Good Morning America," anchor Chris Cuomo used a none-to-subtle visual aid to continue the program’s campaign to have Attorney General Alberto Gonzales fired over the Justice Department’s dismissal of eight U.S. Attorneys. Early in the 7am hour, co-host Robin Roberts introduced Cuomo, who stood at the news desk with stacks of paper, meant to represent the 3000 pages of documents released on the case, piled half way to his shoulders:

Roberts: "Look at all that you have there, Chris." [Roberts points to a huge stack of papers that Cuomo has piled on his news desk.]

Chris Cuomo: "You see this stack of paper? Very relevant today. Good morning to you and good morning, everyone. The number of the day is 3,000. That's how many pages, just like this, the Justice Department handed out overnight. They offer an up-close look inside the controversial firing of eight federal prosecutors."

It’s more than a little odd to turn a news segment into show-and-tell.

The piece, which aired at 7:03am on March 20, featured an onscreen graphic wondering if the documents represented a "smoking gun," the third time in less than a week that GMA used such a phrase. Reporter Pierre Thomas, who last week hyperbolically described the Attorney General as "hunkered down with his closest advisors," and in "a fight for survival," reported on the story:

7:01am tease


Diane Sawyer: "Overnight news, too."

Robin Roberts: "Yes. 3000 new e-mails released by the Justice Department. A trail showing just how far reaching the concern was inside the Justice Department over those firings of U.S. Attorneys. More bad news for the Attorney General."

7:03am

Sawyer: "But let’s begin the morning’s news with Chris Cuomo at the news desk."

Roberts: "Look at all that you have there, Chris." [Roberts points to a huge stack of papers that Cuomo has piled his news desk.]

Chris Cuomo: "You see this stack of paper? Very relevant today. Good morning to you and good morning, everyone. The number of the day is 3,000. That's how many pages, just like this, the Justice Department handed out overnight. They offer an up-close look inside the controversial firing of eight federal prosecutors. Pierre Thomas joins us from the Justice Department now. Pierre, tell us about it."

ABC Graphic: "New Docs in Atty Firings: Is There A Smoking Gun?"

Pierre Thomas: "Hi, Chris. Those e-mails provide some insights into why those U.S. Attorneys were fired. But it is unclear whether they will help the Attorney General keep his job. Late last night, roughly 3,000 pages of Justice Department documents about the firing of U.S. Attorneys were provided to congressional investigators. The e-mails show one of the men at the center of the controversy appeared very concerned about Senators wanting to investigate the matter. Kyle Sampson, the Attorney General's former chief of staff, allegedly wrote this e-mail about whether fired U.S. Attorney Bud Cummins should testify before Congress. Cummins was replaced as a U.S. Attorney in Arkansas by an associate of White House advisor Karl Rove. Sampson wrote, ‘I don’t think he, Cummins, should testify. How would he answer? Did you resign voluntarily? Were you told why you were being asked to resign?’ The documents suggest Gonzales was generally aware of the plan to remove U.S. Attorneys, but he maintains he was not intimately involved."

Norm Ornstein (American Enterprise Institute): "The Attorney General was in a position where either he lied directly about his involvement or he was clueless about what his own chief of staff was doing right underneath his own nose."

Thomas: "The e-mails also make clear that, at least initially, the fired U.S. Attorneys were given no justification for their dismissals. Margaret Chiara, the U.S. Attorney for the Western district of Michigan, at one point wrote, ‘I need to know the truth to live in peace with the aftermath.’"

Victoria Toensing (Fmr. Assistant Deputy Attorney General): "To mess this up by smearing the reputations of people who have dedicated a certain amount of years to public service is inexcusable."

Thomas: "Justice officials say the e-mails show that the firings were legitimate. But sources say the documents also show that some prosecutors were ranked based on loyalty to President Bush."

It’s also interesting to note that Victoria Toensing appeared in the piece to criticize Gonzales. Yet, last week, when Toensing testified against Valerie Plame in the CIA leak case, GMA simply ignored her. Perhaps GMA found criticism of a Republican administration more palatable than that of a liberal icon such as Plame.
http://newsbusters.org/node/11536

 

[T-Bor]

Clinton did it at the beginning of this presidency I beileve which is quite normal. Clinton did it as soon as he got in to clean house. Bush is doing it at the end. Why ? No other president in history has fired all attorneys at the end of his tenure. This is NOT the same scenario.

 

[red states rule]

Clinton did it at the beginning of this presidency I beileve which is quite normal. Clinton did it as soon as he got in to clean house. Bush is doing it at the end. Why ? No other president in history has fired all attorneys at the end of his tenure. This is NOT the same scenario.

Two years to go and that is the end of his term?

When their is no scandel libs will always create one - and the liberal media will carry their water