Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your
contribution is not tax-deductible.)
PayPal Acct: 
Feedback: 
Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):
| [ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, [8], 9, 10 ] |
| Subject: Own up to it. Bush is using the Patriot Act just like Hitler used the Enabling Act | |
|
Author: Mo' Green |
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 10:29:00 03/15/07 Thu In reply to: Oropan 's message, "Re: Nonsense & BTW did Clinton subvert terrorist legislation (patriot act) to circumvent congressional approval of replacement Attys?" on 07:13:25 03/15/07 Thu To subvert the rule of law. >AND both Carter and Reagan did not fire all the >attorneys when they took office. But W did and now he's firing those who don't follow his political directives and avoiding any congressional oversight thru a perversion of the Patriot Act he had inserted to subvert the rule of law. He is a criminal. > > > > > >>Did his DOJ chief of staff admit using the patriot act >>change for political purposes, not the national >>security rationale the treasonous bastards gave when >>they snuck it into the legislation. >> >>BTW, the link below is a NEWS story not distortions >>from Opinion Journal. >> >> >>href="http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/news/ >n >>ation/16897325.htm?source=rss&channel=krwashington_nat >i >>on">http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/news/na >t >>ion/16897325.htm?source=rss&channel=krwashington_natio >n >> >> >>Current situation is distinct from Clinton firings of >>U.S. attorneys >>McClatchy Newspapers >> >>WASHINGTON - The Bush administration and its defenders >>like to point out that President Bush isn't the first >>president to fire U.S. attorneys and replace them with >>loyalists. >> >> >>While that's true, the current case is different. Mass >>firings of U.S. attorneys are fairly common when a new >>president takes office, but not in a second-term >>administration. Prosecutors are usually appointed for >>four-year terms, but they are usually allowed to stay >>on the job if the president who appointed them is >>re-elected. >> >> >>Even as they planned mass firings by the Bush White >>House, Justice Department officials acknowledged it >>would be unusual for the president to oust his own >>appointees. Although Bill Clinton ordered the >>wholesale removal of U.S. attorneys when he took >>office to remove Republican holdovers, his replacement >>appointees stayed for his second term. >> >> >>Ronald Reagan also kept his appointees for his second >>term. >> >> >>"In some instances, Presidents Reagan and Clinton may >>have been pleased with the work of the U.S. attorneys, >>who, after all, they had appointed," Kyle Sampson, >>former chief of staff to Attorney General Alberto >>Gonzales, speculated in a 2006 memo outlining Bush's >>alternative approach. "In other instances, Presidents >>Reagan and Clinton may simply have been unwilling to >>commit the resources necessary to remove the U.S. >>attorneys." >> >> >>Nonetheless, Bush aide Dan Bartlett noted Clinton's >>first term firings in defending Bush's second term >>dismissals. >> >> >>"Those discretionary decisions made by a president, by >>an administration, are often done," he told reporters >>Tuesday. >> >> >> >> >>> >>> >>>href="http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature >. >>h >>>tml?id=110009784">http://www.opinionjournal.com/edito >r >>i >>>al/feature.html?id=110009784 >>> >>>The Hubbell Standard >>>Hillary Clinton knows all about sacking U.S. >>>Attorneys. >>> >>>Wednesday, March 14, 2007 12:01 a.m. EDT >>> >>>Congressional Democrats are in full cry over the news >>>this week that the Administration's decision to fire >>>eight U.S. Attorneys originated from--gasp--the White >>>House. Senator Hillary Clinton joined the fun >>>yesterday, blaming President Bush for "the >>>politicization of our prosecutorial system." Oh, my. >>> >>>As it happens, Mrs. Clinton is just the Senator to >>>walk point on this issue of dismissing U.S. attorneys >>>because she has direct personal experience. In any >>>Congressional probe of the matter, we'd suggest she >>>call herself as the first witness--and bring along >>>Webster Hubbell as her chief counsel. >>> >>>As everyone once knew but has tried to forget, Mr. >>>Hubbell was a former partner of Mrs. Clinton at the >>>Rose Law Firm in Little Rock who later went to jail >>>for mail fraud and tax evasion. He was also Bill and >>>Hillary Clinton's choice as Associate Attorney >General >>>in the Justice Department when Janet Reno, his >nominal >>>superior, simultaneously fired all 93 U.S. Attorneys >>>in March 1993. Ms. Reno--or Mr. Hubbell--gave them 10 >>>days to move out of their offices. >>> >>>At the time, President Clinton presented the move as >>>something perfectly ordinary: "All those people are >>>routinely replaced," he told reporters, "and I have >>>not done anything differently." In fact, the >>>dismissals were unprecedented: Previous Presidents, >>>including Ronald Reagan and Jimmy Carter, had both >>>retained holdovers from the previous Administration >>>and only replaced them gradually as their tenures >>>expired. This allowed continuity of leadership within >>>the U.S. Attorney offices during the transition. >>> >>>Equally extraordinary were the politics at play in >the >>>firings. At the time, Jay Stephens, then U.S. >Attorney >>>in the District of Columbia, was investigating then >>>Ways and Means Chairman Dan Rostenkowski, and was >>>"within 30 days" of making a decision on an >>>indictment. Mr. Rostenkowski, who was shepherding the >>>Clinton's economic program through Congress, >>>eventually went to jail on mail fraud charges and was >>>later pardoned by Mr. Clinton. >>> >>>Also at the time, allegations concerning some of the >>>Clintons' Whitewater dealings were coming to a head. >>>By dismissing all 93 U.S. Attorneys at once, the >>>Clintons conveniently cleared the decks to appoint >>>"Friend of Bill" Paula Casey as the U.S. Attorney for >>>Little Rock. Ms. Casey never did bring any big >>>Whitewater indictments, and she rejected information >>>from another FOB, David Hale, on the business >>>practices of the Arkansas elite including Mr. >Clinton. >>>When it comes to "politicizing" Justice, in short, >the >>>Bush White House is full of amateurs compared to the >>>Clintons. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>And it may be this very amateurism that explains how >>>the current Administration has managed to turn this >>>routine issue of replacing Presidential appointees >>>into a political fiasco. There was nothing wrong with >>>replacing the eight Attorneys, all of whom serve at >>>the President's pleasure. Prosecutors deserve >>>supervision like any other executive branch >>appointees. >>>The supposed scandal this week is that Mr. Bush had >>>been informed last fall that some U.S. Attorneys had >>>been less than vigorous in pursuing voter-fraud cases >>>and that the President had made the point to Attorney >>>General Alberto Gonzales. Voter fraud strikes at the >>>heart of democratic institutions, and it was entirely >>>appropriate for Mr. Bush--or any President--to insist >>>that his appointees act energetically against it. >>> >>>Take sacked U.S. Attorney John McKay from Washington >>>state. In 2004, the Governor's race was decided in >>>favor of Democrat Christine Gregoire by 129 votes on >a >>>third recount. As the Seattle Post-Intelligencer and >>>other media outlets reported, some of the "voters" >>>were deceased, others were registered in >>>storage-rental facilities, and still others were >>>convicted felons. More than 100 ballots were >>>"discovered" in a Seattle warehouse. None of this >>>constitutes proof that the election was stolen. But >it >>>should have been enough to prompt Mr. McKay, a >>>Democrat, to investigate, something he declined to >do, >>>apparently on grounds that he had better things to >>do. >>> >>>In New Mexico, another state in which recent >elections >>>have been decided by razor thin margins, U.S. >Attorney >>>David Iglesias did establish a voter fraud task force >>>in 2004. But it lasted all of 10 weeks before closing >>>its doors, despite evidence of irregularities by the >>>likes of the Association of Community Organizations >>>for Reform Now, or Acorn. As our John Fund reported >at >>>the time, Acorn's director Matt Henderson refused to >>>answer questions in court about whether his group had >>>illegally made copies of voter registration cards in >>>the run-up to the 2004 election. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>As for some of the other fired Attorneys, at least >one >>>of their dismissals seemed to owe to differences with >>>the Administration about the death penalty, another >to >>>questions about the Attorney's managerial skills. Not >>>surprisingly, the dismissed Attorneys are insisting >>>their dismissals were unfair, and perhaps in some >>>cases they were. It would not be the first time in >>>history that a dismissed employee did not take kindly >>>to his firing, nor would it be the first in which an >>>employer sacked the wrong person. >>>No question, the Justice Department and White House >>>have botched the handling of this issue from start to >>>finish. But what we don't have here is any serious >>>evidence that the Administration has acted improperly >>>or to protect some of its friends. If Democrats want >>>to understand what a real abuse of power looks like, >>>they can always ask the junior Senator from New >York. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>>The actual letter from the Cheif of staff may be >>>>viewed at this address >>>> >>>>href="http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/13/sampson-ro >v >>e >>>- >>>>attorney">http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/13/sampso >n >>- >>>r >>>>ove-attorney >>>> >>>> >>>>Gonzales Chief Of Staff Rebuts Rove Claim That >>Clinton >>>>Purged Prosecutors Too >>>>At a speech last week in Little Rock, Karl Rove >>>>described the Bush administration’s purge of federal >>>>prosecutors as “normal and ordinary,” claiming that >>>>Clinton did the same thing. “Clinton, when he came >>in, >>>>replaced all 93 U.S. attorneys,” Rove said. “When we >>>>came in, we ultimately replace most all 93 U.S. >>>>attorneys — there are some still left from the >>Clinton >>>>era in place. … What happened in this instance, was >>>>there were seven done all at once, and people wanted >>>>to play politics with it.” Watch it: >>>> >>>> >>>>But in an e-mail to Harriet Miers on Jan. 9, >Attorney >>>>General Alberto Gonzales’s chief of staff Kyle >>Sampson >>>>(who resigned yesterday) admitted that the Clinton >>>>administration never purged its U.S. attorneys in >the >>>>middle of their terms, explicitly stating, “In >recent >>>>memory, during the Reagan and Clinton >>Administrations, >>>>Presidents Reagan and Clinton did not seek to remove >>>>and replace U.S. Attorneys to serve indefinitely >>under >>>>the holdover provision”: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>Former Clinton chief of staff John Podesta >previously >>>>told ThinkProgress that Rove’s claims that the >>Clinton >>>>administration also purged attorneys is “pure >>>>fiction.” He added, “Replacing most U.S. attorneys >>>>when a new administration comes in — as we did in >>1993 >>>>and the Bush administration did in 2001 — is not >>>>unusual. But the Clinton administration never fired >>>>federal prosecutors as pure political retribution.” >>>> >>>>(The Gavel has more.) >>>> >>>>Filed under: Ethics, Administration [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ] |
| Subject | Author | Date |
| WRONG!!!! Reagan fired all his US Attorneys when he hired his first Attorney General, fool | Mo' Green | 11:19:28 03/15/07 Thu |
| WRONG WRONG WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! | Oropan | 13:48:59 03/15/07 Thu |
|
||