Clinton/Reno fired 92 Federal Prosecutors

[PaulS]

It has always been a patronage position and they are political appointees who serve at the pleasure of the pres. BTY Rudy Giuliani was a prosecutor for anyone who doesn't know. What got Bush in trouble is that they have always been insulated from politics and unless let go b/c of performance issues and unless of an administration changes, they have had great job security. Gonzales injected politics into an area where customarily politics was not involved. The attornies were pressured to bring cases against Dems prior to the last election.

[spence]

Originally Posted by PaulS

The attornies were pressured to bring cases against Dems prior to the last election.

That's one of the accusations at least...along with too much pressure on Republicans.

-spence

[Mike P]

Originally Posted by PaulS

It has always been a patronage position and they are political appointees who serve at the pleasure of the pres. BTY Rudy Giuliani was a prosecutor for anyone who doesn't know.

Yup. And despite his great conviction record in prosecuting the Mob (Pizza Connection and the Commision) and Wall Street sharks, he was one of the 93 whose resignation Janet Reno asked for. He was given a few months to wrap up his business, and replaced by Mary Jo White. It was what Rudy expected to happen after the Democrats won the White House, and probably the best thing that ever happened for his political career. Then again, he probably would have resigned anyway. No one makes a career out of being US Attorney for a Federal judicial district. For most, it's a stepping stone to a black robe. Few Asst. US Attorneys make it a career choice--for them, it's a stepping stone to a position in a mega-bucks private firm.

[spence]

Interesting, sorry I don't have the link for this.

Was Carol Lam Targeting The White House Prior To Her Firing?

Referring to the Bush administration’s purge of former San Diego-based U.S. attorney Carol Lam, Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA) questioned recently on the Senate floor whether she was let go because she was “about to investigate other people who were politically powerful.”

The media reports this morning that among Lam’s politically powerful targets were former CIA official Kyle “Dusty” Foggo and then-House Appropriations Committee Chairman Jerry Lewis (R-CA). But there is evidence to believe that the White House may also have been on Lam’s target list. Here are the connections:

– Washington D.C. defense contractor Mitchell Wade pled guilty last February to paying then-California Rep. Randy “Duke” Cunningham more than $1 million in bribes.

– Wade’s company MZM Inc. received its first federal contract from the White House. The contract, which ran from July 15 to August 15, 2002, stipulated that Wade be paid $140,000 to “provide office furniture and computers for Vice President #^&#^&#^&#^& Cheney.”

– Two weeks later, on August 30, 2002, Wade purchased a yacht for $140,000 for Duke Cunningham. The boat’s name was later changed to the “Duke-Stir.” Said one party to the sale: “I knew then that somebody was going to go to jail for that…Duke looked at the boat, and Wade bought it — all in one day. Then they got on the boat and floated away.”

– According to Cunningham’s sentencing memorandum, the purchase price of the boat had been negotiated through a third-party earlier that summer, around the same time the White House contract was signed.

To recap, the White House awarded a one-month, $140,000 contract to an individual who never held a federal contract. Two weeks after he got paid, that same contractor used a cashier’s check for exactly that amount to buy a boat for a now-imprisoned congressman at a price that the congressman had pre-negotiated.

[spence]

More interesting news...

It looks like (according to submitted documents) Patrick Fitzgerald was ranked on the "Bushie" scale as only mediocre, the same ranking of several of the fired attorneys.

Fitzgerald of course was the man who prosecuted Scooter Libby and implicated the VP's office in the case.

This is a man regarded as one of the best prosecutors in the country, and the man who prepared the indictment of Osama Bin Laden!

Sniper, you still think this was just a performance issue as stated?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...902036_pf.html

-spence

[stripersnipr]

Originally Posted by spence

More interesting news...

It looks like (according to submitted documents) Patrick Fitzgerald was ranked on the "Bushie" scale as only mediocre, the same ranking of several of the fired attorneys.

Fitzgerald of course was the man who prosecuted Scooter Libby and implicated the VP's office in the case.

This is a man regarded as one of the best prosecutors in the country, and the man who prepared the indictment of Osama Bin Laden!

Sniper, you still think this was just a performance issue as stated?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...902036_pf.html

-spence

Spence what I said was "Did anyone ever believe for a second the firings were performance related? Political hirings equal Political Firings. Thats the reality and anybody who thinks otherwise is delusional".

I stand by the point that the firing of the eight was no more or less political than the firing of the 92.

[spence]

Originally Posted by stripersnipr

I stand by the point that the firing of the eight was no more or less political than the firing of the 92.

Sorry, but the evidence coming forth doesn't match that assertion.

Additionally, here's some new food for thought. When Clinton's AG fired everyone at the beginning of his term, I'm pretty sure the replacements had to go through Senate confirmation.

Under the Patriot Act signed into law by President Bush the Whitehouse now has the legal authority to fire and replace Federal Prosecutors indefinately without Senate confirmation.

This is a BIG difference you might not have been aware of. I just learned of it recently myself.

How the fruit salad coming along?

-spence

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by spence

Under the Patriot Act signed into law by President Bush the Whitehouse now has the legal authority to fire and replace Federal Prosecutors indefinately without Senate confirmation.

-spence

Not anymore according to the senate.

This screw up was so bad that people now feel sympathy for lawyers!

[Mike P]

Do you see a difference between Nixon not keeping Ramsey Clark on as Attorney General when he took office (in effect, firing him as well as the rest of LBJ's cabinet) and his later firing of Eliot Richardson as AG because he wouldn't carry out Nixon's order to fire Archibald Cox?

I think that's the distinction that Spence is driving at

[stripersnipr]

Originally Posted by Mike P

Do you see a difference between Nixon not keeping Ramsey Clark on as Attorney General when he took office (in effect, firing him as well as the rest of LBJ's cabinet) and his later firing of Eliot Richardson as AG because he wouldn't carry out Nixon's order to fire Archibald Cox?

I think that's the distinction that Spence is driving at

Yep I understand the distinction, each instance has its own set of nuances but at the end of the day all the firings were essentially for the same reason. Whether in anticipation of, or after the fact, federal prosecutors are fired for not doing as the sitting President desires. This comes as no surprise to me no matter who is in the Whitehouse. The seperation of power between executive and judiciary branches has been skewed for decades.