Federal DAs fired for not making political prosecutions

Races for the Senate, U.S. House, etc. and other issues of national importance.
lordofthecockrings
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 1318
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2004 11:06 pm

Postby lordofthecockrings » Tue Mar 13, 2007 2:26 pm

Ned Flanders wrote:
Why would a new administration fire all of the attorneys from the previous administration besides that fact that they wanted ideological partisans in place?

It's a question of priorities.
The priorities of the incoming administration generally differ from those of the outgoing one.
when Clinton was still in office, the AGs office was busy fighting terrorism. When Ashcroft took over pornography became our greatest enemy. Good thing too or else we would have been unprepared when those giant dildos hit the WTC, right?

Seriously tho - a new administration wants to put together a team who will work towards a common goal, like stamping out terror or porno. Nothing wrong with that. But eliminating political opponents through prosecution? That's a whole 'nuther ball-o-wax. Can you REALLY not see the dif or are you just being your usual obtuse self?

Ned Flanders
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 13797
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2001 2:48 pm
Contact:

Postby Ned Flanders » Tue Mar 13, 2007 2:28 pm

Your hair-splitting Cockie.

The most interesting part of this whole thing is to see which of the 4 or 5 current threads on this subject will survive.

AlphaLiberal
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 1274
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 8:39 pm
Contact:

Postby AlphaLiberal » Tue Mar 13, 2007 2:29 pm

LOCR: He just saw "Clinton" on the talking points this morning and got all foamy at the mouth.

Good post, though.

Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 21417
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all
Contact:

Postby Henry Vilas » Tue Mar 13, 2007 3:33 pm

Wholesale change in federal DAs is common when a president of a different political party is inaugurated. Proposing such a change during a president's tenure is unheard-of (until now).

Thank the deities that Harriet Miers was removed from consideration for the USSC.

lordofthecockrings
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 1318
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2004 11:06 pm

Postby lordofthecockrings » Tue Mar 13, 2007 3:36 pm

Ned Flanders wrote:Your hair-splitting Cockie.
Nuh-uh! Your hair-splitting cockie, fuckwad!

HARUMPH!

buckyor
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 2329
Joined: Mon May 07, 2001 1:09 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM

Postby buckyor » Tue Mar 13, 2007 5:12 pm

Henry Vilas wrote:Wholesale change in federal DAs is common when a president of a different political party is inaugurated. Proposing such a change during a president's tenure is unheard-of (until now).

Thank the deities that Harriet Miers was removed from consideration for the USSC.


The dismissals are just the smoke. Any president has the authority to name his own US Attorneys.

The fire behind the smoke is the reason why they were canned. Then evidence has grown abundantly clear that the dismissed USA's refused to play ball with an administration that wanted to politicize law enforcement. The White House and the GOP wanted them to pursue more Dems and lay off of Republicans, regardless of what the evidence was, and the US Attorneys (Republicans all) refused to play along with that deformation of law enforcement.

AlphaLiberal
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 1274
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 8:39 pm
Contact:

Postby AlphaLiberal » Tue Mar 13, 2007 10:17 pm

I was wondering who our USA is(are). And why haven't they been fired?!?

WISCONSIN
Eastern District
Steven M. Biskupic, USA
530 Federal Building
517 East Wisconsin Avenue
Milwaukee, WI 53202

Western District
Erik C. Peterson, USA
P.O. Box 1585
Madison, WI 53701-1585

http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/offices/usa_listings2.html#w

tibor
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 840
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 9:55 am

Postby tibor » Wed Mar 14, 2007 2:53 pm

AlphaLiberal wrote:Here's a juicy one.


More fun from the Sampson-Miers gang here:
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/ar ... 10193.html

[quote="TFA"]In case there was still any lingering doubt among conservatives on this point, in White House documents released today, thereâ??s an email to Harriet Miers from Attorney General Alberto Gonzalesâ??s chief of staff Kyle Sampson (who resigned yesterday), in which Sampsons admits that the Clinton administration never purged its U.S. attorneys in the middle of their terms, explicitly stating, â??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.â?Â

Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 21417
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all
Contact:

Postby Henry Vilas » Wed Mar 21, 2007 7:23 pm

I bet the federal DA in this case didn't get fired when he delayed prosecution of Republican dirty tricksters until after the election.
New Hampshire Democrats say they will ask Congress to investigate whether prosecution of a Republican phone-jamming scheme on Election Day 2002 was intentionally delayed until after the presidential election two years later.

The furor over alleged political firings of eight federal prosecutors prompted the move, Kathy Sullivan, chairwoman of the state's Democratic Party, told The Associated Press Tuesday.

In 2002, Republicans hired a telemarketing firm to place hundreds of hang-up calls to phone banks for the Democratic Party and the Manchester firefighters union, a nonpartisan group offering rides to the polls on Election Day. Service was disrupted for about 90 minutes on Election Day.

The case resulted in four criminal convictions, including that of strategist James Tobin, who was New England chairman of President Bush's re-election campaign in 2004.

Marvell
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 7016
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 11:28 pm
Location: At one with time and space

Postby Marvell » Wed Mar 21, 2007 9:42 pm

Well, it definitely looks like the shit is about to hit the fan.

Again, it raises the obvious question - why? What's going on at DOJ that Bush is so terrified people will find out?

If it's simply that there was an even greater scale of influence by Rove and the political shop, then that's probably bad for Rove, Gonzalez and the rest of the AG's office, but probably not a Watergate-esque body blow.

But if it's more than that - what's the more we're talking about?

That's where this phone-jamming case gets one's back-of-the-neck hairs a'standin'.

Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 21417
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all
Contact:

Postby Henry Vilas » Thu Mar 22, 2007 9:10 am

Today's Washington Post reports more political interference from the Justice Department, this time over prosecution of tobacco cases.
The leader of the Justice Department team that prosecuted a landmark lawsuit against tobacco companies said yesterday that Bush administration political appointees repeatedly ordered her to take steps that weakened the government's racketeering case.

Sharon Y. Eubanks said Bush loyalists in Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales's office began micromanaging the team's strategy in the final weeks of the 2005 trial, to the detriment of the government's claim that the industry had conspired to lie to U.S. smokers.

She said a supervisor demanded that she and her trial team drop recommendations that tobacco executives be removed from their corporate positions as a possible penalty. He and two others instructed her to tell key witnesses to change their testimony. And they ordered Eubanks to read verbatim a closing argument they had rewritten for her, she said.

"The political people were pushing the buttons and ordering us to say what we said," Eubanks said. "And because of that, we failed to zealously represent the interests of the American public."

Marvell
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 7016
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 11:28 pm
Location: At one with time and space

Postby Marvell » Thu Mar 22, 2007 11:57 am

Josh Marshall has a great post up on his site, pointing out that it's pretty much an established fact that the Bush administration attempted to leverage corruption prosecution of Democratic candidates for partisan advantage - the Bushies aren't even bothering to lie about it any more.

Given that this is indisputably a case of obstruction of justice, it really speaks to the utter shamelessness of the Bush administration, and the intellectual, ethical and civic bankruptcy of those who would seek to apologize for or justify their actions.

I guess we know who really hates America, don't we?

Marvell
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 7016
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 11:28 pm
Location: At one with time and space

Postby Marvell » Sun Mar 25, 2007 11:19 am

Ann Althouse's favorite idiot Glenn Greenwald has a post up at Salon about an ancillary revelation from the Great DOJ Document Dump of March 2007 - FBI/ATF Agents Gone Wild, Not Caught On Tape.

Jurors, by definition, are randomly selected citizens from the communities in which defendants are tried. If they collectively find behavior of law enforcement agents to be coercive, unconscionable or excessive [...] that seems to be rather compelling evidence that agents should not be engaged in that behavior.

But this is how our federal government operates now. [...]They engage in conduct that they know is improper and that Americans would find repellent. But their reaction to that knowledge is to figure out how to best conceal what they are doing.


Return to “National Politics & Government”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests