Many congressmen say these 8 U.S. attorneys had a spotless record after reviewing the facts.
Why in the world would 8 of them be fired, especially all at once as they were?
So were they all fired because they were not tough enough on Democrats, as many congressmen suggest?
If not, then why did Kyle Sampson, chief of staff to Gonzalez, decide to resign over this controversy?
With this scandal, and the issue of Gonzalez indicting Ramos and Capion, should Gonzalez be forced to step down?
2007-03-13 06:33:01 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
I'd like to know more about this. I have also heard they were not adequately investigating allegations of election fraud, something that should concern us all.
I also want to know what was done in other administrations - whether this is out of the ordinary.
It would not be the first time a "scandal" turned out to be a trumped-up story, or that some feckless member of the Bush administration was apologetic about something he had no reason to apologize for. And they say Rove is a political genius? Sheesh!
I'd like to hear more of the facts.
2007-03-13 06:42:23 · answer #1 · answered by American citizen and taxpayer 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
General theory says they were fired so the AG could appoint new people in their place.
Even if we ignore the rumors that they may have been fired because the prosecuted Republicans despite political pressure, or refused to prosecute Democrats (when there was no case) merely to suit political agendas -- even if we ignore that....
The timing is too convenient. Congress had recently passed a law changing the appointment process for interim US Attorneys. Rather than being appointed by federal judges, the US Attorneys would now be appointed by the AG. And rather than their interim appointments being only temporary, the appointments could last indefinitely. Which allows the positions to be stacked with political appointees.
2007-03-13 06:39:49 · answer #2 · answered by coragryph 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
So, Clinton fires nearly all the US attorneys when he takes office and it is not a controversy. But 8 get fired when GW is in office and the world is coming to an end.
Yea, there's no bias in the media...
2007-03-13 06:40:37 · answer #3 · answered by ML 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Unless the next President takes an oath not to fire any of the sitting US attorneys upon taking office this is a non story
2007-03-13 06:37:14 · answer #4 · answered by espreses@sbcglobal.net 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
US Attorneys are there at the president's convenience.
Clinton cleaned house when he came in and dropped all 93.
2007-03-16 11:55:10 · answer #5 · answered by Chainsaw 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think it is much a do about nothing. Just more Dems trying to cause trouble with Bush instead of actually doing something constructive.
2007-03-13 06:41:23 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
no he shouldn't be made to step down..he should be sent to prison...along with Sutton!
EDIT TO ADD----
If our beloved Alberto can replace them...just who IS going to take their place...more people to push the amnesty agenda...
Scary.
2007-03-13 06:36:58 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋