Why was there no outrage when Clinton fired all 93 US attorneys when he took office in 1993?

Question

For full details about why it is not unusual to replace US attorneys, see here:
http://www.mahablog.com/2007/01/18/us-attorneys-its-the-replacing-stupid/

Today's Wall Street Journal editorial, The Hubbell Standard, also contains enlightening facts. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB117383831796236349.html?mod=opinion_main_review_and_outlooks

Answer 1

Because liberals obviously do no wrong. But in reality, where the rest of the sane thinking society is, they do not like to admit they are wrong. Clinton allowed the country to have 5 attacks against it without any real action taken afterwards. After the WTC 1993 bombing, Clinton did nothing about it, only thing he said about it was not to pay attention to the terrorists they are just looking for attention. He didn't even say anything to the survivors and victims or bring it up until a 1996 luncheon meeting. After that the Kenyan and Tarzanian US embassies were bombed by Al-Qaida terrorists, the Khobar Towers were bombed to make Saudi Arabia no longer be our allies and friends and supporters. They threatened our ally to try and threaten us, and the USS Cole bombing was done by Al-Qaida. Not to mention the fact Clinton was paid off by Saddam, along with other leaders of the world, to overlook the Al-Qaida training camps and his other illegal acts he was partaking in at the time. Clinton sold rocket technology to China for money and now China has a advanced rocket program that can take us out if it ever came down to it. Why doesn't anyone ever complain about this? No, can't do that. He was a democratic President who screwed us over big time, but can't admit it because that would make the whole party look bad in the process and out a lot of people in a bad light. All he is known for is committing adultery. That is all they see and all they think about when it comes to someone saying Clinton was a bad President. Goes to show how much they really know.

Answer 2

You people make me fear for the future of our country. The selective memory on both sides of the aisle is just astounding.

OK, some facts here.

First, it is common practice for a new President to replace the old President's appointees, which would include these judges. So there is nothing UNUSUAL about what Clinton did. I suspect Reagan did the same thing with all of Carter's appointed judges. I suspect Carter did the same with all of Ford's. When the White House changes parties, this is a common thing. It's just not common to do it in the middle of an administration, and it's not common to do it because the people in that position aren't moving fast enough on investigations into Democratic election procedures in the run-up to a national election, which seems to be the case that these judges are making. Whether there is any truth to their claims, I don't know.

And those of you whose brains evidently have holes in them seem to think that Clinton never got hounded for anything he did. You seem to have forgotten that Clinton got slammed by the media for firing the entire White House Travel group. You seem to have forgotten that all of the 1993 WTC bombers were arrested and convicted. You seem to have forgotten that after the Embassy bombings, we launched missiles at al Quida training bases. (Probably pointless, but he did SOMETHING.) You seem to forget that the Yemeni government rounded up and improsoned the USS Cole bombers. You seem to forget that there are more ways to combat international terrorism than with the 82nd Airborne. You seem to have forgotten those impeachment proceedings and Ken Star and 'that woman' that he 'never had sex with'. Clinton was the most bird-dogged President I've ever known, and I lived through Watergate.

So I would suggest that you try to get something to plug up the holes in your heads that are apparently allowing your brains to leak out, except that I suspect it's your mouth that is the problem.

Answer 3

Hillary did no longer ought to, at the same time as an administration ameliorations so do political appointees. If the previous administration were a Democrat, there may were no favor to regulate them, yet they serve on the exhilaration of the president so guess what, quit searching so desperately for excuses for Bush, he (Bush) easily fired his own prosecutors, ones that he put in workplace, Republicans themselves. basically no longer the kind he needs in a prosecutorial position, the kind which will do his bidding on judicial concerns and ignore justice in want of kissing his fanny first. Hmmmm. Travelgate replaced into made a lot of, yet back there replaced right into a reason that did not get a lot press, specifically because the click replaced into indignant at Clinton for eliminating a perk that they had develop into conscious of. it style of feels the accurate of the commute branch replaced into taking money and putting into his own account, no longer for illicit applications, yet basically to carry the money til it replaced into necessary. Then he may go back it, no individual suggested he did some thing unlawful, in spite of the undeniable fact that it particular appeared undesirable so he replaced into fired. i don't know why I bothered answering, i know you in undemanding words want to listen for your wondering that Hillary is a swamp creature shown, yet I inspite of the actuality that that considering that i replaced into easily alive on the time that's advisable to understand what truly befell.

Answer 4

Quite simple Clinton is a democrat with the press the democrats get a pass on most things unless it is completely indefensible if he had fired 93 democrats it would be a story, but it was republicans this is a non story.

Answer 5

Few people know this, but Bill Clinton is, in fact, infallible. Yes! It's true! He did no wrong, can do no wrong and cannot be held accountable for anything! Don't you recall the utopia he created while president? He is to be held in god-like reverance for all he accomplished during his 8 year term: all those US attorney's NEEDED firing, along with the entire travel office. His appeasement of terror is legendary and thank God he saved us from those weirdoes at Waco! Lord knows we can't have people owning guns and reading the Bible! Don't forget his brave retreat from Somalia and the troops he sent to Bosnia more than 10 years ago who are still there! You know, peacekeeping and nation building take time - it takes a guy with the willingness to invest American lives in the struggle of other independent nations to really do the job right.

Answer 6

Did you even read the article?

Presidents may fire U.S. attorneys, and they do so routinely at the beginning of a new administration.

It is unusual to fire U.S. attorneys in mid-term except in cases of gross misconduct, which doesn’t appear to be the case for the forced resignations under discussion.

Answer 7

There are no "windows" president's have to use to fire a U.S. attorney. This is typical brat behavior by the Democrats with their little puppy press in tow!

Answer 8

it's common practice for an incoming president to fire the staff of the previous commander-in-chief. once they're cleared out they then hire their allies and appoint them to respective positions.

Answer 9

Mainly because he didn't allow terrorists to fly planes into the WTC (and even the people that managed to bomb it were all caught and brought to justice).

He also didn't get the country into an unending war in Iraq.

People let other stuff slide.

Answer 10

Let the President fire whom he wants, just make the tax cuts permanent.