If the united states Attorney General is extremely biased, should he/she be in such an important position?
2007-03-13 18:16:18 · 16 answers · asked by Chi Guy 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
matt (below) Did not Janet Reno also launch and investigatigation into Clinton at some point? Correct me if I'm wrong.
2007-03-13 18:27:21 · update #1
Ok, I know this isn't answering your question, but I must add this about Gonzalez....he's a an arrogant, self-inflated, jerk who hates the "little" people. My mother worked under him in TX while he was the SOS here. She met him a few times and he was so rude, wouldn't even look her in the eye, even though she was a 20+ year employee with a great track record. She was never treated so coldly by any SOS. A lot of the other employees of him felt the same.
Anyways, I didn't answer your question, but just wanted to give you an example of this man's character.
2007-03-13 18:23:47 · answer #1 · answered by ♥austingirl♥ 6 · 2⤊ 2⤋
No. Bush told him who to fire. He's a little more subtle than Janet Reno, who killed a few children at Waco.
Whether or not a president launches an investigation is irrelevant. Janet Reno was a disaster for an attorney general. The only reason Clinton did not fire her was because she wouldn't launch any REAL investigations on him or Hillary.
2007-03-13 18:22:25 · answer #2 · answered by Matt 5 · 4⤊ 2⤋
How soon we forget ?
As everyone once knew but has tried to forget, Mr. Webster 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.
2007-03-13 18:35:10 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
I'm sure this has been pointed out before, but Clinton fired all of the attorneys when he took office. All of them. Should the president be in such an important position?
And all they could get him on was perjury?
2007-03-13 18:28:06 · answer #4 · answered by spewing_originality 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
that's going to also be said that presently after information of Neil Bush’s involvement in the S&L scandal hit the click his father, George Bush Sr., presented the barren area hurricane campaign in Iraq, which for this reason had the outcome of creating Neil’s call right away fade from the headlines. as well, at the same time as Neil Bush's divorce proceeding were exposing more beneficial backroom Bush dealings, united states replaced into once back bombarded with conflict propaganda for Operation Iraq Freedom.
2016-12-01 23:31:57 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, President Bush used his cabinet and and Attorney General Gonzalez used his staff.
2007-03-14 12:19:32 · answer #6 · answered by clwkcmo 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This question should be about Bush...
Yes Gonzales should be fired but at the same time, Bush should get the axe too because Gonzales was only doing what he was told to do by the Administration...
2007-03-16 16:51:27 · answer #7 · answered by BeachBum 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Will you please get over it?? So the people got fired. Lots of attorneys who are lazy get fired from positions...in fact, lots of people get fired who don't perform in their jobs well.
Why would anyone consider him biased? When HR departments of big corporations give evaluations and look over records...you know how that goes. So many complaints against someone and 'out they go.' Why should those attorneys be considered 'unfireable'? Maybe there are things they didn't do that they should have, or things they did they shouldn't have. Besides, most attorneys I know (and I know MANY) are dorks and love themselves beyond anyone else. They have a 'me first' complex that never goes away.
2007-03-13 18:31:33 · answer #8 · answered by chole_24 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
I suppose it was better when Clinton fired 93 of 94 attorneys when he took office? The hypocritical side of the dems comes out more and more everyday.
2007-03-13 18:23:44 · answer #9 · answered by Cinner 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
OMG, Matt made me spew my drink!
I hate to admit it, but I haven't been watching the news lately....I don't know much about it at all.
Hey, Chi - is the world still turning?!? I agreed with you *twice* tonight....I also think public ed and immigration are the 2 biggies. <
;o)
2007-03-13 18:23:53 · answer #10 · answered by Jadis 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋