If not, I'm going to bed. This has been a waste of time reading insults (and not even very good ones), inuendo, and filth!
How about this: Can anyone tell me how many Federal prosecutors were fired during the Clinton administration and WHY? Can anyone tell me how many have been fired during the Dubya years, and WHY?
2007-03-16 16:47:14 · 11 answers · asked by Joey's Back 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Yeah.
Clinton fired all 93 prosecutors. No big deal. Other administrations have had wholesale firings of them as well.
What Bush did was to selectively fire QUALIFIED people (all of whom were Republican appointees), replace them with political hacks, strictly for partisan political advantage, then lie to Congress about it.
The "prosecutor" appointed in Arkansas is a Rove operative who specializes in "opposition research" (digging up dirt on possible electoral opponents).
With Hillary Clinton as a possible candidate, it would have been his "job" to try and find "dirt" on her and report it to Rove.
Is this the kind of Federal Prosecutor you want?
2007-03-16 16:57:56 · answer #1 · answered by marianddoc 4 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Why does the Executive Department have to have a reason to fire ANY or ALL of it's employees?
Congress may be stepping into an area the law specifically has left to the Executive.
I just heard an interesting thought: If the Judicial Branch appointed prosecutors, you'd REALLY have a problem with fair and impartial trials. And if Congress hired and fired prosecutors, you cab be dang sure they'd be politically biased.
What, exactly, do those who are jumping on the political hype bandwagon prefer we do about employing prosecutors?
Judicial, Legislative, and Executive. Which branch?
We know it would be a political nightmare if Congress started employing prosecutors, and the Judicial can't run both the bench AND the States prosecution.
It's not perfect, but the way it is has worked better than anything anyone else can come up with.
2007-03-17 00:04:40 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Good night hope tomorrow brings better
Sweet Dreams Sour Nightmares
Since we've decided to stay up we also have to look at when they were fired most purges are as a new administration takes office, it's a very common practice, but these individuals were fired, many with STELLAR work reviews 6 1/2 years in. Next we have to deal with the damning memo's coming showing an orchestrated plan to release those deemed not Bush friendly, also the newest info that Alberto Gonzales got Bush to NOT give security Clarence to to investigators checking into the wireless eavesdroping program when Gonazales was a probe of the investigation. This is a situation that reeks of obstruction and partisan politics
2007-03-16 23:56:25 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Slick Willy did the same as the Rodeo Clown, no doublt, but he also had two terms with a majority of Repubs in the Senate and House, which made his terms difficult, not like Dubya that got pretty much what he wanted during the first 4 years of fiasco. (Gee, I find it so much fun making fun of Dubya... I'm gonna miss that chimp and his sidekick "Shotgun DICK"... maybe we ought to chip in and send them both on a hunting vacation trip?)(you didn't think I'd let that go by, did you?).
Here's a major difference between both administrations, the Repubs were mostly interested in where Slick Willy inserted his "manhood" while the Dems don't really care where Dubya inserts his and WON'T even ask him, at least not YET... do you think that Condee... aw, never mind!
I sometimes think the Repubs were angry because Monica was a female (not an attractive one, at that... damn, Slick Willy chose THAT...? Wow, he must've been VERY desperate, the poor guy!)
2007-03-17 00:06:16 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
Why should this night be different from all other nights? When was the last time you saw a genuine politics question here? I've beem on for almost 6 months & I think I can couint such questions on my fingers.
Clinton fired 92/93 when he took office because he wanted to put his lackeys. Bush fired 8/93. I'm not sure the reasons. US Attorneys serve at the pleasure of the president.
2007-03-17 00:30:47 · answer #5 · answered by yupchagee 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Clinton fired the federal prosecutors at the beginning of his term, not in the middle of it. And he didn't fire them after they had been pressured to leak information about cases or begin investigations before November.
Is... is that the kind of answer you were hoping for?
2007-03-17 00:08:48 · answer #6 · answered by mykll42 2 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Sorry, I used all mine up before 5pm.
2007-03-16 23:52:25 · answer #7 · answered by MoltarRocks 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Don't count on getting your answer here.
Sweet Dreams!
2007-03-16 23:52:28 · answer #8 · answered by RidiculousTallness 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think it is better for you to go to sleep
2007-03-16 23:54:24 · answer #9 · answered by adjd j 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
no i can not answer those questions, because if i do, i will be the next vince foster
2007-03-16 23:52:29 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋