Bush/Gonzalez attorney firings: Did Bush fire everyone in January 2001?

Question

I've heard that Clinton asked everyone to resign when he came in, and that it's a common practice - but I think the current scandal is along the lines that Bush got rid of everyone when he first came into office, and then again let some go when they wouldn't do what he wanted politically. However, a key differentiator is if he got rid of everyone in 2001, or kept them around and just decided to get rid of them later. Please provide a reliable source along with the answer - thanks!

By the way, I understand that getting rid of everyone en masse is wrong anyway, but that's relative. What I'm specifically looking for is verifiable confirmation one way or the other that the attorney firings were worse than what Clinton did, or were business as usual.

Answer 1

Q: How often are U.S. attorneys fired?

A: Excluding the current controversy, the Congressional Research Service found just five instances over 25 years in which U.S. attorneys were fired by the president or resigned following reports of questionable conduct. A Reagan-era prosecutor was fired and later convicted in federal court in connection with charges that he leaked confidential information. A Clinton appointee resigned over allegations he bit a topless dancer on the arm during a visit to an adult club following a loss in a big drug case. The CRS study did not include departures that followed a change in presidential administration, when turnover is common.
http://fe25.news.re3.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070306/ap_on_go_ot/prosecutors_q_a

According to former Clinton chief-of-staff John Podesta:

"Mr. Rove's claims today that the Bush administration's purge of qualified and capable U.S. attorneys is "normal and ordinary" is pure fiction. Replacing most U.S. attorneys when a new administration comes in - as we did in 1993 and the Bush administration did in 2001 - is not unusual. But the Clinton administration never fired federal prosecutors as pure political retribution. These U.S. attorneys received positive performance reviews from the Justice Department and were then given no reason for their firings."

Answer 2

More than two weeks after a former U.S. attorney in New Mexico alleged he was fired for not prosecuting Democrats, the White House and Justice Department are still struggling to explain the roles of President Bush, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and other key officials in the dismissals of eight federal prosecutors late last year.

The Bush administration's account of the firings has shifted repeatedly over the past week as new e-mails and other evidence have come to light. The precise roles of Gonzales, presidential adviser Karl Rove and Bush himself remain unclear, even as calls for Gonzales' resignation mount.

Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-Huntington Beach (Orange County), became the third Republican lawmaker to call for Gonzales' ouster, saying Friday, "It would benefit this administration if the attorney general was replaced with someone with a more professional focus rather than personal loyalty" to Bush.

Seven U.S. attorneys were fired Dec. 7, after another was let go months earlier, with little explanation from Justice Department officials, who later told Congress that the dismissals were related to their job performance. Several former prosecutors have since alleged intimidation, including improper telephone calls from GOP lawmakers or their aides, and have described threats of retaliation by a Justice Department official.

While the firings themselves initially prompted questions from Congress, a major issue for lawmakers has since become whether they were misled in testimony by Gonzales and Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty, and subsequently in public explanations by the Justice Department and the White House. "The story keeps changing, which neither does them or the public any good," said Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. "They ought to gather all the facts and tell the public the truth."

Answer 3

According to some Bush was handed a well oiled machine and had no need to fire any one. Clinton did such a good job, that Bush consider keeping Janet Reno for her excellent for the at Waco and Elion from Cuba.

Yea, sure!

Answer 4

back-to-back hearings in the Senate and House, former U.S. 8attorney David C. Iglesias of New Mexico and five other former prosecutors recounted specific instances in which some said they felt pressured by Republicans on corruption cases and one said a Justice Department official warned him to keep quiet or face retaliation.

Iglesias's allegations of congressional interference have prompted a Senate ethics committee inquiry. Yesterday he offered new details about telephone calls he received in October from Sen. Pete V. Domenici (R-N.M.) and Rep. Heather A. Wilson (R-N.M.), saying he felt "leaned on" and "sickened" by the contacts seeking information about an investigation of a local Democrat.

Another former prosecutor, John McKay of Seattle, alleged for the first time that he received a call from the chief of staff to Rep. Doc Hastings (R-Wash.), asking about an inquiry into vote-fraud charges in the state's hotly contested 2004 guber8natorial election. McKay said he cut the call short.

Ed Cassidy, a former Hastings aide who now works for House Minority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio), said yesterday that the call was routine and did not violate "permissible limits" on contact with federal prosecutors. Hastings, the ranking Republican on the House ethics committee, also said that the exchange was "entirely appropriate."

In remarks after the hearings, McKay said that officials in the White House counsel's office, including then-counsel Harriet E. Miers, asked him to explain why he had "mishandled" the governor's race during an interview for a federal judgeship in September 2006. McKay was informed after his dismissal that he also was not a finalist for the federal bench.

White House spokesman Scott Stanzel declined last night to respond to McKay's comments.

Answer 5

Actually Clinton fired and did not ask everyone to resign...he did however allow the NJ attorney to stay.

And no, it is not a common practice, the Clinton's were the first.

Answer 6

No, Bush did not fire them all in 2001. Even if he had fired them all in early 2005, that would at least be partially explainable.

The issue is not that some or all US Attys were fired. It's that these individuals may have been fired because they were not serving a political agenda, and were instead doing their job in a non-partisan way.

And being fired for that reason is unethical, and a violation of the codes of professional responsibility that the AG must follow.

Answer 7

He has the right to fire US attorneys at his discretion, and the democrats are politicizing this because that is what liberals idiots do. They are mad because they signed a bill without reading it that got rid of the confirmation process of appointing new attorneys. Just more liberal sniveling.