What do you think of this, Bush supporters ?

Question

"The Senate, voted to strip Gonzales of his authority to fill U.S. attorney vacancies without Senate confirmation. Democrats contend the Justice Department and White House purged eight federal prosecutors, some of whom were leading political corruption investigations, after a change in the Patriot Act gave Gonzales the new authority."

Oops.. what do we see here ? The truth finally surfacing ?
Wow ...

Look at that: Gonzales fired attorneys "some of whom were leading political corruption investigations"...
So this gives a reason for firing them and also fills in another missing gap, doesn't it ?

P.S. pls don't insult and be polite, otherwise i will report you :)

Source:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070321/ap_on_go_pr_wh/fired_prosecutors

To SadaamLiedPeopleDied:
If there was no problem and no corruption and nothing to hide, then why does the president insist SO much that there are not any written records, doing it on private and NOT under oath ?

You say Bush "cares about this country and the US people".
In this case why did we go to war with Iraq ? Is it for National interest ? 3000 dead so far and thousands others without arms and legs.
What has he done to help the Katrina victims ?

However, billion dollar contracts go to straight companies with no bid, like Halliburton, to which Cheney was CEO.

This doesn't show much support for our people does it ?

bubkiss - lol. I have no reason to. You can express your opinion, which is what I'm after.

Answer 1

And on top of that we have!

Well Gonzales can kiss it goodbye! More corruption from this president!

By JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS, Associated Press Writer 28 minutes ago

"Valerie Caproni, the FBI's general counsel, testified that steps were already being taken to rectify the problems, which she called "a colossal failure on our part."

"We're going to have to work to get the trust of this committee back, and we know that's what we have to do, and we're going to do it," Caproni said.

That did little to appease lawmakers who said they had fought hard to give the Justice Department wide latitude to chase terrorists in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks.
"From the attorney general on down, you should be ashamed of yourself," said Rep. Darrell Issa (news, bio, voting record), R-Calif. "We stretched to try to give you the tools necessary to make America safe, and it is very, very clear that you've abused that trust."

Some Republicans, however, said the FBI's expanded spying powers were vital to tracking terrorists.
"The problem is enforcement of the law, not the law itself," said Rep. Lamar Smith (news, bio, voting record) of Texas, the panel's senior GOP member. "We need to be vigilant to make sure these problems are fixed."

Fine's review, authorized by Congress over Bush administration objections, found that the number of national security letters requested by the FBI skyrocketed after the Patriot Act became law.

He also found more than 700 cases in which FBI agents obtained telephone records through "exigent letters" which asserted that grand jury subpoenas had been requested for the data, when in fact such subpoenas never been sought. He called those instances "the most troubling aspect of this."

Rep Smith of Texas should try reading the Constitution sometime, that's what is wrong with the Patriot Act, it violates the US Constitution! A tradition with the Bush Administration!

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

None of the firings were for job performance, and no such thing exists in 3,000 e-mails, and you don't know for a factt!

It is traditional for the incoming party to replace attorney's, at the begginning of their term, not 6 years into it. It is almost unheard of and all but 3 who were fired before this case, were fired for cause, not that they were investigating Republican crimes! Talk about Obstruction of Justice! A US Attorney is usually appointed for 4 years!

And many of Clintons got Ax the at the beginning of his administration and they were Republicans, that's reason enough to fire them!

Who want's to bet Gonzales will be gone by the end of the week?

Answer 2

Really?

1. Bill Clinton fired 93 US Attorneys upon taking office

2. Bill Clinton fired 30 additional attorneys during his tenure. Some of whom were investigating corruption.

3. The reports I'm hearing is Bush had those attorneys fired because they weren't doing enough to investigate Voter Fraud.

I think the next President is going to be a Democrat. And I think the Democrats are purring themselves in a box. When the next President takes over, she'll then be bound by all those restrictions Congress placed on the previous President.

Hillary wont mind having her Attorney General restricted, will she? Do you think Obama wants to have his Attorney General restricted?

The President can fire the Attorney Generals at will. Period.

I think this is a major double standard.

Clinton fires 93 + 30 Attorney Generals = OK, not a word
Bush fires 8 = major crisis.

nope, no double-standard here.

Answer 3

This is a non-story. Bill Clinton in one of his first acts after being inaugurated, crowned, whatever, 1993, fired all 93 US attorneys. This is quite common. You get your own people in there. These are appointed positions.

Now, the thing with Clinton was, he was aiming for one US attorney, and that was the guy in Arkansas, the guy in Little Rock. I forget what it was about, but Clinton wanted the guy gone, and to cover or mask the fact that he was aiming at one single guy, got rid of all 93. Nobody said a word. Where was Chuck Schumer? Why wasn't he out there demanding an investigation back then? Oh no, he would never do so because Bill Clinton was one of his own.

Answer 4

it's all drama. I'd take it all with a grain of salt. I just feel badly that so much time is spent by our government and money wasted as well on inquisitions. Sometimes things happen just because and for no twisted reason like they make it sound.

How do we solve things from getting that far out of wack? I don't know, perhaps getting rid of the computers, the forums and discussion groups and nasty political websites would be a start. There's too many fingers in the pie, too many people who think they have a say-so that confuses the entire situation and makes it long and drawn out. One day we will finally get tired at our money being wasted like this and do something about it.

Answer 5

Every president has had the power to hire and fire any attorneys they please, unobstructed! At the will of the president... that's the law, always has been! The Democrats, as usual, have yet unleashed another propaganda weapon for those of you too ignorant to understand what's going on, and so far it's working! The Democrats' demagoguery can only work if they're playing to an ignorant audience - (and they're laughing at you all the way into power! Wise up people, and get educated so you can know the truth from the lies!
GEEEEEZE !
Oh yeah, and... P.S. I didn't hear any of you hollering "FOUL" when President Clinton fired 93 attorneys when he was in office?!?!? (HELLO?!)

Answer 6

I'm a 29 year Republican, I voted a straight Democrat ticket in November to try to stop this madness. I will not be a Democrat either.

I want Mr. Gonzales out NOW!
He's a member of La Raza, a group that's trying to take our country saying it belongs to them.

Answer 7

I can not, for the life of me, understand why these wimpy @$$ed Republicans don't stand up and fight these morons that are so bent out of shape over these 8 lawyers being given the axe. Hell, Clinton fired 93 at the get go when he was sworn in as president. They are picked by the president so it stands to reason that the president can also fire them. By the way, what have the democrats accomplished since they gained the majority in congress? Let's see-minimum wage bill------------investigations, investigations, investigations, seems as if they just want to prevent the Bush administration from accomplishing anything by tying them up on defending themselves against threats of law suits, investigations and witch hunts. I'm surprised they haven't moved with more vigor towards impeachment of Bush and Cheney. I guess their witch hunts are not turning up anything they can use.

Answer 8

evaluate this. heavily, take a 2nd and think of roughly this: the yankee militia soundly defeated the communists in Viet Nam in each substantial conflict fought - inclusive of the TET offensive which wisely crushed them. For all reason and purpose, the North Viet Namese have been defeated - yet they checked in with the yankee media and, to their utter amazement, they found out that they've been prevailing. And, real sufficient, we lost the conflict at abode and withdrew our troops - assuring the Viet Cong a victory and the ensuing bloodbath. Do you fairly think of this little bit of background is lost on the terrorists? it fairly is why i think that public reflects and rallies geared in the direction of our president in a time of conflict is the comparable as helping our enemy. that is relatively not that not straightforward to connect the dots.

Answer 9

All US Attorneys serve at the pleasure of the President. Not only that but these 8 he himself appointed.

Again, Clinton fired all 93. I guess it is OK for a dem but not a rep. Double standard here once again?

Answer 10

I think it is an unprecedented power grab by the Senate. I doubt if it will stand up in court.