Gonzales is still saying that he didn't have anything to do with the firings and Bush says he wasn't involved. But then Bush comes out and says he supports Gonzales on the decision to fire them.
If Gonzales wasn't involved in the decision then how can Bush support him in the decision he says he didn't make?
And how can the President support a decision he says he didn't know about by a person who says he wasn't involved???
And who the heck is making these decisions if nobody in charge knows about them?
2007-03-25 01:03:30 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Delphi, the President says he didn't fire them.
The Attorney General says he didn't fire them.
Did they fire themselves???
2007-03-25 01:13:48 · update #1
Buzzard, if Bush had fired all 93 this past year, I wouldn't be complaining. But he only fired ones who prosecuted Republican politicians and weren't responding to pressure to prosecute specific Democratic ones.
2007-03-25 01:44:35 · update #2
Tommy G - nice response. Which goes exactly to my question - why couldn't anybody in the administration give a straight answer instead of making up a pack of lies about it?
2007-03-25 01:46:06 · update #3
Because a straightforward and truthful answer would make the Bush administration look very bad and would probably reveal illegal conduct. The problem here is that they didn’t come up with a plausible story before they fired the US attorneys and they’ve gotten caught telling lies.
2007-03-25 06:29:44 · answer #1 · answered by tribeca_belle 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
of direction they're. they're constantly hiding something heinous. that's what they do. the priority isn't that the U. S. legal experts have been ousted. maximum all incoming presidents do this. that's the while and the why those US legal experts have been fired it is the scandal. playstation . some individuals think of that's no huge deal that the Justice Dept be corrupted for Whitehouse political benefit. besides the fact that, even some properly respected Republican leaders are calling for Gonzales to renounce or be fired. Gonzales lied to Congress related to those firings. LIED TO CONGRESS.
2016-10-20 10:04:51 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It works like this. The president asks his advisers and cabinet to handle parts of all the things that demand his attention. The attorney general also has staff that he has handling situations. They are in charge of identifying and dealing with problems. They bring it to the attention of either the President or the Attorney General, which ever they report to, the Prez signs off on it and the AG signs off on it and it happens. The amount of information released to congress will attest to this being what happened. They were fired because it was felt that, although they were in some cases quite good at their job, the job would be better done by some one else. They hold what is the equivalent of a cabinet job and can be replaced at anytime.
2007-03-25 01:40:29 · answer #3 · answered by Tommy G. 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Let's see if this concept can be grasped: The US Attorneys are POLITICAL APPOINTEES. That's why Clinton could fire all of them and hire new ones. US Attorneys work at the pleasure of the POTUS.
Now, why hasn't Bush said this nice and loud for the reporters? I don't know.
Why did Alberto Gonzales comment the way he did? I don't know.
2007-03-25 02:17:15 · answer #4 · answered by Delray 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Maybe you should have asked,
How bad is the American justice system,
or are we in trouble or not?
How about the constitution that protects liars like Rowe from telling the truth, The right not to testify against yourself was written 200 years ago they didn't have any idea that our country would get to be so corrupt. we are in real trouble and there is no way out soon, the laws we have are only for the guilty not the Innocent
get involved .
2007-03-25 01:11:23 · answer #5 · answered by t-bone 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋
He is going to have to, Congress is rewriting legislation right now for getting Bush in front of a investigative committee.
2007-03-25 01:48:17 · answer #6 · answered by UNDERDOG 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The fact that The Media doesn't remind Americans that the Clinton Administration, fired ALL FREAKIN' NINTEY-THREE doesn't get a blip on the screen. It's all Politics, Partner. Don't buy into it. Check all of the facts. Report to us, when you've done that.
2007-03-25 01:27:20 · answer #7 · answered by Nunya Bidniss 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
It doesn't matter. It is a non issue. The President can hire and fire those attorneys at his discretion and he doesn't need a reason. GET OVER IT!
Reply to addition details. IT STILL DOESN'T MATTER!
They got fired because they were Democrat supporters and weren't working in the interests of the President. I would have fired them too!
2007-03-25 01:11:11 · answer #8 · answered by Delphi 4 · 4⤊ 3⤋
Because the answer would be 'They were involved in investigations of top Rep figures so we had to get them out of the way too'.
2007-03-25 01:23:23 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
They have.
But the straight answer isn't the "smoking gun" that the partisan Dem's are seeking.
So, we investigate...and we spin...and we pontificate.
And in the end, we finish right where we began.
2007-03-25 04:22:21 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋