2007-03-27 02:15:34 · 20 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
No. Regardless of what you think of the Bush administration, the prosecutors serve at the pleasure of the executive branch. They can be fired for any reason or no reason at all.
However, if it is discovered that the administration was pressuring these prosecutors to bring up phoney or unsubstantiated charges against political rivals, there SHOULD be an investigation and a special prosecutor. The executive branch only appoints these people, they cannot give them orders or tell them how to do their jobs.
2007-03-27 02:37:32 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Your reasoning fails. Obama has asked for attention of his cupboard appointments in the previous he's happening of work so as that they might have expedited confirmations. the US Senate has been protecting HEARINGS on the folk who would be contributors of the Obama cupboard. as a result, the contest occasion has an criminal duty to ask questions approximately their skills and historic past. Obama has asked the Congress for particular law that he needs as component of his administration's classes. it particularly is purely before his inauguration besides the undeniable fact that it particularly is a ingredient of his administration's coverage and course. it would be irresponsible for the Republican minority to permit those classes to circulate unchallenged while they're of course against the suitable hobbies of the country. The GOP contributors symbolize one hundred MILLION human beings who should have their voices heard. The Democrats can no longer and should no longer ignore approximately those human beings. did no longer Obama say he needed a BI-PARTISAN government? FYI - Bush grow to be no longer "of course" a "disaster." while the airborne dirt and dust settles and the Bush-haters circulate directly to different stupidities, purpose diagnosis will tutor that he grow to be a a techniques better president than any of them might ever anticipate. it particularly is thrilling how lots of his classes and rules Obama is adopting, isn't it? seem for many extra to come back. that often is the data of Bush's achievement. you are able to not relatively anticipate to take human beings to activity for criticizing Obama once you spend maximum of your submit making ignorant accusations approximately Republicans and conservatives. you have no theory who "those human beings" are and in the event that they have any association with the Republican occasion.
2016-10-20 01:13:32 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't think so. Let the congressional committees do their jobs. An independent prosecutor just muddies the water and makes the congress less accountable for their actions. Let's not stoop to the level of the cons in their witch hunt of Clinton.
2007-03-27 02:24:37 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋
No they all agree it was legal...they just want a reason to embarrass the Pres more....why wasnt there a hearing on Clintons 93....fiar is fair...if we have the hearing make it for BOTH....and Hillery and the travel staff...
2007-03-27 02:45:37 · answer #4 · answered by Real Estate Para Legal 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
ah, NO.
Maybe a special prosecutor should be appointed to investigate some congressmen and have them prosecuted.
2007-03-27 02:18:47 · answer #5 · answered by az 4 · 3⤊ 2⤋
What would that accomplish - except to spend tax dollars that the American people would have to pay to get a directory published listing all the horrific problems Bush and his administration has caused? Get real - contact your representatives and senators and demand justice and end party politics!
2007-03-27 02:45:21 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Individual freedom is the dream of our age. It's what our leaders promise to give us, it defines how we think of ourselves and, repeatedly, we have gone to war to impose freedom around the world. But if you step back and look at what freedom actually means for us today, it's a strange and limited kind of freedom.
Politicians promised to liberate us from the old dead hand of bureaucracy, but they have created an evermore controlling system of social management, driven by targets and numbers. Governments committed to freedom of choice have presided over a rise in inequality and a dramatic collapse in social mobility. And abroad, in Iraq and Afghanistan, the attempt to enforce freedom has led to bloody mayhem and the rise of an authoritarian anti-democratic Islamism. This, in turn, has helped inspire terrorist attacks in Britain. In response, the Government has dismantled long-standing laws designed to protect our freedom.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctwo/noise/?id=trap
2007-03-27 02:20:59 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
At this point, since they're refusing to testify, I'd say yes. I was hoping they'd have the integrity to testify and just get this over with, but clearly, since they refuse, there is something to hide, and we deserve to know what that is.
2007-03-27 02:35:32 · answer #8 · answered by Bush Invented the Google 6 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Yeah, but it'll never happen... although the handful of us that are still awake are aware of what's going on, nothing will be done, as usual.
2007-03-27 02:22:22 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋
Who really cares that a shark was fired?
2007-03-27 02:26:59 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋