next presidential election and those are the states where Gonzales fired the nine judges in the latest Bush controversy to insure "cooperative" republican judges.
2007-03-28 06:36:01 · 6 answers · asked by Raven 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
It was 8 attorneys, very strategic attorneys who decide whether or not to bring charges. The latest pub mantra is to scream "conspiracy theorist" when they're afraid of the facts. By now I would have thought they would stop comparing what Bush did re the firings to Clinton (and many other presidents) to make a clean sweep at the start of their term, not midway as Bush did.
2007-03-28 07:09:53 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 3⤋
Clinton fired 93 judges when he took office. The judges are there at the pleasure of the president. They can fire them for wearing funny shoes if they want to. They are also appointed by the President. Clinton chose 93 hand picked ones. Bush only got rid of a few that he found did not agree with the way he sees things need to be done. That's all there is to it and only mind numb, CNN watching, liberals think anything else about it.
2007-03-28 19:39:33 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 3⤋
Sounds right except for the facts. One, there was 8 firings two, it was attorneys not judges.
2007-03-28 13:46:13 · answer #3 · answered by ReedRothchild 3 · 4⤊ 0⤋
It was 8 and they were US attorneys not judges. You need to get the facts straight before jumping to conclusions.
2007-03-28 13:41:52 · answer #4 · answered by Elizabeth Howard 6 · 5⤊ 3⤋
Oh Lord, here we go. Hey!! Conspiracy theorists! Over here!
2007-03-28 13:39:35 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 4⤋
sounds like the way they operate to me
2007-03-28 13:40:17 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 6⤋