US attorneys firing? Can anyone explain?

Question

I've been reading a lot about this but don't really get it. Were these attorneys fired because of job performaance or what exactly? Why is it a "scandal"? Someone please explain the mystery behind this.

Answer 1

Well, the "scandal" is because it appears these US Attorneys were fired because their political and judicial views didn't go along w/ the Republican agenda. They were good lawyers doing a good job, but somewhere along the way, upper management decided they'd be a threat because they didn't believe exactly as they did. That's a big deal. When you start packing the judicial system with ONLY those people who agree w/ you, then you can sway alot of big decisions in this country. It's the same w/ the Supreme Court. The President gets to decide on the the Supreme court justices when a spot opens up. Do you think the President chooses someone who can be completely politically impartial or someone who will further their own political agenda? Yes,most presidents choose based on the judges record of decisions that go along w/ their parties' beliefs.

Answer 2

1. NO, they offened some body in the white house I guess as they've given a whole series of excuses as the paper work didn't back up each of the new reasons they'd think up for the firing.
2. You can't give someone great reviews then stand up and say they were fired because they do a poor job. That is the crux of the problem. Things went down hill from there.

Gonzo may be a fine personal lawyer but as head of the justice dept. he is a disgrace, doesn't have a clue what the %$^&*( is going on and there by has offened a lot of the senators. The guy is to stupid to be in that job.
Being a Rep. I hate to say so but Bush has yet again picked a person who is incapable of doing the job.


All these idiots had to do is say they were released to give someone else a chance to do the job that they'd done a great job and the Pres wished them well but no the idiots had to ...........etc.

Answer 3

The administration was not satisfied with the performance of the US Attorneys. Some were reportedly not interested in pursuing voter fraud cases. The so-called scandal was manufactured by liberals out to cause problems for the Administration, no matter what the circumstances. The President has the right to fire these attorneys. I think he learned it from Mr. Clinton, who fired all of the US Attorneys when he, Mr. Clinton, came into office. The left wing liberal kooks in this country are in a symbiotic relationship with the left wing liberal kooks in the main stream media. They use each other to try to dump on Mr. Bush for anything and everything.

Answer 4

i visit assume some issues in the past answering: l. the guy asking this question is an knowledgeable considerate individual. 2. That as an knowledgeable considerate individual you realize the flaws we can't be denied employment in america of a. Being denied(fired) out of your activity to your political ideals is against the regulation. curiously, specific information affirming that it fairly is precisely the case have been launched. for this reason, the outcry to have the criminal expert familiar step down. It on no account ceases to amaze me how people proceed to help the Bush administration no rely what includes easy. The final time my coronary heart advance into broken via a president advance into Richard M. Nixon, i advance into devastated via Watergate and fought with acquaintances to shelter Mr.Nixon. I even despatched him a letter of help and have been given a pretty letter returned denying all the allegations. you realize how that grew to become out. i'm nevertheless a registered Republican yet I actual have discovered the stressful way that those are in basic terms people such as you and me and that they do make blunders and that they do issues they could desire to no longer do. in basic terms via fact a guy is elected to the presidency does no longer make him proper. i visit attend and notice what the learn says. yet i think of there is adequate evidence to warrant an entire learn and that i watch with pastime for the end result. thank you to your question -ok-

Answer 5

Bush CAN fire them at will. When a pres comes into office they usually change almost all of them at one shot. Almost never int eh middle of the term.

When asked why they were fired, Gonzales and Bush said "For performance". Then it turned out that their performance was exemplary. Gonz. said "Well I didn't know anyhting about it, then his signature turned up on a doc from a meeting where they discussed who and how to fire. Then Bush said he knew nothing about it. But if the pres. has the authority to fire them.... how was this done if he was not involved? Who actually fired them?
The relevant statute–28 U.S.C. 541(c)–vests the power to remove U.S. Attorneys with the president ("Each United States attorney is subject to removal by the President.") As we've repeatedly been told, U.S. Attorneys serve at the pleasure of the President–not the pleasure of the Attorney General (and certainly not the pleasure of the Attorney General's chief of staff). The decision to fire a U.S. Attorney–much less eight of them–is unquestionably one for the president to make, so if President Bush was truly out of the loop on this, that's a problem in and of itself.

If the attorney general is saying that these U.S. attorneys lost his confidence because of their performance-related reasons, then he obviously reviewed the cases, reviewed their situations, reviewed their work records and came out with this reason for their dismissal. That means he was intimately involved.

Some crimes that a special prosecutor might one day look at:

1. Misrepresentations to Congress. The relevant provision, 18 U.S.C. § 1505, is very broad. It is illegal to lie to Congress, and also to “impede” it in getting information. Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty indicated to Congress that the White House’s involvement in firing the United States attorneys was minimal, something that Justice Department e-mail messages suggest to be untrue.
Attorney General Alberto Gonzales made his own dubious assertion to Congress: “I would never, ever make a change in a United States attorney position for political reasons.”

2. Calling the Prosecutors. As part of the Sarbanes-Oxley reforms, Congress passed an extremely broad obstruction of justice provision, 18 U.S.C. § 1512 (c), which applies to anyone who corruptly “obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding, or attempts to do so,” including U.S. attorney investigations

3. Witness Tampering. 18 U.S.C. § 1512 (b) makes it illegal to intimidate Congressional witnesses. Michael Elston, Mr. McNulty’s chief of staff, contacted one of the fired attorneys, H. E. Cummins, and suggested, according to Mr. Cummins, that if he kept speaking out, there would be retaliation

4. Firing the Attorneys. United States attorneys can be fired whenever a president wants, but not, as § 1512 (c) puts it, to corruptly obstruct, influence, or impede an official proceeding.

Let’s take the case of Carol Lam, United States attorney in San Diego. The day the news broke that Ms. Lam, who had already put one Republican congressman in jail, was investigating a second one, Mr. Sampson wrote an e-mail message referring to the “real problem we have right now with Carol Lam.” He said it made him think that it was time to start looking for a replacement.

Answer 6

Most of these attorneys were fired because they would not pursue pointless voter fraud cases in an attempt to discredit democrat candidates! If this sounds like something from the totalitarian regime of N. Korea, then you understand why there is concern!!

Answer 7

Gonzalez is a Republican appointee of Bush's. Because of the amount of convenient destruction of emails relating to this firing to prevent disclosure that it was ordered by the White House. It is being investigated because the firing is because these Lawyers were not Bush -Yes people. These lawyers had many good comments made about them prior to their handling of cases.

Answer 8

They got fired, Democrats in their fixated lets go after Bush for everything mentality claim it is a scandal, many with low IQs fell for it.