this is to all the people who like to add Gate to the end of any "Scandal". Its funny to see people huff and puff and call for the Attorney Generals resignation for firing 8 US attorneys, yet Janet Reno was ordered by President Clinton to fire all 93 US attorneys in a heartbeat back in 93'... i dont recall a massive uproar... let alone a single day of coverage.... clean slate right.... ..
2007-06-09 11:54:36 · 14 answers · asked by Aldo G 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
you people are halarious... so if President Bush would of fired all the current US attorneys in the beginning it would of been Ok... and libs wouldnt of said a peep right? just for your information.... all presidents have done this... and they are always for political reasons...left or right... now, i dont think thats very right.. but thats how its been.... its not Bush repressing civil liberties with the..... PATRIOT ACT!!!! AHHH!!!! Were all gonna die!!!
2007-06-09 12:03:09 · update #1
first off im not a republican... but i sure as hell not a liberal and secondly... im simply stating that why is there a double standard when every president has done this? could it be that this is a unpopular president who the media and the liberals in congress want to completely destroy so he can leave office as a corrupt politician, and hand over the white house to the democrats.... this is the same crap as the karl rove scooter libby AXIS OF EVIL!!!!! comon, get over yourselves...
2007-06-09 12:53:12 · update #2
Yes, our Lib friends are correct. Billy fired all the US attorneys at the beginning of his term because he couldn't be sure HOW MANY OF THEM WERE INVESTIGATING ONE OF HIS MANY, MANY, MANY SCANDALS. US Attorneys serve at the PRESIDENT'S PLEASURE......they are AT WILL employees and all presidents FIRE them when they want for whatever they want--bad hair days included.
2007-06-09 12:17:09 · answer #1 · answered by Cherie 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
When they fire them at the beginning of the term it's for the same reason as at the midpoint isn't it? So what's the difference? Is it just that they waited to see who was going to be for or against them first rather than just assuming that they all would be? Total hypocrisy, complete and total--if there's a no confidence vote, it will be because of a Democratically controlled Congress--isn't that exactly the same thing? Firing someone because they don't agree with their politics?
2007-06-09 12:23:00 · answer #2 · answered by Trav 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Had a pal that lived in a gated community. policies, policies and the value replaced into terrible and the value for the human beings residing there replaced into consistently going up each and each 12 months. on no account understood why the community in basic terms did no longer eliminate the gate, that they had injury ins in basic terms approximately another month and not in any respect caught the culprits. to date as i understand the gate continues to be there. What a waste of funds.
2016-12-12 16:30:53 · answer #3 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well you're a little early there bucko, watch as Congress gives a no confidence vote on Monday (it's already scheduled, so I see how informed you really are) Then we'll see how long the Gonz (heyyyyyyy with 2 thumbs down) lasts
2007-06-09 12:05:42 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Maybe to distract people from thinking about being raped by Big Oil. How many representatives are talking about that?
MLB Steriods,
Immigration Reform,
Global Warming,
Alberto Gonzales,
And on and on.....
oh yeah and why don't we convict more people like Scooter Libby for saying "I don't remember"
2007-06-13 08:27:57 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
it's call led "politics" you may want to start paying attention...
there are reasons for it... but it's been ALL OVER THE NEWS ON EVERY CHANNEL FOR MONTHS...
and it's been the SAME FOR EVERY PRESIDENT FOR THE PAST 50 YEARS... so don't give me the Rep/Dem stuff...
so either you just don't care how politics work... you don't care enough to pay attention to how they work... or you're just trying to stir things up...
either way... it's pretty pointless to try and explain a fairly simple concept that's been all over the news to you... if you haven't gotten it by now... doesn't look like your going to catch on...
is there a Republican that knows anything about politics?
2007-06-09 12:30:33 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Because this was done at the beginning of his term ,not mid way with political axes to grind. Hell even the Republicans in the senate see this, why the hell can't you?
2007-06-09 11:58:02 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
Uh...does this really have to be explained again?
When Clinton took office he fired them all, across the board. He didnt wait 6 years later and fire them because they weren't Republicaney enough like Bush had his lackeys do.
2007-06-09 12:02:11 · answer #8 · answered by Stephanie is awesome!! 7 · 3⤊ 2⤋
The difference is that this administration did it in the middle of the term for political reasons...do you listen to the media reports at all? This has been covered over and over.
2007-06-09 12:00:12 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
Because Republicans are about the countries business instead of pursuing endless investigations and inquiries.
2007-06-09 12:02:33 · answer #10 · answered by aiminhigh24u2 6 · 2⤊ 3⤋