I keep seeing investigations, he had to have done something wrong otherwise why would there be investigations? I was told today, don't be fooled he did (did do something wrong) or why would there be investigations? and I'm like still clueless. I'm not going to play smart. I know he fired fed DAs, and had the right, and that it was for political reasons, but why is that or how could that be a crime?
2007-06-15 17:59:46 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
speedracer, you are 1st, I am serious, please give me the answer.please?
2007-06-15 18:35:23 · update #1
I have to tell you all, I love you guys. none of you has had a concrete answer yet, so I don't feel like an uninformed idiot anymore.
2007-06-15 18:38:24 · update #2
billy free is lookin like the genius here so far.
2007-06-15 18:55:48 · update #3
maarten, hugh and just - hanging, you guys seem to have the same source but I don't feel it's credible, what is it?
2007-06-15 19:00:54 · update #4
He is said to have fired federal prosecutors for political reasons. They are political appointees and their job is to prosecute the crimes that the administration deems as their agenda. All prosecuting attorneys are subject to political views even at the local level. A prosecutor is just the one that brings the charges and sees that the agenda of those that put them in office are carried out. If they had been judges I could see the up roar but they were not.
The investigations are so that the Democrats can flex and try to smear this administration a little more with out any intent to prove anything.
2007-06-15 18:08:56 · answer #1 · answered by ? 6 · 1⤊ 6⤋
it's a legal ethics question... more than an actual federal law question...
and there are ethical codes for the justice department... just as there is for congress...
now, I'm not a lawyer, so, I don't know the exact details... but I think it's basically got something to do with firing lawyers for political reasons vs. actual reasons (legal reasons or job performance reasons)...
bringing politics into the justice department blatantly is pretty much considered a "legal ethics no-no" the majority of the time...
presidents can kind of get away with it when they first get inaugurated, since they are saying that they don't agree with the legal stance (not political stance) of lawyers... of course you could argue otherwise, but to a degree it's a bit of leeway that most on both sides let slide...
but since no one seems to know the REASON why they were fired magically in the middle of the term... it looks very, very bad... ethically
2007-06-16 01:11:56 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The phrase "political reasons" has been watered down until people think it just means they fired prosecutors who had political opinions against the White House goals - not so.
Gonzales office may have used his office for election fraud and tampering with court cases AND lying to cover it up.
There has been testimony of directions to the fired prosecutors, supported by telephone logs, that suggests some of the prosecutors were fired for not using their office to bring spurious charges of election fraud against Democratic candidates in close elections, and fired for investigating Republican candidates at all.
2007-06-16 01:36:20 · answer #3 · answered by oohhbother 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
He lied about being involved in the firing of several attorneys--so far it appears that he was directly involved. A man in his position, should never lie and the sad thing is if the last election had turned out differently, we may not have known until much later.
2007-06-16 01:12:46 · answer #4 · answered by Joan J 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
He authorized investigation techniques which violated amendments 4, 5, 6, and 7 of our constitution... Seems pretty illegal to me.
The fired attorney thing is nonsense, but if it gets rid of Gonzales then I don't really care.
This is the guy that called the constitution "quaint".
2007-06-16 01:05:53 · answer #5 · answered by brooks b 4 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Ask all those people that served under the goon.
I don't even care legal or illegal.
All I can think of is him going to Ashcroft while he is in the hospital being treated for cancer, and pressuring the man about the stupid, illegal, wiretapping that monkey bush rammed down our throats.
If you support that out of your government representatives, then there is no possible way that you could see or understand why Gonzales should step aside.
Especially now, that all his underlings are jumping ship.
They know something...they don't want to be a part of it.
2007-06-16 01:05:23 · answer #6 · answered by powhound 7 · 3⤊ 2⤋
I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and believe that you are not that ignorant. Now think about this question a little bit longer.
2007-06-16 01:18:33 · answer #7 · answered by Speedracer 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I truly believe it all boils down to the handling of the border guard incident. Apparently specific border guards were accused of beating up and violating the rights of Mexicans caught sneaking over the border. So GONZALES a MEXICAN pressed some serious charges against those guards. I mean they were looking at mucho years in prison. Heres the kicker, all the illegal immigrants that were caught by these guards and deported back to Mexico got a free trip back into the U.S. (courtesy of the American tax payers) so they could testify against the United States Border Guards
2007-06-16 01:17:11 · answer #8 · answered by Delta/Bravo 3 · 0⤊ 4⤋
He did nothing illegal, he has the right to fire those prosecute rs. I believe Clinton fired over 100 and where was the news on that one.
2007-06-16 02:36:59 · answer #9 · answered by alfie 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Clarence Thomas was hounded by Ted Kennedy et al. LInda Chavez was hounded by Ted Kennedy et al. Colin Powell was demeaned by Ted Kennedy et al. The for this is obvious. The Democratic Party has a LONG history of racism, and way down deep part of it is still there. Sure, they'll make a person of color something like Surgeon General or Housing Secretary, but to put one in a position of REAL power is something they just can't stand.
Kent in SD
2007-06-16 01:13:05 · answer #10 · answered by duckgrabber 4 · 1⤊ 5⤋