Rove, Miers to Testify in Prosecutor Firings

It was covered in various articles 2 years ago. It was also covered in DOJ emails released during this fiasco:

Here is how Kyle Sampson (Gonzales ex-Chief of Staff) described it in email:

• “Clinton fired all Bush USAs in one fell swoop. Has been described to me as ‘have your offices cleared out by the end of the week.’ We fired all Clinton USAs (except Mueller and Warner), but staggered it more and permitted some to stay on for, several months (including Mary Jo White in SDNY who we permitted to stay on for many months).”
[email March 04, 2007]

• “Reagan U.S. Attorneys appointed in 1981 stayed on through the entire Reagan Administration; Bush41 even had to establish that Reagan-appointed U.S. Attorneys would not be permitted to continue on through the Bush41 Administration.”
[email January 09, 2005]

I know I’m going to be in the minority here...

but if congress creates an agency they are empowered to investigate how its run even if the people they suspect of wrong doing work for the President. The alternative is that the administration can use any agency to whatever they want.

Do we really want that - putting aside how we feel about Rove - do we want the Obama White House and future administrations to simply do whatever they want with impunity by forbidding Justice from investigating and quashing any attempt by congress?

"Clinton fired ALL the lawyers. Rove should tell them to shove it."

Clinton fired US attorneys appointed by the previous(George H.W.Bush) administration. That is not considered unusual protocol. When a new administration takes over all US attorneys submit their resignation. It is up to the new President to accept some or all of those resignations.

The 8 US attorneys that were fired by the Bush administration, were not Clinton appointees, they were appointed by Bush in his first term. That is what is at the root of this controversy. Except for under the most extraordinary circumstances, that type of action is never really taken. For that reason, questions have arisen about the grounds for those dismissals.

Here is some background compiled by the CRS (Congressional Research Service)

Record by presidential administration:

Ronald Reagan: Dismissed all previously appointed attorneys en masse and replaced them upon assuming office. All of those attorneys who left office before completing their two four-year terms left for personal reasons, with the exception of the two mentioned above (Kennedy and Petro).[11]

George H.W. Bush: Kept appointees from the previous administration. Only one attorney's "resignations [was] the result of questionable conduct." Frank McNamara, Jr. resigned because he had “been the focus of heated dispute since the Justice Department announced in November [1988] that he was the target of an internal probe.”[12]

Bill Clinton: Dismissed all previously appointed attorneys en masse and replaced them upon assuming office. Those attorneys who left office before completing their two four-year terms left for personal reasons. Two of those "resignations were the result of questionable conduct." Larry Colleton resigned in 1994 after being videotaped grabbing a reporter by the throat, and Kendall Coffey resigned in 1996 amidst allegations of biting a topless dancer. [13]

George W. Bush: Did not dismiss all the attorneys en masse when he assumed office. Bush Allowed a few to continue in their positions for several months until he replaced with his own selections early in his administration. Bush dismissed eight U.S. attorneys on December 7, 2006, in the middle of their second terms, without citing reason. Three other attorneys resigned without either explicitly stating reasons or providing conclusive evidence as to what reasons were prompting their resignations.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Bush_administration_U.S._attorney_firings_controversy/Firings_and_activities_of_fired_U.S._attorneys

Upon rereading the article, I realize that the following may offer further insight and explanation.

"Many U.S. attorneys continue to serve after the administration leaves office. However, U.S. attorneys serve "at the pleasure of the president," meaning that the president has the right to terminate their appointments at any time. According to a McClatchy news article dated March 13, 2007, "mass firings of U.S. attorneys are fairly common when a new president takes office, but not in a second-term administration," as was the case with the George W. Bush firings. [6]

According to the CRS report, in the past 25 years, with the exception of the most recent eight, only two U.S. Attorneys have been "apparently dismissed by the President." Both cases were under the Reagan Administration. Reagan dismissed William Kennedy, US Attorney for the Southern District of California, in 1982, reportedly for asserting that the CIA had pressured DOJ to pressure him not to pursue a case. The second was in 1984 when President Reagan dismissed J. William Petro, US Attorney for the Northern District of Ohio for disclosing information about an indictment. Petro was later convicted of the charges.[7] Both are considered traditionally reasonable causes to be asked to resign. [8]

Most of the other attorneys who resigned "explicitly indicated (in news reports or elsewhere) that their intent was to take a position with a law firm or as house counsel for a business." Only three resignations (all of which occurred under George W. Bush's administration) were given without explicitly stating, or having information to back, reasons for leaving.[9]

On March 13, 2007, McClatchy Newspapers published an article stating that the "current situation is distinct from Clinton firings of U.S. attorneys." The article further goes on to state that "nonetheless, Bush aide Dan Bartlett noted Clinton's first term firings in defending Bush's second term dismissals." [10]

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Bush_administration_U.S._attorney_firings_controversy/Firings_and_activities_of_fired_U.S._attorneys

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.