| DEMOCRATS AS THEY SEE THEMSELVES:
|
|
|
DEMOCRATS AS THE AMERICAN TRAITORS THEY ARE:
|
|
Posted on 07/26/2004 5:28:28 AM PDT by sr4402
Edited on 07/26/2004 5:56:40 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
Democrats Seek Reason for His Being Pushed Out
Archivist of the United States John W. Carlin was pushed by the White House in December to submit his resignation without being given any reason, Senate Democrats disclosed last week at a hearing to consider President Bush's nomination of his successor.
The Democrats said the White House should explain why it asked Carlin to resign. He said in a letter to Sen. Carl M. Levin (D-Mich.) that White House counsel Alberto R. Gonzales called him Dec. 5 and told him "the administration would like to appoint a new archivist." Carlin said, "I asked why, and there was no reason given."
Critics have suggested Bush may have wanted a new archivist to help keep his or his father's sensitive presidential records under wraps. Under the Presidential Records Act of 1978, many of President George H.W. Bush's papers are due to become public in January.
The 1984 law establishing the National Archives and Records Administration provides that the archivist will serve an indefinite term and can be replaced if he resigns or is removed by the president. If he is removed, "the president shall communicate the reasons for any such removal" to Congress, the law says.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
/Sarcasm off
December?
Maybe, just maybe, the guy DIDN'T do his job properly and allowed someone to stuff "code word" level documents down his pants and walk out.
You think?
Why does an archivist get fired, but Berger does not get arrested?
i mean this is't like the prez fired the whole travel staff is it?
Yes, this timing stuff gets a new meaning each day that passes.
Isn't John Carlin a fromer democrat governor from Kansas?
| DEMOCRATS AS THEY SEE THEMSELVES:
|
|
|
DEMOCRATS AS THE AMERICAN TRAITORS THEY ARE:
|
|
Yes, please, give the reasons for it. Better still, let's have a public hearing. Could it have anything to do with the fact that Archive clerks approached Carlin about Berger and Carlin rebuffed them or Carlin tipped off Berger that he was being watched (via Lindsey, perhaps)?
Wonder if Carlin has retained a lawyer as of late? It would be telling if he had.
Sandy Berger to 'replace' John W. Carlin at Archives?
'ROTFLOL'....?
/sarcasm
'"I asked why, and there was no reason given."'
Gee, sounds pretty gentlemanly of GW, doncha think, not to "leak" the story, with the real reason that there was corruption and sabotage and carelessness goin' on...
Agreed. Executive Order 13233 is a bad thing. It violates 200 years of precedent - beginning with Geo. Washington - on the question of presidential papers.
To those interested, do a Google on "Executive Order 13233", and read it, bearing in mind that by precedent, presidents have for the most part had control over their adminsitration's papers throughout U.S. history. Some limiting statutes have been put in place since Watergate, but the changes have been gradual and mostly supportive of the precedent.
Executive Order 13233 turns that entire relationship upside-down.
An achivist fired? Could it be. We never did hear the names of the archivists involved (and I mean involved) with Berger's "selective stripping" of the archives.
Well ... er ... uh ... because Mr. Carlin was looking very peaked, and we thought an outside job would help his skin condition?
Or how about, Mr. Carlin became so exhausted from fetching files for Mr. Burgler, his health was in jepardy?
Or maybe ...
Remember John Carlin served at the Governor's meetings as the same time as Clinton in the early 80's..
The DemocRATs aren't too bright for bringing this public, are they?
Since Bush had let a number of appointees stay in place (read lots at the Justice Dept. and State Dept. who have caused no end of problems with false leaks, etc.)he, Bush, gets to appoint whom ever he wants at any time without giving any reason for the request for resignations. Appointees serve at the "pleasure" of the President of the United States, whoever that is.
It's the Presdent's right to replace staff as it suits him.
I suppose the DEMO(N)cRATS prefer the way Hillary handled it with the White House Travel Office - call in the FBI and falsely accuse the outgoing staff of a crime.
No, earlier than that. Conveniently buried at the bottom of the WaPost piece is the following:
At the same time, Weinstein offered a chronology that reflected an early White House determination to get rid of Carlin. Weinstein said he was invited to meet with Dina Powell, director of presidential personnel, on Sept. 23 to talk about the possibility of his nomination.
This jives with the WaPost's own reporting that the first noticeable theft by Berger occurred on September 2, according to the archives staff.
Berger denies that he was contacted by archives staff after that incident, and only admits to the October 2 incident.
So, Berger had help from Carlin it appears, and denies the September incident because it links to Carlin's replacement, and the WaPost chooses selective amnesia.
Berger who?
Guess what? The guy's a Toon appointee.
I hope he's subpoenaed.
The plot thickens!!!!
No wonder President Bush brought so many "OLD" timers with him into office.
"IF" President Bush has just swept the offices clean like the Clintons did with the US Attorneys we probably know less than leaving them in place and monitoring their work.
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.
