Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

FNC's Hume Chastises Media for Failing to Point Out How Clinton Fired Every Attorney
NewsBusters ^ | March 13, 2007 | Brent Baker

Posted on 03/14/2007 9:50:24 AM PDT by rightinthemiddle

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-138 last
To: jude24
" I know this is legal. It is still unseemly, and it angers me"

Why do you believe this is unseemly? All U.S. District Attorneys are political appointees and serve at the pleasure of the President. Indeed, at the end of a term they traditionally submitted their resignations. Jude, these are the ultimate in non-judicial legal political appointments. Two members of my family served a total of 19 years as U.S. DAs back in the 20th century, believe me, I know how that system works.
121 posted on 03/14/2007 2:03:42 PM PDT by Kolokotronis (Christ is Risen, and you, o death, are annihilated!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: Sam Hill

planning on naming a Clinton USA holdover, other than MJW?


122 posted on 03/14/2007 2:06:46 PM PDT by ContemptofCourt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: Sam Hill
BS. As has been stated, Bush did not pick the 8 attorneys who were to be fired. The DoJ did. Bush just signed off.

Bush signed off on the firing of US Atty's because they were not sufficiently loyal. That is unconscionable.

Moreover, Bush should fire US Attorneys who are not carrying out the administration's policy. That is why he was elected, and why he is the head of the executive branch. These are his people.

His authority does not extend so far as to install people "loyal" to him. That is the kind of crap that goes on in banana republics and crooked Third World Nations.

Rove notes one US Attorney who was fired for refusing to prosecute capital punishment cases

That's his after-the-fact justification. The document dump today indicates it was due to drug and immigration prosecution disagreements, but also due to loyalty.

Besides - ROVE HAS NO LEGAL AUTHORITY. I don't give a damn what Rove thinks.

123 posted on 03/14/2007 2:15:24 PM PDT by jude24
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: jude24

You are amazingly uninformed.


124 posted on 03/14/2007 2:24:42 PM PDT by Sam Hill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: safeasthebanks

"In fact, the dismissals were unprecedented: Previous Presidents, including Ronald Reagan and Jimmy Carter, had both retained holdovers from the previous Administration and only replaced them gradually as their tenures expired...."

That is a really excellent point. And it once again drives home the hypocrisy of the media (and some of the trolls here).

One of the things that Congress is pretending to be outraged about is that Bush is replacing federal prosecutors before the end of their terms. (I don't know if that is true or not.)

But certainly Clinton must have done so with his housecleaning. And Congress never said a word about it.


125 posted on 03/14/2007 2:28:35 PM PDT by Sam Hill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: Sam Hill

Hey, I was wrong. I found a Clinton holdover. Fred Black, USA for Guam. Although, technically, he is a Bush holdover, as he was appointed in 1991 by HW Bush. He was replaced in 2005.


126 posted on 03/14/2007 2:30:36 PM PDT by ContemptofCourt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: ContemptofCourt

Edit...Fred Black was replaced in 2002.


127 posted on 03/14/2007 2:32:19 PM PDT by ContemptofCourt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: rightinthemiddle

I don't blame the media. I blame Bush. No one should have resigned at the DoJ. Gonzales never should have admitted anything was handled badly. Bush should never have said he was "displeased" with anything...he should have mentioned that Clinton fifed everyone and he only fired 8..so what's the big deal? That's IT, dammit. What is wrong with these folks, do they have no balls left at all?


128 posted on 03/14/2007 2:39:35 PM PDT by montag813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kathy in Calif
Hume didn't mention that Bush fired all 93 after taking office. Yes, Clinton did it en masse, and Bush did it over a six month period, but if Hume was being "fair and balanced" he would have stated that Bush got rid of all the federal prosecutors, too. Hume was trying to make it sound like Clinton fired all 93, and Bush just wanted to fire these eight...

You are right, context matters...however, you'd sound a lot less confused (and would undoubtedly be less outraged) if you didn't depend upon the media to provide all the context you need in the article.

Those with any awareness of politics longer than five years are familiar with the issue of US Attorneys...how they are hired and fired, why 1993 was precedent setting, and why this so-called issue is no issue at all.

It does seem there are two kinds of people in the world...and you undountedly know which one you are...;-)

129 posted on 03/14/2007 2:59:46 PM PDT by gogeo (Democrats want to support the troops without actually being helpful to them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Sam Hill
. . . the posting histories . . .

Is not irony ironic, and was it not ever thus?

Get a life.

130 posted on 03/14/2007 3:35:55 PM PDT by alcuin (Mother, I did a bad thing . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: alcuin

How flattering that you pried yourself away from your Natalie Halloway and "Single Lonely Men" threads to post to me. LOL


131 posted on 03/14/2007 3:43:00 PM PDT by Sam Hill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: Sam Hill
I don't pay much attention to MY posting history, dear, but, judging from YOUR research (always formidable), you fit my response criteria.

How's the book selling?

132 posted on 03/14/2007 3:55:29 PM PDT by alcuin (Mother, I did a bad thing . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: alcuin

How's the stalking?


133 posted on 03/14/2007 4:03:31 PM PDT by Sam Hill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

To: Sam Hill
How's the stalking?

When a total of two replies on one thread constitutes stalking, the mojo has gone out of the "stalked."

Ever was it thus.

134 posted on 03/14/2007 4:12:09 PM PDT by alcuin (Mother, I did a bad thing . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: alcuin

Stalking would encompass using phrases from me and mentioning purported things about my life. None of which is relevant to this thread.

It is funny though, what a deep impression I have clearly made upon you. I can't remember you from Adam. Why is that?

(That's a rhetorical question. I really don't care. And I don't feel like being trolled anymore today.)


135 posted on 03/14/2007 4:29:47 PM PDT by Sam Hill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

Comment #136 Removed by Moderator

To: alcuin

"But invade their privacy and attempt to downgrade their status as PEOPLE---"

I've never done any such thing.

You loathsome creep.


137 posted on 03/14/2007 5:04:04 PM PDT by Sam Hill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]

To: jude24

They are political appointees who are serving at the pleasure of the president.

If he finds them unsatisfactory, then he can fire them.

If a president is authorized to set policy in the executive branch, and if the attorney general and the Justice Dept are part of the executive branch, then the president can move anyone to see to the implementation of his policy.

Policy implementation has nothing to do with loyalty.


138 posted on 03/14/2007 7:29:40 PM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who support the troops will pray for them to WIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-138 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson