Some lawyers got the ax...

rayb · Hot Air Balloon

Some lawyers got the ax...

arbilad · Head Chef

Well, my brother's a lawyer, and I'd care a lot if he lost his job.

Cat Herder · Understander of unimportant things

Oh yeah, and like Clinton didn't abuse the Justice Department during his term of office? What was the name of his AG that impeded investigations on the Clintons?

Really, doesn't Patrick Leahy have anything better to do than call for hearings simply because 8 of 93 district attorneys were let go?

salesortonscom · Wise and Revered Master

I still don't get why this is a story.

rayb · Hot Air Balloon

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,258642,00.html

Great read, and explains why the Dems are upset...

--Ray

fear of shiz · Profuse Pontificator

-- Edited by fear of shiz at 18:53, 2007-03-13

LEVE · Veteran Member

Prthaps an overstatement, but the more lawyers who loose thier job... the better it is for society. As Mark Twain said: "In a town with one lawyer, the lawyer goes hungry. In a town with two lawyers, both get rich."

Mahonri · Senior Bucketkeeper

He should have done like Reno and fired all of them.... and then sited prescedent.

I need a spell checker on this thing.

salesortonscom · Wise and Revered Master

Is this story actually getting any traction with the electorate? I don't get what the controversy is still.

Cat Herder · Understander of unimportant things

Well, we all know it is just part of that vast right wing conspiracy...

Shiz... ditto...

It just goes to prove that the Democrats have no real agenda other than to bad mouth the sitting president of the U.S. because their poster boy was shown to be a corrupt, lieing, adulterous man before the people and in a court of law. So, what is their plan then for running the country? What's that I hear... crickets chirping in the silence?

rayb · Hot Air Balloon

LEVE: Awesome Mark Twain quote... hee hee...

arbilad · Head Chef

It also proves that the democrats love to hold the republicans to a different standard.

BTW, Mahonri, if you want a browser with a built in spell checker, switch to Firefox 2.0

arbilad · Head Chef

Is anyone else getting really tired of this controversy still being in the news? As far as I understand it those lawyers served at the pleasure of the president. That is, there's nothing illegal even if he fired them for favoring chocolate ice cream over vanilla.
I think they have blown this up to appear to be a scandal in order to distract attention from more serious problems.

Cat Herder · Understander of unimportant things

Yes. It just goes to show that the Democrats in congress do not feel they have a higher calling in life but to destroy the Bush administration. And it goes to show they do not know how to lead.

Yes, the lawyers in the Justice Department serve at the pleasure of the president, and they can be let go for any or no reason at any time.

lundbaek · Profuse Pontificator

A Washington Post article explained in early February: "A recently fired U.S. attorney based in Seattle said yesterday that he was told of no performance problems when he was asked to resign, and he called critical remarks by a top Justice Department official 'unfair' and inaccurate. The comments by former U.S. attorney John McKay add to a growing tide of criticism of the Justice Department's decision to fire seven top prosecutors without explanation, and came on the same day the Senate Judiciary Committee voted 13 to 6 to limit the attorney general's power to appoint replacements. ..."McKay said in an interview that his Seattle office received glowing reviews as recently as last fall, when an intensive Justice Department audit heaped praise on McKay and his staff. McKay challenged testimony this week by Deputy Attorney General Paul J. McNulty, who told the Senate panel that McKay and five other Republican-appointed U.S. attorneys were forced to resign for 'performance-related' reasons."McKay is the third U.S. attorney to speak publicly about his dismissal. Daniel G. Bogden of Nevada told the Las Vegas Review-Journal that he was given no explanation for being forced out and that he had not been told of any problems with his performance."McNulty's testimony Tuesday also included an admission that the chief prosecutor in Little Rock, Ark., was fired to make way for GOP stalwart J. Timothy Griffin, a protege of presidential adviser Karl Rove and former researcher for the Republican National Committee."

The prosecution of two good Border Patrol agents recently (combined with the freeing and rewarding of the drug smuggler they shot) aroused my suspicion about the president's dominance of the U.S. justice system, and led me to look more carefully at the firings of those U.S. attorneys.

Last year's USA Patriot Act re-authorization law, which gave Attorney Gen. Alberto R. Gonzales the authority to appoint interim prosecutors for indefinite terms, was followed almost immediately by the firing of the 7 U.S. Attorneys without comment, reason, or criticism of performance. 5 of the 7 had received outstanding ratings prior to their abrupt dismissal.

-- Edited by lundbaek at 22:48, 2007-04-21

Mahonri · Senior Bucketkeeper

It still doesn't change the fact that Janet Reno FIRED all 92 of the attorneys when Bill got into office. It was nothing more than a political thing. Alberto should have canned all of them and rehired the Republicans.

rayb · Hot Air Balloon

I've heard that the firings took place in many cases because the attorneys refused to prosecute immigration violations aggressively enough, as it has become one of the administration's priorities.

As it was explained to me, Administrations have certain legal priorities. In the clinton administration it was gun control and militant religious/domestic hate groups that played a heavy focus of the Clinton/Reno--in the which they picked attorneys committed to carry out their policies.

--Ray

lundbaek · Profuse Pontificator

I'll try to find a more polite way to express my disagreement with the bit about President Bush & Co. makng an effort to prevent illegal immigration.

-- Edited by lundbaek at 09:19, 2007-04-22

-- Edited by lundbaek at 13:13, 2007-04-22

Cat Herder · Understander of unimportant things

Oh, I was wondering what was getting yer knickers in a knot about this topic, lundbaek. I didn't see the relation earlier... Of course, I don't see it now either, as nothing has been shown how firing these seven appointed attorneys is furthering a real or imagined cause to hamper immigration law enforcement.

So, since you have made the allegation, can you back it up to show that any of these seven were or had worked on stuff relating to enforcement of immigration law?

The key here is all of these attorneys are appointed. They are not "hired" in a competitive fashion. It is not like they were responding to a want ad or job listing. Once they are appointed, as long as they are vetted by whatever powers do the vetting, they are assured the title, job, and paycheck until such time as their appointment is revoked. In Michigan, we have a concept called Employment at Will, which in other words means unless you have an actual contract with the employer or are part of a collective bargaining unit (e.g. union), your employment can be ended -- by either party -- at will, with or without cause. How do you think so many big companies can get away with laying off thousands of employees to save their bottom line? Very few of them, relatively speaking, end up being through attrition or early retirement buyout packages...

So, what I'm saying is, I find absolutely nothing sinister about 7 of 92 (or less than 10%) of a workforce being let go... it is not like these 7 attorneys careers and fortunes are ruined. It is not like they are going to be hurting financially (they will probably make more in private sector again anyway). It is all about political appointmentships, and those that are doing the whining are doing just that... whining, and it is most unbecoming of people who are supposed to be "professional".

lundbaek · Profuse Pontificator

I got a bit bent out of shape at a suggestion that prosecution of immigration violations has become a priority of President Bush & Co. I wish! To me it seems this administration is attempting to provide a delusion of commitment to enforcement of immigration laws, only because of the bitter objections by so many Americans to the administrations steadfastly refusing to hire an adequate number of special agents for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and an adequate number of Border Patrol agents. Congress appropriated funds that were adequate to hire 800 new special agents for ICE, and the administration slashed that already anemic number of new agents to a measley 143. Similarly, the administration cut the number of new Border Patrol hires from the authorized 2,000 to just 210. Some of those numbers were increased a bit, but still Bush sent some members of the Border Patrol to beef up the Iraqi border while not being willing to secure our own border. The administration has also sent a clear notice that Border Patrol agents better not shoot smugglers and that smugglers caught with the drugs can flee without fear of being shot.This lack of manpower is made even more apparent when you realize that five and half years after the attacks of September 11, 2001, National Guard troops (many of them unarmed) are being assigned to the Mexican border to supposedly augment the understaffed Border Patrol. And Guard troops have had to retreat from armed incursion from Mexico with no response from the U.S.Where immigration law enforcement is concerned, it is obvious that the job is deliberately not getting done. The administration is adamant about creating a Guest Worker Amnesty program and surely realize that if they are to sell the Guest Worker amnesty program, they need to make a show that the government is able to effectively enforce the immigration laws to blunt the criticism of those of us who oppose the Guest Worker Amnesty program. No matter what the administration may claim, where immigration is concerned, things are getting far worse and not better. Our administration is still relinquishing control of borders to the enemy.

Cat Herder · Understander of unimportant things

Okay, so there are multiple fronts for consternation going on there... Maybe it is just me, but I still don't see how that has any relation to the dismissal of seven or eight or however many appointed lawyers in the justice department over the past 6 - 12 months.

Is the source of your consternation expressed above in the thread, another thread on the board, or external to the board altogether?

rayb · Hot Air Balloon

I just reported what I heard. IN regards to a number of these lawyers, they had refused to enforce immigration laws, which was a Bush Administration desire.

You can believe what you want about Bush's motives. But i can understand why they'd want to keep the dismissals under raps, when Gonzales is a posterchild for immigrant success--yet he's enforcing immigration. I wouldn't be surprised if Bush was trying to do the right thing by better enforcement, while trying not to make it a matter of public criticism by immigrant rights groups.

Rock and a hard place...

--Ray

Cat Herder · Understander of unimportant things

Oh, I missed that post by Ray, or at least the first paragraph... So, Ray, you have anything to back up what you have heard about these attorneys not being aggressive enough?

I now see the bee that got in yer bonnet there, Lundbaek.

rayb · Hot Air Balloon

I've forgotten where I heard that detail. I think it might've been Medved was talking in particular about specific attorneys in the case and specific law cases, so I can't ever keep track of that sort of detail... I was hoping someone who knew something specific about the issue might have more concrete commentary to link to...

Many of these legal squabbles (The Valerie Plame thing, for example) are often in grey areas which thanks to a lot of hype by the media are based in judgements and rulings that are of no consequence to most of us.

And those who hate bush, go on hating him. Those who don't have no way to defend him cuz we simply don't understand the core root of the issue, because it is so esoteric.

--Ray

lundbaek · Profuse Pontificator

I had read reports that those U.S. Attorneys that were fired were replaced with others. Also I read that they were canned because they were soft on prosecution of illegal immigrants, which doesn't make sense to me, since Bush & Co. are doing all they can to support illegal immigration. So I asked a friend, Joel Skousen, an investigative news analyst and editor of the weekly "World Affairs Brief "what he knew about the matter. He replied:
"Yes, they were replaced by others more loyal to the administration--especially the one in Arkansas which was a former staffer for Dick Cheney. It was Carol Lam who was accussed of not being tough on illegals, but that was just a sham. She was fired for going after Duke Cunningham. The prosecutors don't go after an illegal until they have passed the 3-strike mark."

Congressman Randy "Duke" Cummingham had been a major Bush/Republican cheerleader, but resignied from Congress after pleading guilty to taking more than $2 million in bribes in a criminal conspiracy involving at least three defense contractors. And I'll continue on in my contempt for President Bush & Co., and also their puppet masters.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/11/28/cunningham/

rayb · Hot Air Balloon

Their puppetmasters? Do you have a name for these guys?

--Ray

Mahonri · Senior Bucketkeeper

Yes... I too would like to know who is 'really' in charge.

lundbaek · Profuse Pontificator

Satan has control now. No matter where you look, he is in control, even in our own land. He is guiding the governments as far as the Lord will permit him. That is why there is so much strife, turmoil, confusion all over the earth. One master mind is governing the nations. It is not the President of the United States...it is not the king or government of England or any other land; it is Satan himself. (Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, Vol. 3, pp.314-315)

Last fall I attended a meeting at which a member of the Rothschild family, a US resident and citizen, spoke. I took the opportunity to ask him "What sort of a relationship is there between the Rockefeller family and the Rothschild family?" He replied that both families are striving toward greater control of the world economy, and both families have fomented wars to help achieve this end. He declined to go into further detail.

"For more than a century, ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well- publicized incidents to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure - one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it." (David Rockefeller, Memoirs, 2002, Pg 405 )

In order to figure out who at least some of the puppet masters are, and its not that hard, one needs to first understand the difference that exists between Formal Power and Real Power. What the media propagate with a very high public profile every day in their television and radio newscasts, and in the press are basically the concrete and visible results of the actions carried out by Formal Power structures, especially those of national governments and the technological, financial and corporate infrastructures. However, is is the Real Power levers that actually make things happen. They are the ones which plan out what will occur in the world, when it will occur, where it will take place and who shall carry it out. They are far less visible, but they are not all that secret. I've said enough. If anyone really cares enough about it, I suggest reading a book recommended in the April 1972 Church Conference by the Apostle Ezra Taft Benson, "None Dare Call It Conspiracy" by Gary Allen. No longer in print, it can be read on-line at http://reactor-core.org/none-dare.html Other recent books by an LDS authors are "Awakening To Our Awful Situation" by Jack Monnett and "The Hidden Things Of Darkness" by Christopher S. Bentley. The power groups promoting and driving the New World Order are doing so in full public view: i.e., multinational corporations (e.g., the Fortune Global 500s accounting for over 80% of US economic activity); the global financial infrastructure (which includes banks, investment funds, stock exchanges and commodity market operators); multimedia monopolies; major Ivy League universities; international multilateral organizations (such as the World Bank, the IMF/International Monetary Fund, the IADB/Inter-American Development Bank, the BIS/Bank of International Settlements, the UN/United Nations and the WTO/World Trade Organization) and, most important, key government posts in the United States, Israel, the United Kingdom and other industrialized nations. So, we definitely do not have something that can be explained away as a "conspiracy theory".

-- Edited by lundbaek at 11:31, 2007-04-24

-- Edited by lundbaek at 11:39, 2007-04-24