He appears to have corrupted the administration of justice in this country by being a willing tool, if not an active leader, of a movement to turn federal prosecutors into political instruments. He then lied about it.
"Appears" being the operative word. US Attorneys serve at the pleasure of the President. It's not unusual for the incoming AG to replace some (or even all in the case of the Janet Reno) of the US Attorneys. This is only a "scandal" in the eyes of some. Read yesterday's ( 3/29/07) opinion piece in the WSJ by Mark Lasswell for differnt prespective.
And yes, US Attorneys are "political instruments" by definition. They are political appointments.
And if I were concerned about reaction to my post why would I even bother? I knew exactly what kind of reaction I would get.
The only thing that the current administration is guilty of is not being as adept at manipulating the media as the previous administration was.
"Political appointee" is different from "political instrument." Once appointed, they are expected -by law and tradition- to follow the consitution, the laws and regulations, and ethical precepts of their office. Those do not allow partisanship to sway criminal investigations.
The present administration is guilty of so much more than not manipulating the media well. It is without question the worst presidency in American history, bar none. This USA scandal isn't even a blip on the Radar of Incompetence.
Erik,
They did fire a guy with an investigation into a Democrat. The problem was that he refused to speed up the case to indict it before teh election. Instead, it was indicted this week.
Why, He hasn't done anything wrong.
Posted by: Ted | March 30, 2007 at 08:25 AM
Yes, he has.
He appears to have corrupted the administration of justice in this country by being a willing tool, if not an active leader, of a movement to turn federal prosecutors into political instruments. He then lied about it.
He is a disgrace.
Posted by: carpundit | March 30, 2007 at 08:46 AM
This administration rewards loyalty over competence. They punish dissenters.
Ted who is merely a sheep, just doen't want to be punished. Baaa!
Posted by: Erik Schwartz | March 30, 2007 at 10:40 AM
"Appears" being the operative word. US Attorneys serve at the pleasure of the President. It's not unusual for the incoming AG to replace some (or even all in the case of the Janet Reno) of the US Attorneys. This is only a "scandal" in the eyes of some. Read yesterday's ( 3/29/07) opinion piece in the WSJ by Mark Lasswell for differnt prespective.
And yes, US Attorneys are "political instruments" by definition. They are political appointments.
And if I were concerned about reaction to my post why would I even bother? I knew exactly what kind of reaction I would get.
The only thing that the current administration is guilty of is not being as adept at manipulating the media as the previous administration was.
Posted by: Ted | March 30, 2007 at 01:30 PM
Baa.
Did they fire any who had active investigations going against Democrats.
The justice department is not the SD. The adminstration needs to understand that.
Posted by: Erik | March 30, 2007 at 02:00 PM
Ted,
"Political appointee" is different from "political instrument." Once appointed, they are expected -by law and tradition- to follow the consitution, the laws and regulations, and ethical precepts of their office. Those do not allow partisanship to sway criminal investigations.
The present administration is guilty of so much more than not manipulating the media well. It is without question the worst presidency in American history, bar none. This USA scandal isn't even a blip on the Radar of Incompetence.
Erik,
They did fire a guy with an investigation into a Democrat. The problem was that he refused to speed up the case to indict it before teh election. Instead, it was indicted this week.
CP
Posted by: carpundit | March 30, 2007 at 02:29 PM
Interesting read.
The Reno Precedent:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/14/AR2007031402194.html
Posted by: cthrall | March 30, 2007 at 04:19 PM