Feinstein Speaks out on U.S. Atty Firings

Feinstein Speaks out on U.S. Atty Firings
http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/002349.php
--

According to Senator Dianne Feinstein, the Bush administration has fired several US Attorneys for no apparent reason. She says to her knowledge these individuals have done nothing wrong, yet are being asked to leave. The administration is using a little known part of the Patriot Act to appoint interim replacements without Senate confirmation.

The link contains video of the Senator discussing the issue.

One of those fired was a friend and former college classmate of mine-the Honorable (and I do mean HONORABLE) Carol Lam-USA SDCal. Lam made corruption her main thrust-taking down uber hog Duke Cunningham. Anti Immigrant fanatics wanted her to use most of the resources going after the huge number of illegals there

AndrewC said:

Feinstein Speaks out on U.S. Atty Firings
TPMmuckraker January 16, 2007 02:28 PM
--

According to Senator Dianne Feinstein, the Bush administration has fired several US Attorneys for no apparent reason. She says to her knowledge these individuals have done nothing wrong, yet are being asked to leave. The administration is using a little known part of the Patriot Act to appoint interim replacements without Senate confirmation.

The link contains video of the Senator discussing the issue.

Click to expand...

I read about this yesterday. Did you notice that the US Attorney who went after Duke Cunningham was fired? What the hell is that about?

You will hear nothing but silence on this one from our right-wing friends on this board.

Gibberish said:

You will hear nothing but silence on this one from our right-wing friends on this board.

Click to expand...

As well as from the MSM. Another very depressing piece of news that is overlooked, but who cares when there are new seasons of "24" and "American Idol", oh and the NFL playoffs too! :-( :twisted:

Tot, Np, Please Respond.

Doremus Jessup said:

As well as from the MSM. Another very depressing piece of news that is overlooked, but who cares when there are new seasons of "24" and "American Idol", oh and the NFL playoffs too! :-( :twisted:

Click to expand...

And don't forget the big story on MSM. Madonna is banging someone new.

Presidents have full authority and latitude to fire US Attorneys. Unless someone can find a reason why he shouldn't have what's the story? Recall Clinton fire them all when he came into office.

March, 1993

Stinger said:

Presidents have full authority and latitude to fire US Attorneys. Unless someone can find a reason why he shouldn't have what's the story? Recall Clinton fire them all when he came into office.

March, 1993

• 
  [*]Clinton and Attorney General Janet Reno decide jointly to fire all U.S. attorneys at Justice Department effective immediately.

http://www.freerepublic.com/china/24.htm

​

Click to expand...

Fair enough. Politics is politics, after all. But Clinton fired the attorneys as soon as he took office, and I believe his new choices were vetted by the Senate, although I could be wrong on this point.

Bush is installing his new attorneys as temporary appointments, in order to avoid Senate scrutiny, and the reason is obvious. One of them worked on the Bush campaign, and is a close friend of Karl Rove. However, even at that, Bush is within his rights.

Gibberish said:

You will hear nothing but silence on this one from our right-wing friends on this board.

Click to expand...

You obviously didn't read this thread very well

Look-Lam and others serve at the pleasure of the president and if we want to talk about games we can talk about CLinton demanding instant termination of every GOP Bush I appointee rather than do what Reagan, Carter, Nixon, and Bush II did-wait til they had a replacement ready before accepting the resignations of the other party's appointees. Clinton did this to get rid of the USA in arkansas without being too obvious

Lam's concern was proper-going after complex white collar cases. But as we have seen from the ENRON prosecutions-such prosecutions take years and lots of effort and only result in a few convictions while pushing the feds to go after illegals or convicts with guns allows them to rack up huge numbers of convictions and thousands of years in sentences.

Lam did what was right IMHO but she wasn't getting the numbers AG Gonzo and some of the GOP congressmen wanted

"but the Congress may by law vest the appointment of such inferior officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the courts of law, or in the heads of departments."

It seems apparent that appointment of US Attorneys is governed by this provision of the Constitution. If Republican dominated Congresses wish to let additional power devolve to the Presidency, they clearly have the right to do so. Its unwise, partly because the Constitution did not anticipate the importance of some of these positions. They'll reap what they sow when a partisan Democratic President is elected during a Republican dominated Congress.

Since my teen years, I have understood that the presidency has accumulated too much power. I have consistently, through all administrations (for 20+ years), argued that Congress needs to preserve and strengthen its powers in whatever legal ways it can.

Dezaad said:

"but the Congress may by law vest the appointment of such inferior officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the courts of law, or in the heads of departments."

It seems apparent that appointment of US Attorneys is governed by this provision of the Constitution. If Republican dominated Congresses wish to let additional power devolve to the Presidency, they clearly have the right to do so. Its unwise, partly because the Constitution did not anticipate the importance of some of these positions. They'll reap what they sow when a partisan Democratic President is elected during a Republican dominated Congress.

Since my teen years, I have understood that the presidency has accumulated too much power. I have consistently, through all administrations (for 20+ years), argued that Congress needs to preserve and strengthen its powers in whatever legal ways it can.

Click to expand...

the first appointees must clear the senate. USA's almost always do. unlike judges they have no life tenure. If you don't like the President having too much power go back and burn a picture of FDR