- Joined
- Aug 27, 2005
- Messages
- 43,602
- Reaction score
- 26,257
- Location
- Houston, TX
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
The most interesting point made in this article is the following:
1) Last April, Karl Rove made a speech in which he designated 11 states pivotal in the 2008 elections.
2) Bush has appointed prosecutors in 9 of those states, all with records of partisanship.
3) 4 of the prosecutors who were fired were in those pivotal states.
4) A former prosecutor who has served 6 US attorneys in Florida and Georgia has stated that too much emphasis on voter fraud investigations "smacks of trying to use prosecutorial power to investigate and potentially indict political enemies", only going after the other political party, and not one's own.
5) US prosecutors have also been involved in structuring laws to discriminate against poor and minority voters, which was done in Georgia.
6) In addition, US prosecutors get to choose which cases to prosecute, and which not to pursue. This is notable in Texas, where the US Civil Rights Division chose not to pursue the redistricting plan, which was eventually thrown out by the US Supreme Court. They also chose not to prosecute Tom Delay, but a Texas state prosecutor took care of that one.
Put everything together, and there is a decent case to be made that the firings and replacements are for the purpose of placing political operatives in key states in time for the elections next year. A decent case can also be made that, since the replacement prosecutors do have a history of bias, that they were installed to go after political enemies, while turning a blind eye to cronies.
Article is here.
1) Last April, Karl Rove made a speech in which he designated 11 states pivotal in the 2008 elections.
2) Bush has appointed prosecutors in 9 of those states, all with records of partisanship.
3) 4 of the prosecutors who were fired were in those pivotal states.
4) A former prosecutor who has served 6 US attorneys in Florida and Georgia has stated that too much emphasis on voter fraud investigations "smacks of trying to use prosecutorial power to investigate and potentially indict political enemies", only going after the other political party, and not one's own.
5) US prosecutors have also been involved in structuring laws to discriminate against poor and minority voters, which was done in Georgia.
6) In addition, US prosecutors get to choose which cases to prosecute, and which not to pursue. This is notable in Texas, where the US Civil Rights Division chose not to pursue the redistricting plan, which was eventually thrown out by the US Supreme Court. They also chose not to prosecute Tom Delay, but a Texas state prosecutor took care of that one.
Put everything together, and there is a decent case to be made that the firings and replacements are for the purpose of placing political operatives in key states in time for the elections next year. A decent case can also be made that, since the replacement prosecutors do have a history of bias, that they were installed to go after political enemies, while turning a blind eye to cronies.
Article is here.
