ARGville

Chewing politics and current events one bite-size chunk at a time
Opinions about current events, politics, religion, pop culture, and society.
And the occasional comment on soccer, the world's game.

 

Bookmark this page | Tag to del.icio.us | Add to Technorati Favorites


Our discussion forum is open for business. Come say hello. 



Friday, March 16, 2007

 

Purgegate: Same pattern as Scooter Libby

purgegateBy VictorM: The pattern by this White House continues in the same manner it did with the Scooter Libby case. That is, they deny, they evade, they lie, all along claiming they did nothing wrong. If they did nothing wrong, why the lies? Here's the latest example:
E-mails released this week, including a set issued Thursday night by the Justice Department, appear to contradict the administration's assertion that Bush's staff had only limited involvement in the firings of eight U.S. attorneys, which Democrats have suggested were a politically motivated purge... The latest e-mails between White House and Justice Department officials show that Rove inquired in early January 2005 about firing U.S. attorneys
We're only scratching the surface on this case. Does this mean they did something wrong and are trying to hide it? Their pattern of behavior surely suggests that.

They were so used to getting away with criminal and unethical activity that they weren't even careful. This is what happens to people who do the things they do simply because they can -- eventually, they get caught.

Labels: , , ,


 

No Bozos, Clinton Didn't Also Do It

purgegateBy mageen, commenting on allegations that Clinton also fired prosecutors:

Take a better look at this so-called comparison between the Clinton [Department of Justice] and the Bush/Rove/Gonzalez [Department of Justice]. It is customary to require the resignation of all presidential appointees from the previous administration. Just ask Linda Tripp. The difference here is that this clutch of fired prosecutors were let go for cause despite their glowing performance reviews. In their case, there was a pattern displayed by [Department of Justice]/White House. The cause in their cases were mostly the fact that they were following the law in prosecuting Republican "friends" of the Bush White House. In the Clinton [Department of Justice], there were really only two remarkable cases of firing for cause: one attorney tried to choke a reporter and another attorney bit a woman.

Labels: , , ,



Wednesday, March 14, 2007

 

I think those attorneys deserved to be fired

PurgegateBy VictorM: Talk of the prosecutors' purge continues to dominate many liberal blogs. The consensus being that this was a rotten thing by a rotten administration, and damn it, they got caught. JuliaAnn has quite an interesting take. I really recommend that her post be read in its entirety, but here's the gist of it:

On the heels of the unpopular surge, we now celebrate the unmasking of the purge, as if this will finally do it, this is the "too far" moment, camel's back meet straw. Frankly, I don't think so. There is a sickness in the land that overwhelms all of it for me. Let's start with this: I think those attorneys deserved to be fired.

The reasons JuliaAnn gives are quite compelling and thought provoking. Go read it!

Labels: ,


 

The height of intellectual dishonesty

Prosecutors purgeBy Carpetbagger Report: As the prosecutor purge scandal continues to become more serious and more damaging for the Bush gang, the right has struggled to come up with a coherent defense. They seem to have embraced one, but it’s surprisingly weak [that Clinton also did it].

The argument is premised on a mistaken understanding of how the process works. When a president takes office, he or she nominates federal prosecutors at the beginning of the first term. Under normal circumstances, these U.S. Attorneys serve until the next president is sworn in.

In 1993, Clinton replaced H.W. Bush’s prosecutors. In 2001, Bush replaced Clinton’s prosecutors. None of this is remotely unusual. Indeed, it’s how the process is designed.

The difference with the current scandal is overwhelming. Bush replaced eight specific prosecutors, apparently for purely political reasons. This is entirely unprecedented. For conservatives to argue, as many are now, that Clinton’s routine replacements for H.W. Bush’s USAs is any way similar is the height of intellectual dishonesty. They know better, but hope their audience is too uninformed to know the difference.

Labels: , ,



Saturday, March 03, 2007

 

The Point of the Prosecutors' Purge

By Dahlia Lithwick, commenting on the Bush administration's purging of prosecutors for dubious reasons: Perhaps the most important lesson to be drawn from the purge isn't that the Bush administration puts ideology above the rule of law. That isn't exactly news. The real point may be that between inexperienced fumblers at Justice, energized Democrats in Congress, and a public that seems finally to have awoken from its slumber, it's just become harder for the administration to get away with it.

Labels: ,


This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

 

Site Map
Home Page
Discussion Forum
Relationship Advice
Humor


Blogroll
(will open new window)


Blogroll Me!

Big, Bad Monsters






Contact Us | Resource Links

Online Shopping Deals URL.biz - Relationships
A Designated SinglesStop.com