Were More Prosecutors On Chopping Block?
The Skinny: Washington Post Reports Justice Dept. Mulled Firing 1 In 4 U.S. Attorneys
-
Alberto Gonzales (AFP/Getty Images)
-
Who's Who Firings Firestorm Justice Department at center of controversy over firing of eight U.S. attorneys.
The Justice Department considered firing at least 26 federal prosecutors, significantly more than Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and other administration officials have previously acknowledged, according to a report in Thursday's Washington Post.
Gonzales told Congress last week that the department's effort was limited to eight U.S. attorneys dismissed since last June; other Bush administration officials have said just a few other prosecutors were suggested for removal.
But the Post, citing "sources familiar with documents withheld from the public," said that between February 2005 and December 2006, more than two dozen prosecutors – more than one quarter of the nation's 93 U.S. attorneys – were mentioned as candidates for firing on lists compiled by Gonzales' former chief of staff, Kyle Sampson.
The lists include nine prosecutors who were fired in 2006, others who resigned and 13 who remain in their posts today. Some of those still on the job, apparently, were unaware they'd been targeted for dismissal. "Really? I wasn't aware of that," said U.S. Attorney Paula Silsby of Maine, when a reporter told her.
A Justice Department official would not confirm the names on the lists, but said they "reflect Kyle Sampson's thoughts for discussion during the consultation process.''
Democrats charge the firings were politically motivated, while the administration insists they were based on performance or policy disputes.
Meanwhile, The New York Times reports on another controversy involving Gonzales, following testimony this week that in his previous job as White House counsel, he pressured former Attorney General John Ashcroft – who was hospitalized at the time – to certify the legality of President Bush's warrant-less domestic eavesdropping program.
Following that revelation, Sen. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska joined the ranks of Republicans calling for Gonzales to resign.
Is McCain Physically Fit For The White House?
Is John McCain physically fit to serve as president of the United States? That's the question the Los Angeles Times asks in a front-page story Thursday suggesting that the 70-year-old Republican senator's health – and age – could become a campaign issue.
McCain has "a body and mind with some heavy wear and tear," the Times says, "including a couple of bouts of cancer and the effects of years of torture," as a POW in Vietnam. He would also be oldest person ever elected to enter the White House – and if he served two terms, would leave office at the age of 80.
Of course, McCain isnt the only presidential contender with health concerns. Sen. Joe Biden had two brain aneurysms in 1988, Rudy Giuliani had prostate cancer in 2000, and still-undeclared candidate Fred Thompson had lymphoma. But, the Times says, all are all younger and "haven't experienced McCain's physical and mental agonies."
Still, the McCain campaign insists voters need not worry. Much younger staffers say they have a hard time keeping up with the energetic septuagenarian, and the campaign says it plans to release the results of a recent health exam which McCain passed with flying colors.
$30 Million Men
It's certainly no surprise that the men and women seeking the White House are wealthy – indeed, it's probably the only thing most of them have in common.
But just how rich some of them are may be a surprise. The New York Times reports Thursday on the personal fortunes of two of those contenders, Republican Rudy Giuliani and Democrat John Edwards, whose financial disclosure forms show they are worth a cool $30 million each.
And they're far from the richest candidates in the field. That title, the Times says, belongs to Mitt Romney, the former Republican governor of Massachusetts, who is expected to report as much as $350 million in assets.
A NOTE TO READERS: The Skinny is now available via e-mail. Click here and follow the directions to register to receive it in your inbox each weekday morning.
© MMVII, CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.
- Sorry, my spell checker didn't realize that I meant took instead of tool, you're instead of your and "and," not ans.
- Reply to this comment
- SlipSter01
You criticize others for factual inaccuracy, but don't do very well either.
(Fact)Judges are the people who wear the robes and preside over trials. (Fact)No president ever fired a federal judge, because they are appointed for life. (Fact)The only way they leave the bench is by retiring, dying or being impeached.
(Fact)US Attorneys are prosecutors who appear before the judges. (Fact)Clinton fired all the USA's when he tool office. (Fact)Bush fired all the USA's when he took office. No president before Bush has ever tried to operate the DOJ as his party hit squad. That's been only in more authoritarian societies, and he seems to like that idea, too.
Your following the party line, but you're months late, you're behind the curve in the reich talking points. If the "blame Clinton" excuse is the best you can do, you need to pick up some recent facts. Spell checking isn't a bad idea, either.
Remember, Ken Starr spent years and $80 million to pin something on Clinton. The best he could find is lying about a BJ. You're not likely to run across something he missed.
A fundamental truth, "It's better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open one's mouth ans remove all doubt." - Reply to this comment
- Hey, don't forget. Clinton fired ALL the federal judges en-masse. Why didin't we have a rash of Republicans investigating that?
Because it's the President's priviledge to fire Federal Judges at any time. That's why Clinton wasn't investigated for it.
This is such a non-story, except to point out the hypocrisy of the Democrats for making an issue of a presidential priviledge - Reply to this comment
- the admin. thinks playing bulldog long enuf will wear out the opposition or that over TIME the issue will "run out of gas" -- not so when it comes to "real justice" -- this is a case of real justice... this is NOT an isolated case of just Gonzales.. but it's a consistent, very clear pattern of appointing puppets that are "Bushies" ... automatons that will do the neocon will of the narrow-minded. They have consistently been caught with their hand in the perennial cookie jar. The elected are supposed to be servants of the people; that is real democracy; it has come down to these nuts that we are going to remove. It is now the Age of Light in two ways: fast as light commmunication on the Internet -- AND the Light of Truth being shed on reality vs unreality. No more justifying corruption: out with the bad, in with the good.
- Reply to this comment
- Democrats charge the firings were politically motivated, while the administration insists they were based on performance or policy disputes.
These administration a*sholes think everybody is stupid. How do you give approval ratings then turn around and say they aren't doing a good job?
If there is any under performance it belongs to the whole administration even the top two.What a bunch of morons! - Reply to this comment
- The Govt. needs to act now to stop Global Warming, instead they're "grinding their gears" over nothing...
In 1980, Reagan capitalized upon discontent with a pres. seen as weak, however their strong Executive branch was diminished by the Boland Act, making military aid to the Contras illegal (in their fight against the Sandinistas--who nationalized the Banks, ect.).
In other words, if the second rate actor was to successfully charge forth with his rapicious doctrine, he would need JUSTICE at his side...
One by one the doomed division heads, deputy and assistant att. gens. fell to Att. Gen. Meese's terrible, swift sword...
The DOJ, which had begun the decade turning a blind eye to criminal acts (the Church Committee found that the FBI, " ... harassed and disrupted ... vicious tactics have been employed ..."), was now a full-fledged partner.
Following the '92 election extensive document shredding commenced; "It started immediately after the election and is more extensive than anything in anyone's memory. Here you have twelve years--Inslaw, BCCI, BNL, ect., and the stonewalling of Meese and Thornburgh and Barr."
Now Congress has its panties all in a bunch because they're scared of a politicized DOJ--this after Congress itself pretty much entirely negated the Senate Confirmation process...
This entire issue is about the magician waving his magic wand--diverting attention away from his other hand (Global Warming), so the Govt. is "forced" to pay industry's way? - Reply to this comment
- "The New York Times reports Thursday on the personal fortunes of two of those contenders, Republican Rudy Giuliani and Democrat John Edwards, whose financial disclosure forms show they are worth a cool $30 million each."
You'd think Rudy could afford a decent haircut. - Reply to this comment
- After a Federal Grand Jury refused to indict Bill Clinton on Ken's Starr's charges, I thought here in America we would get back to normal. Instead, the GOP decided that they would impeach the President of the United States for lying about nine bj's.
After Al Gore won the popular vote, I thought here in America we would count all the votes. Instead, the GOP decided to go to the SC to stop the vote count.
After a Navy hero won the Democratic nomination, I thought here in America we would all salute him. Instead, the GOP decided to slime him.
Now we have an Attorney General who, as White House Counsel, sought to assist the White House in breaking the law. And the GOP has decided to defend him.
I hope this nightmare is over soon. - Reply to this comment
- Who cares..Clinton fired all of them but life goes on..Who cares..It bothers me that Pelosi is pushing thru a bill that will make her husband more millions an no one is stopping her..Now that is a CROOK !!!!!
Posted by FARTKNOCKER2 at 12:48 PM : May 17, 2007
FARTKNOCKER2
Stop pretending that you're that ignorant!!!
The difference here is that Alberto Gonzales replaced these prosecutors with interim appointments which do not have to go through confirmation in the U.S. Senate. This is due to a hidden provision in the USA PATRIOT Act. But the reason U.S. Attorneys have Senate confirmation in the first place is that it is an expression of confidence in their character and to insure that they would be free from PARTISAN service. - Reply to this comment
- What else can be said I just shake my head and think if it were a movie it would be a comedy but it is sad it is real life.
- Reply to this comment
- You know, we spend so much (well-deserved) time discussing and debating the corrupt and incompetent actions of this Bush Administration that we have much less time to address and resolve many major political, environmental and financial problems in this country and the world. While the distractions are obviously necessary to try and correct this corrupt government's illegal actions, it is still an unfortunate expense of our limited resources. We need to impeach and prosecute these Republican fools so we can move on to other matters.
- Reply to this comment
- What a pathetic slob Gonzo is. He does not deserve to be AG of the US. He is not qualified besides being a Bush friend, and he can't remember anything because he didn't do his job. He let everyone else do it for him.
The guy is a creep and it is past time to get rid of the incompetent jerk. Resign or be fired. - Reply to this comment
- I am sick and sad for this country. I'm embarrassed and humiliated by this administration. I wish something concrete could be done to send a message to this President and his followers, that we no longer want them to step all over our rights and represent us to the world. I am a voter who didn't vote for Bush. But, I feel my vote makes no difference and I am at the mercy of these men in government who have no idea how they have changed things for the rest of us.
- Reply to this comment
- Is it any surprise that there are new revelations about Gonzo, or that Karl Rove%u2019s emails MYSTERIOUSLY disappeared, or that Paul Wolfowitz is about to be fired from the WB? This is the most CORRUPT administration since Nixon, and maybe prior to Nixon as well! These people will lie, cheat, steal, obstruct justice, and trash the constitution to hang on to power. The Republicans impeached Clinton for lying about a BJ while this administration gets away with murder. This entire administration is an embarrassing, shameful, immoral, disgrace to the nation, to democracy, and to our creditability in the world. What PATHETIC excuses for human beings these pieces of garbage are. These people are unbelievably corrupt and arrogant and the WHOLE administration should be impeached and face criminal charges.
- Reply to this comment
- This is the kind of sleazy misleading statements or lies that have caused me to completely stop voting for Republicans since Reagan took office. Clinton did do the same as most, including Bush. He fired them all when he first took office. But that's not the situaltion now, which is the firing of people that Bush himself appointed, because they did not pervert justice in the cause of electing Repulicans.
- Reply to this comment
***
If you have to lie to make your point then you don't have one.- Reply to this comment
- Hey FARTKNOCKER2 who cares? YOU SHOULD WE ALL SHOULD IF IN YOU NEO CON MIND IF THIS WAS A DEMOCRATIC ADMINISTRATION FROM YOUR CLINTON JIBE YOU NEO CONS ALWAYS THROW CLINTON in there when you cannot think of anything clever to say as I asked if this was a democratic adm. wonder if you would say WHO CARES?
- Reply to this comment
- Just FIRE the sob NOW!
- Reply to this comment




