What…? The recent firings of eight U.S. attorney’s may have been politically motivated?
The Justice Department said today that Republican Sen. Pete Domenici called Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and his deputy four times to complain about a U.S. attorney who claims he was fired for not rushing a corruption probe.
Hmm. I wonder if any Washington state Republicans complained to the Justice Department about John McKay? Cathy McMorris? Dave Reichert? You’d think maybe the local media might be a little more curious about the circumstances regarding McKay’s firing. But then, you know, this is just the sort of hardball politics we’ve come to expect from the GOP, so I guess it really wouldn’t be news.
UPDATE:
McKay in his own words, over on BlatherWatch.
Hey Goldy,
since you brought it up, how many US Attorney Generals were fired under Pres. Clinton?
http://www.tylwythteg.com/enemies/newt.html
THIS IS THE MAN WHO MAY WELL BE THE REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE.
“Gingrich’s duplicity on the political field can be traced back to a failed 1974 bid for Congress. Mary Kahn, a reporter who covered Gingrich, remembers, “He was always talking about the family being a team, about family values. It was a constant, and a big part of his campaign.”
Several of Gingrich’s closest advisers spotted a flaw in his public stance. They recognized that their candidate was having an affair. One former aide recalls approaching Gingrich’s car with the candidate’s two daughters in tow. Close to the vehicle, the aide spotted a woman with her head buried in Newt’s lap. The aide shielded the daughters and led them away.”
Seems one of the papers asked Chris Vance about this, and his denial was so vehement that one can’t help wonder…
1 Who cares?
THE BLATHERWATCH PIECE IS WORTH READING IF ONLY TO GET OUR FRIEND SHARANSKY’S TAKE ON MCKAY. I SURE DO DESPISE THAT LUNATIC.
THE BOTTOM LINE FROM MCKAY ABOUT THE 2004 ELECTION FLAP: “NO EVIDENCE”.
THAT SURE TICKS OFF THE MINNOW-SIZED, GRANDSTANDER OF GREENLAKE.
Artfart!! I can tell by your name the level(LOW) of your mental capacity. We all should care, no one should be removed from office without just cause.
Re 6: We are trying to find out about why McKay was fired, not about who Bill Clinton fired.
It’s just like when you get a speeding ticket and point out to the officer that other people are speeding: It doesn’t make any difference to the cop. You are still going to get the ticket.
In fact, the “He did it too” defense is something I’d expect from a five year old, not a supposed adult.
I wrote President Bush six years ago in January 2001 and told him that he shouldn’t hire John McKay. I also told President Bush that he shouldn’t have McKay’s older brother Mike McKay in charge of his patronage and appointment committee for the State of Washington. Among other things, I noted that Mike McKay had donated money to Democrats Christine Gregoire and Ron Sims (and this was in 2000 while he was co-chair of Bush’s campaign in Washington to boot!). I also pointed out that the top candidate that Mike McKay’s committee was considering was Seattle attorney Anne Bremner — who had just donated money to Gary Locke and Jay Inslee in October 2000. I also pointed out that Bremner had been convicted of driving without a valid license while she was an attorney (and I believe this may have happened not once, but twice).
So I guess the result of pointing all this out was that dyed-in-the-wool Democrat Anne Bremner was given no further consideration by Mike McKay’s committee. Unfortunately, Bush didn’t replace Mike McKay with a more loyal Republican. Mike McKay’s committee then recommended (1) Rob McKenna, (2) Diane Tebelius, and (3) John McKay to President Bush, to pick among the three names. McKenna would have been the smartest, while Tebelius had over 15 years working in the U.S. Attorney’s Office. Unfortunately, we ended up with John McKay.
I am glad that President Bush is finally correcting this major mistake. I guess a lot of it is that Alberto Gonzalez is a lot smarter and savvy at being Attorney General, than John Ashcroft ever was. Gonzalez is much better at cutting through the political bullshit and making the wisest decisions. Ashcroft probably didn’t like having to appoint John McKay, but had to make peace with GOP moderates, such as Slade Gorton, Jennifer Dunn, and Chris Vance. The dynamics are different these days, with Gorton now six years out of office, Dunn two years out of office, Vance one year out of office, and Mike McGavick getting his tail kicked last fall. So it is okay now to say “Adios” to John McKay.
http://www.buzzflash.com/articles/alerts/189
Bush’s Director for U.S. Attorneys Mysteriously Resigns
“The “unprecedented” U.S. Attorney firing scandal keeps getting weirder. It was revealed today that Michael Battle, the director of the Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys, will resign on March 16.”
8 Aha! So, we can blame Richard. Mystery solved.
ArtFart @ 10
Actually, I haven’t communicated with anyone in the Bush administration about this matter since early 2001. Although I have certainly expressed my opinion from time to time on Sound Politics and other blogging-type stuff.
re 9: You can’t be serious about Gonzales, Richard Pope. Do you really want to raise your daughter in a land governed under Alberto Gonzales’ wacky right wing take on Constitutional freedoms?
An 8th grader could puncture holes in his legal concept of habeus corpus as it relates to the Constitution.
You must be the sock puppet Richard Pope.
Seriously — how can anyone complain about President Bush basically firing John McKay? If John Kerry had been elected in 2004, McKay would have been fired two years earlier, and no one would have complained. Whoever Bush appoints to replace McKay will surely be fired in January 2009, if a Democrat is elected in 2008. And even if a Republican wins in 2008, no one will complain if Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney, John McCain or whoever decides to hire some different person as local U.S. Attorney, than the person Bush picks to be McKay’s successor. U.S. Attorneys serve at the pleasure of the President. If Bush fired McKay because he didn’t like McKay’s politics anymore, then there is no reason for McKay to comment any further on this matter. And if Bush had fired McKay because he refused to do something illegal or unethical, then you would be expecting McKay to be talking about this matter all over town right now (as opposed to the hypothetical statement he made two years ago).
Rising Christian Right Leader Blames Holocaust on Jews
http://www.talk2action.org/sto.....5015/2167/
“Top GOP leaders and presidential hopefuls regularly meet with Texas Pastor John Hagee, founder of a powerful new “Pro-Israel” national lobbying group. In “Jerusalem Countdown”, Hagee says Jews caused the Holocaust by rebelling against God. He also states the Holocaust was God’s way of forcing Jews to move to Israel where Hagee predicts they will soon mostly die in a catastrophic Mideast and Global War Hagee’s lobby seems to be egging on.”
Pope @ 8
Anne Bremner is no Democrat. She is an insurance defense lawyer who has a particular focus on defending Seattle police officers who have been sued for civil rights violations. No good Democrat would do such work. I don’t give a damn who she’s donated money to. Moreover, John McKay was not an asskissing Republican suckup like McKenna or Tebelius, but an attorney who was actually interested in doing his job as a prosecutor. I can see why someone like you would think that bending over for politicians is a more important attribute for a prosecutor than performing the duties of the office.
Mr. Pope:
While the firing of Mr. McKay is the headline, the real issue here is that the Bush administration managed to slip a couple of paragraphs into a 277 page-long bill while it was in conference committee. (Neither the House nor Senate versions of the bill had this provision going into committee, and several Republicans have stated that they knew nothing about it until the firings.)
The new provision allows the President to name “interim” replacements that do not need Senate confirmation.
Under the old system, the President could fire any U.S. Attorney he wanted to, but he knew that the replacement would have to face Senate confirmation. This tended to temper the temptation to fire someone for simply disagreeing with the White House on some individual issue.
It also required the President to name someone that could get through Senate confirmation, because if he or she couldn’t get confirmed, after 120 days the court got to pick the U.S. Attorney.
The problem is that the White House has “pulled a fast one” on Congress, and is now playing politics with the U.S. Attorney’s offices.
Bush made the mistake of not cleaning house when he first got elected. He wanted to set a “new tone” which was stupid. He had a mandate and a second chance to clean house in 2004 when he won by 4 million votes (more if you discount all the fraudulent dem votes). Coulda, woulda, shoulda.
Ann Coulter is a babe and a hero. You go girl. I love it when you pussy lefties get tied in knots over her comments. heehehhe. Maybe she can write a fictional book on how to assasinate a liberal president. Liberals can dish it out but cant take it. hehehehe
Dickie Pope: “If Bush fired McKay because he didn’t like McKay’s politics anymore, then there is no reason for McKay to comment…”
The first clause is totally contradicted by the second, but who’s paying attention? If this was indeed a political decision (widely assumed), then all is fair game.
@6 For your information, U.S. Attorneys are appointed by the president and serve at his pleasure, and incoming presidents of the opposite party customarily replace them. That’s not the same thing as suddenly firing a bunch of U.S. Attorneys from your own party, that you have appointed, which the Senate has confirmed. Does Bush have the authority to replace them? Sure. Do we have the right, as citizens, to ask why? Damn right we do.
@11 If you wrote them about it in 2001, your letter would have worked its way up the hierarchy to Gonzales’ desk right about now.
@17 “when he won by 4 million votes”
This number seems to grow with every retelling. You might want to go back and check the official results to see what the actual number was.
@17 Or do you wish to assert that “4” is a typo?
@18 Ann Coulter would be ideal as a Republican “family values” candidate.
@18 That is, if she’s still eligible to run for office or vote when the prosecutor in Florida is finished with her.
Re: 24. do you have some evidence that Ann Coulter has been indicted in Florida for something or are you the Kieth Olberman of Horseses ass and just decided to make something up?
24
Well you never know with a liberal, they are famous for pulling charges from their ass based on nothing. I should know, I worked for See (forged documents) BS.
I tell you that Rove has caused you Publicans to looooose your minds. Do you really think that you can play this shit? What; do you want to ask if we can PROVE the sky is blue and then claim it isn’t until we can prove it?
Google you right wing turd. That lying, aids-infested cunt Coulter was charged with voting out of her district. And by the way, this was news back in Nov. I guess you righties watching Fox Nothing Channel don’t get much real news now do you?
Anyone who is found out to be a liberal should be second guessed on anything they say including criminal charges. Yessss you do have to prove it. You lying sacks of shit.
The Republicons only have one rule.
Party before country.
Period.
That is why they should be treated like other vermin.
#27 why do you hate Rather. He had the story right. Bush was AWOL, and his “handlers” had all him military records (in triplicate) destroyed.
It is amazing how the righties can ignore the treason committed by the sleaze in the White House, and complain about a Democrat if they spit on a sidewalk.
Republicons make real Americans want to puke.
By the way, your party is dead.
Nobody with an IQ in double digits will vote for Republicans for the next few decades. In 20 years or more of Democrats in charge, and we endure peace, and prosperity, we will have almost forgotten your morally bankrupt party, except for the ongoing prosecutions…..
2011 Newsflash: Congress approved emergency funding for the construction of 7 additional prisons to hold all the convicted Bush Administration officials….
rob says: Re: 24. do you have some evidence that Ann Coulter has been indicted in Florida for something or are you the Kieth Olberman of Horseses ass and just decided to make something up?
—–
Republicons don’t prosecute Republicons. Especially the true party leaders like Coulter. She could vote in 20 places and walk. We all know that!
Republicons hate “liberals” because sleazebags like Rush, and Coulter tell them to. Their whole ideology is about hate, greed, and fear, and nothing else.
Liberals “hate” Republicons because of the damage they have done to America.
That is the difference.
YOU CAN ALWAYS COUNT ON BRAINWASHED WINGNUTS LIKE DOOFUS TO LOSE. HE’S BEEN LOSING SINCE NOV 2004. EVEN IF THEY HAVE THEIR DAY IN THE SUN BECAUSE TOO MANY PEOPLE BUY THEIR BULLSHIT, IT’S ONLY A MATTER OF TIME WHEN THEY GET BACK TO LOSING.
BECAUSE THEY’RE LOSERS. IT’S IN THEIR NATURE TO BUY PHONY IDEOLOGIES THAT LOSE.