Page 2 of 11 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 106

Thread: Key Witnesses to Be Interviewed in Prosecutor Firings

  1. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Ventura California
    Last Seen
    11-15-11 @ 11:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    8,706

    Re: Key Witnesses to Be Interviewed in Prosecutor Firings

    Quote Originally Posted by aps View Post
    Sigh. You just don't get it, do you? Yes, they serve at the pleasure of the president and he can fire them for cause or no cause. HOWEVER, he cannot fire them for illegal or improper reasons.
    "HOWEVER, he cannot fire them for illegal or improper reasons" .... as defined by Liberals for purely political purposes.

    Just needed a little fix here to make it pertinent to the debate; the FACT here is that the people fired are making false and specious claims that NO investigation will change; they were LEGALLY fired for their actions or inactions. I don't care if the person firing them had said they didn't like the way their hair was done.

  2. #12
    Passionate
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Last Seen
    03-07-11 @ 04:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    15,675

    Re: Key Witnesses to Be Interviewed in Prosecutor Firings

    Quote Originally Posted by JMak View Post
    You're as foolish as you are naive. Politics plays a very critical role in the DoJ and rightly so.

    First, United States Attorneys are ~gasp~ political appointees.

    Second, while the commission of crime is infinite, the resources available to investigate and prosecute those crimes are finite. Consequently, the allocation of such finite resources is a political decision. For example, Clinton made investigating and prosecuting health care fraud as one his priorities. Bush made child porn one such priority.

    For you to argue that politics should have no role in the DoJ is absolutely foolish and reveals that you really have nothing meaningful to say at all.
    Oh brother. I would recommend your looking in the mirror when you write out the words, "You're as foolish as you are naive."

  3. #13
    Passionate
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Last Seen
    03-07-11 @ 04:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    15,675

    Re: Key Witnesses to Be Interviewed in Prosecutor Firings

    Quote Originally Posted by Truth Detector View Post
    "HOWEVER, he cannot fire them for illegal or improper reasons" .... as defined by Liberals for purely political purposes.

    Just needed a little fix here to make it pertinent to the debate; the FACT here is that the people fired are making false and specious claims that NO investigation will change; they were LEGALLY fired for their actions or inactions. I don't care if the person firing them had said they didn't like the way their hair was done.
    But that's not what they said. Keep talking, Truth Detector. I soooo believe that you have a better grasp of this issue than the Inspector General of the Department of Justice.

  4. #14
    Professor

    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Last Seen
    02-13-09 @ 05:15 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,942

    Re: Key Witnesses to Be Interviewed in Prosecutor Firings

    Quote Originally Posted by aps View Post
    Oh brother. I would recommend your looking in the mirror when you write out the words, "You're as foolish as you are naive."
    Color me underwhelmed, aps. Look, whether you approve or not, politics is central to how the DoJ operates. Wishing it were otherwise doesn't make it so nor make it desireable.

    It's clear now that I was right and that you didn't have anything meaningful to say by posting that politics should play no role in the DoJ. It's a throw-away line, much like Obama's lies that opponents of this spending bill are really advocates of doing nothing. Throw away lines that reveal you have nothing meaningful to say on the issue.

  5. #15
    Professor

    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Last Seen
    02-13-09 @ 05:15 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,942

    Re: Key Witnesses to Be Interviewed in Prosecutor Firings

    Quote Originally Posted by aps View Post
    But that's not what they said. Keep talking, Truth Detector. I soooo believe that you have a better grasp of this issue than the Inspector General of the Department of Justice.
    Weak appeal to authority.

    The OIG reported:
    We concluded that the process the Department used to select the U.S. Attorneys for removal was fundamentally flawed, and the oversight and implementation of the removal process by the Departmentís most senior leaders was seriously lacking. In particular, we found that Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty failed to adequately supervise the U.S. Attorney selection and removal process, and they were remarkably unengaged in the process. Instead, Chief of Staff to the Attorney General Kyle Sampson, with very little input from other Department officials, designed, selected, and implemented the removal process, with little supervision or oversight. In addition, after the removals became public the statements provided by the Attorney General and other Department officials about the reasons for the removals were inconsistent, misleading, and inaccurate in many respects.
    That's great and all...however, none of this can be read as a conclusion that the dismissals were were improper or illegal.

    The most serious allegations that arose were that the U.S. Attorneys were removed based on improper political factors, including to affect the way they handled certain voter fraud or public corruption investigations and prosecutions. Our investigation found significant evidence that political partisan considerations were an important factor in the removal of several of the U.S. Attorneys.
    So what? Partisan political reasons are sufficient when administrations change. Why not during an administration?

    All the OIG is saying is that the process of dismissing was flawed and that as a result of the dismissals several allegations were raised.

    That's it.

    Amazingly, however, you people appeal to this as evidence that the dismissals were improper or illegal.

  6. #16
    Passionate
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Last Seen
    03-07-11 @ 04:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    15,675

    Re: Key Witnesses to Be Interviewed in Prosecutor Firings

    Quote Originally Posted by JMak View Post
    Weak appeal to authority.

    The OIG reported:


    That's great and all...however, none of this can be read as a conclusion that the dismissals were were improper or illegal.



    So what? Partisan political reasons are sufficient when administrations change. Why not during an administration?

    All the OIG is saying is that the process of dismissing was flawed and that as a result of the dismissals several allegations were raised.

    That's it.

    Amazingly, however, you people appeal to this as evidence that the dismissals were improper or illegal.
    You know what, JMak? I am happy for you since you clearly believe the stuff you spew. Have a nice day.

  7. #17
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Ventura California
    Last Seen
    11-15-11 @ 11:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    8,706

    Re: Key Witnesses to Be Interviewed in Prosecutor Firings

    Quote Originally Posted by aps View Post
    But that's not what they said. Keep talking, Truth Detector. I soooo believe that you have a better grasp of this issue than the Inspector General of the Department of Justice.
    I am perfectly willing to bet an asshat avatar for three months that no charges will ever be brought in this case.

  8. #18
    Professor
    Phoenix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    04-27-17 @ 10:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,782

    Re: Key Witnesses to Be Interviewed in Prosecutor Firings

    Quote Originally Posted by aps View Post
    Sigh. You just don't get it, do you? Yes, they serve at the pleasure of the president and he can fire them for cause or no cause. HOWEVER, he cannot fire them for illegal or improper reasons.

    The Bush Administration claimed that the US Attorneys were fired due to underperformance. If that was the case, the inquiry would end there. But that appears NOT to be the case, and that improper/illegal reasons were used to fire them.
    __

    This is directed at anyone who says, "But the President can fire them for cause or no cause."

    At this point, I am done trying to explain things. If you want to speak intelligently about this issue, I would suggest you read the report. Otherwise, stop talking out of your butt!

    OIG Special Report: An Investigation into the Removal of Nine U.S. Attorneys in 2006
    If you can show me where it's written in the law what constitutes a "Legal" or "Proper" termination, then maybe we can have an intelligent debate. The fact is, it's never specified, any attempt to determine what is legal or proper is speculation without written law.
    From the ashes.

  9. #19
    Professor

    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Last Seen
    02-13-09 @ 05:15 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,942

    Re: Key Witnesses to Be Interviewed in Prosecutor Firings

    Quote Originally Posted by aps View Post
    You know what, JMak? I am happy for you since you clearly believe the stuff you spew. Have a nice day.
    Again, clearly underwhelmed by your response.

    I mean, if you don't want to engage in debate about the comments you make, then why do you respond to substantive criticisms with crap like you did above?

    Just let it go.

  10. #20
    Professor

    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Last Seen
    02-13-09 @ 05:15 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,942

    Re: Key Witnesses to Be Interviewed in Prosecutor Firings

    Quote Originally Posted by Phoenix View Post
    If you can show me where it's written in the law what constitutes a "Legal" or "Proper" termination, then maybe we can have an intelligent debate. The fact is, it's never specified, any attempt to determine what is legal or proper is speculation without written law.
    You know, I'm on the same page as you...

    I know of no legal standard that must be satisfied before dismissing a US Attorney. Politically-speaking, though, it may be unwise and even inappropriate to can a US Attorney for failing to prosecute crimes you want to see prosecuted or to stop a pending investigation. I guess in some political sense that would be characterized as "improper." But such a characterization is completely irrelevant. The only price to be paid would be a political one.

Page 2 of 11 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •