March 14, 2007
Gonzales and Attorneys
I think Kevin nailed the real issue here, awhile back. If the Whitehouse and the DoJ had simply let these people go, and replaced them – it probably wouldn’t have gotten a second glance.
The problem is that – that wasn’t enough. The needed to manufacture performance problems for those fired, which pissed off the ones fired, and which started this ball rolling.
And, yes. Clinton fired all the US Attorneys at the start of his administration. As did Bush Sr. before him, and Reagan before him. What’s unusual is that these people were appointed by Bush and were targeted, apparently, because they were not carrying enough political water
David said (at March 15, 2007 10:10 AM):
Bush sr. and Reagan did not fire all the US attorneys immediately upon taking office. Clinton is the only president to have pulled that stunt.
dolphin said (at March 15, 2007 11:12 AM):
David,
I suspect that you are getting hung up on the word "all."
You may be right that Clinton was the first to fire "all" the US attorneys immediately upon taking office. The fact is that whether "all" or "nearly all" it's common when a president first takes office. That's why there was no outcry when Bush Jr cleared out "nearly all" (according to Karl Rove) of Clinton's US Attorneys upon taking office.
Bush's new actions are unprecedented because once the new appointees are in place, they aren't messed with. In the last 25 years there's been like 3 firings of US Attorneys (outside of the initial clean-out). Bush is more than doubling that all at once.