Study: Bush's U.S. Attorney Firings "Unprecedented"
A BUZZFLASH NEWS ALERT
President Bush recently fired seven U.S. Attorneys for political reasons and replaced them with members of his "inner circle."
Today, a new report concludes that Bush's actions were completely unprecedented. The study was conducted by the non-partisan Congressional Research Service (CRS) and released by House Judiciary Chairman Rep. John Conyers and Subcommittee Chairwoman Rep. Linda Sánchez.
The CRS found that of the 486 U.S. Attorneys confirmed in a president's initial term since 1981, 54 left voluntarily before completing a full four-year term. Of those, no more than three had been forced out under circumstances similar to the current situation.
The examination is ongoing because the Bush Administration has refused to cooperate with the CRS' investigation. "I intend to do everything within my power to obtain the necessary information and get to the bottom of this growing scandal," Conyers said.
48 of the 54 U.S. Attorneys studied had resigned to pursue other jobs, such as federal judgeships or more lucrative opportunities in the private sector. Of the remaining eight, two were apparently dismissed by President Reagan for specific behavior and three resigned after "questionable conduct" (our favorite was Kendall Coffey, who quit "amid accusations that he bit a topless dancer on the arm during a visit to an adult club after losing a big drug case.")
The CRS was unable to locate specific information on the reasons for the resignations of the remaining three Attorneys, although they noted one was only two months away from completing his term (this was another Dubya appointee).
At most, then, only a trio of Attorneys in the last 25 years was fired under the same mysterious circumstances as the seven sacked recently by Bush.
"The findings of this report cast more doubt on the Bush Administration's decision to fire important federal watchdogs, many of whom were involved in federal corruption probes," said Congresswoman Sánchez. "No presidential administration - now or in the future - should be allowed to dismantle the important constitutional set of checks and balances to achieve a political agenda."
The full House Judiciary Committee will hold a closed-door briefing on this issue on February 28th and the Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law is set to hold a hearing on the matter in early March. The Senate is also working to prevent further abuses by the Bush Administration, although Republicans have blocked Democrats' initial attempts.
Click here to read the report (pdf)
A BUZZFLASH NEWS ALERT
- Login or register to post comments
- Printer-friendly version
Buzz this on Buzzflash.net




Technorati Tags:
Attorney Firings
Anyone want to guess how many attorneys were fired by Janet Reno, with little or no mention made of it?
Missed some history
Clinton fired all but one US Attorney when he came into office. None of whom (obviously) were his appointees.
Get over it.
WTF?!
Why focus on this latest harder to prove crime?
We don't have enough evidence of illegal wire taps, torture, rendition, Katrina, incompetence, kidnapping, war-profiteering, war-mongering, treason, rape, murder to name just a few of the crimes this government has committed? Has Conyer forgotten the indignation of having to have the Downing Street Memo's hearing being held in a basement? And what happened to them? Where's Waxman with all his bolster about all the hearings and oversight? Does Pelosi still think impeachment is "off the table"?
FUCK THAT AND FUCK ANYONE THAT DOES NOT DO WHAT WE ELECTED THEM TO DO! FUCK YOUR NON-BINDING RESOLUTIONS! FUCK YOUR POSTURING! GET THE FUCK OUT OF IRAQ NOW AND HOLD SOMEONE - ANYONE - ACCOUNTABLE!!! OR GET THE FUCK OUT OF THE WAY!
Unprecedented
Wanna know what else is unprecedented? Bush, that's what. He'd rather have a farting contest with Turdblossom than go about the annoying business of presedintal work, and no wonder. The job is so far over his head, it's not entrusted to him to perform. Cheney and his shadow government do that. They tell him where to go and what to say, and he can't even get that right half of the time. Now, who in his right mind would support a psycotic ignoramus for the nation's highest office? Not enough people to legitimately elect him, as was proven in the 2000 & 2004 "elections".