Quote:
Originally Posted by 70Chip
This hardly amounts to an eye-popping distinction. It's okay to fire all of them right away but you can't fire a few after 2 or 5 years? This is pure politics. The Democrats think that if they hold enough hearings someone will slip up. I'm amazed that they haven't found a crime to prosecute yet. I'm not sure if the obdurate simpleton, Janet Reno, could have withstood such scrutiny.
The Democrats seem to be operating under the misapprehension that somehow their 2006 election victory nullified the 2004 presidential election. Wishful thinking. The President can do what the hell he wants with hiring and firing.
|
This is not pure politics. This is a blatant disregard for an institution that should be treated with the highest honor and respect. These people are the curators of law in the nation, they are not to be toyed with and labeled incompetent, fired, and replaced with unqualified individuals. Lets not make this to us vs. them. This is is a serious matter that should concern us all. Believe me, if this was Clinton administration doing the firing I would be saying the same thing.
I mean really, do you want the president firing a whole bunch of AGs every 3 months, 6 months, year, etc? Yes, he has the power to do so but there are reasons why one shouldn't do that and certainly one shouldn't fire AGs because they don't meet Monica Goodling's litmus test or a certain Senator doesn't like how they are handling a case.