Democrats double-minded on attorney firings

While Democrats seize any and every excuse to investigate the Bush Administration and attempt to intimidate the nation’s first Hispanic Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales, into resignation, they are also displaying their double standards. In more ways than one.

First, the Democrats all too quickly have forgotten recent history. In 1993, their guy – Bill Clinton – fired every single US attorney shortly after taking office. While replacing attorneys is a common practice when the administration changes hands, usually it is a gradual process, as attorneys in the middle of critical cases are generally allowed to finish out their work before being shown the door.

Clinton changed that rule, firing everyone in sight and gradually restaffing the US Attorneys Office with his own political cronies. It was unprecedented at the time, injecting such sudden partisanship into US legal proceedings. While the power was always there to do so, no president prior to Clinton had wielded that power so swiftly and completely.

Clinton’s attorney firings involved hundreds; now, Dems are decrying the firing of eight? That’s a double-standard. Liberals are trying to apply first aid kits to any potential black eyes they might get from folks with memories that go beyond last night’s sound-byte-drenched newscasts, by claiming there’s a big difference between firing attorneys in the Justice Department at the beginning of an administration, versus firing them in the middle of one.

Don’t be fooled. US attorneys, like all administration members, serve at the pleasure of the president and can be dismissed at any time, for any reason, without explanation. That’s how the Clintonistas described it back then, and the same principle applies now.

The real “big difference” libs are ignoring is a more inconvenient truth: there’s a big difference between firing eight attorneys, and hundreds of them!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

CommentLuv badge