General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: How global corporations can hack anyone's computers for $2.5 million [View all]OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)In spite of the long-accepted, constitutionally sound, independence-preserving method of appointing interim U.S. Attorneys, the appointment process was radically changed with the reauthorization of the USA PATRIOT Act in 2006. Removed was the interbranch appointment from the district court; the Attorney General could now make interim U.S. Attorney appointments. Also eliminated was the 120 day period that interim U.S. Attorneys could stay in office before a district court could appoint an interim U.S. Attorney to fill the vacancy. Interim U.S. Attorneys could now remain in office indefinitely, or until the President appointed a U.S. Attorney to the district. Interim U.S. Attorney appointments bypassed Senate confirmation, leaving the determination of qualification to the Justice Department.
When there was a close election, feds would launch an investigation against the (Democratic) challenger. The study conducted by Shields and Cragan in 2007 found that Democrats were prosecuted over Republicans, 86% to 12%.
Couple this with the GSA violating the Hatch Act (and Scott Bloch destroying the evidence.)