"Firing U.S. Attorneys is President's Job" by Token Bushiebot in my local progressive rag

[Emit]

I could write a book in response to this bushiebot. Usually, I dismiss this twirp; however, I feel compelled to write a response to this trash he wrote in one of our local rags. Yes, I know he is really not even worth the time, but, given that he is the token bushie in this otherwise progressive rag, and because the subject matter is so important, I will be writing a response. Perhaps, I can even convince RN&R to allow me a full editorial on the subject.

I've been following this topic closely, so I know pretty much what I need to say. But, any insight DUers can offer is greatly appreciated. At a minimum, it's usually the snarky, articulate zingers that DUers are known for that inspire, motivate and move me.

Firing U.S. attorneys is president's job

By Michael Lafferty
[e-mail]

"God is a Republican, and Santa Claus is a Democrat." – H. L. Mencken

Should White House or U.S. Supreme Court staffers be immune from congressional subpoenas?

Yes 24.59 % (60)

No 75.41 % (184)

Total votes: 244

So sayeth a Reno Gazette-Journal online poll as of March 22. It proves the appalling lack of constitutional knowledge among the general populace for those who answered the poll in the negative. For the uninitiated, the poll was no doubt in response to Congressional wrangling to get the White House to testify before Congress about the recent firings of eight U.S. attorneys.

~snip~

First, let's start with a premise. Namely that the Attorney General and an assortment of other appointments are made by the President of the United States in his role as "the man in charge" of the executive branch.

So while ding-a-ling Democrats in charge of Congress trip all over themselves ginning up the next "big" scandal amongst the otherwise evil and corrupt Bush & Company, let's try to remember a few things. First, with the exception of judges, who enjoy lifetime appointments, everyone serves at the pleasure of the President as a political appointment. A corollary to that is that an appointee can be fired or asked to step down for any reason or no reason at all.

Second. Both the executive branch (the President) and the legislative branch (Congress) have certain rights and powers relative to the "checks and balances" between the branches as provided for in the Constitution. For example, the President is the commander-in-chief of the military. So whether Congress likes the events surrounding Iraq or not, about their only say in the matter is to legislatively defund the military in Iraq--to the extent they really wish to stop it. (Of course that would require something resembling a backbone amongst Democrats--but that's a subject for another column.)

The point is that while Congress may have oversight, that does not mean they get to second guess or oversee the President's day-to-day handling of things. Firing eight political appointments does not a scandal make. I mean, you'd think Bush & Company fired them all. Oh wait a minute. That's where myopic Democrats should perhaps remind themselves of a little history. You see, on his watch, former President Bill Clinton (Democrat) fired all 93 U. S. attorneys out of the gate when he first took office in 1992.

~snip~

Although let's also recall that Democrats--led by Henry Waxman (D-CA) --also got their undies in a bunch and held Congressional hearings over alleged uses of steroids by major league baseball players, too. The point and purpose then, however, doesn't seem unlike what they're doing now, to-wit: making a lot of noise but not a whole lot of substance.

http://www.newsreview.com/reno/Content?oid=303008

[EVDebs]

1. So why did he need special tweaking of the Patriot Act NOW for ?

CIA/GOP money connections being found out about during Carol Lam's investigation will lead to more CIA and more in congress. You're seeing acts of desperation now.

[hobbit709]

2. "Teaching a pig to sing

is a waste of YOUR time and only annoys the pig"

[DCKit]

3. The PUBLIC has good reason for being constitutionally illiterate

What's the excuse of the DoJ and administration?

[BuyingThyme]

4. Two Simple Points:

1. A president cannot fire U.S. attorneys in an effort to obstruct justice. That is a crime. The crime is known as obstruction of justice.

2. The Constitution give Congress, not the president, the power to declare war.

Thank you.

[BOSSHOG]

5. And I believe it was 90 years ago today

that President Wilson asked congress to declare war on Germany. Gee, see how easy that works. Every day I see the news and read the paper I am convinced conservatives are intentionally idiots. They are very proud of their ignorance.

[Robbien]

6. POTUS cannot hire any USA he wants. He must get congressional

approval.

However one third of all sitting USA's were not even put up for congressional approval.

They are temporary appointments sitting in USA spots and most have the qualifications of a badly educated dog catcher. But they are good bushies.

[beltanefauve]

7. Ding-a-ling

Democrats? Sure, go right for the jugular with the name-calling! :rofl: This is SO typical. And tripping "all over themselves ginning up the next "big" scandal" is directly out of THEIR playbook, not ours. I guess the concept of oversight and accountibility is completely lost on this guy.