At Ask Me Help Desk you can ask questions in any topic and have them
answered for free by our experts. To ask questions or participate in
answering them you must register for a free account. By registering you
will be able to:
Get free answers from experts in any of our 300+
topics.
Recently, Donald C. Shields, from the University of Missouri-St. Louis, and John F. Cragan, from Illinois State University, accounted for all of the public officials investigated by all U.S. attorneys across the country. They found that under the Bush administration, for every one Republican investigated, seven Democrats were investigated.
Is there a moral to the story…or is it that the U.S. attorneys under Bush are targeting Democrats?
I work in NJ . I can tell you that the Dems have turned the state into a cesspool of corruption. I have no doubt that investigations of officials from the State distort the over-all national percentage you cite .Corruption is as much of the character of the state as the smell in the air when you drive on the Jersey Turnpike near the Linden oil fields .
Honestly ,the reason there are so many Democrat public officials in the state who have or will do the frog march soon ,and so many others under investigation is that they are the ones in control. The few times the Republicans gave it a go they were the happy pigs at the trough .
Recently NJ had a slogan contest . Here were some of the better suggestions :
"New Jersey: The only state you have to pay to leave."
"What you make, Trenton takes"
"Come to New Jersey, where the landscape will take your breath away - and so will your tax bill."
"New Jersey: Things are as bad as they seem."
"New Jersey: Where the roads are paved and the pockets lined with good intentions"
"New Jersey: Pay to play, play to win"
"New Jersey: Corrupt and proud"
"New Jersey: We can have you killed"
"New Jersey: It's a death trap, it's a suicide rap, get out while you're young."
I work in NJ . I can tell you that the Dems have turned the state into a cesspool of corruption. I have no doubt that investigations of officials from the State distort the over-all national percentage you cite .Corruption is as much of the character of the state as the smell in the air when you drive on the Jersey Turnpike near the Linden oil fields .
Honestly ,the reason there are so many Democrat public officials in the state who have or will do the frog march soon ,and so many others under investigation is that they are the ones in control. The few times the Republicans gave it a go they were the happy pigs at the trough .
Recently NJ had a slogan contest . Here were some of the better suggestions :
"New Jersey: The only state you have to pay to leave."
"What you make, Trenton takes"
"Come to New Jersey, where the landscape will take your breath away - and so will your tax bill."
"New Jersey: Things are as bad as they seem."
"New Jersey: Where the roads are paved and the pockets lined with good intentions"
"New Jersey: Pay to play, play to win"
"New Jersey: Corrupt and proud"
"New Jersey: We can have you killed"
"New Jersey: It's a death trap, it's a suicide rap, get out while you're young."
"New Jersey: One state, under indictment."
"New Jersey: Everything you've heard is true."
How about this one:
"New Jersey: If this is what it's like, I'd hate to see Old Jersey"
If they ALL do that [fire federal attorneys] then why was it bought up as an issue in the first place? And if they have the right to do so, even for purely partisan reasons, why was Gonzalez hounded out of office? And for what reason should the Republicans not do the same thing to the next Democrat president's AG?
If they ALL do that [fire federal attorneys] then why was it bought up as an issue in the first place? Why was Gonzalez hounded out of office?
Hello El:
They can FIRE them for any reasons whatsoever. But, they can't LIE about why they did it.
If, when asked why he did it, Gonzales could have given the lawyerly and quite correct response of, no comment. Instead, he lied. I think liars in high places should be called into account.
It is. Like I said, liars in high places should be called into account.
The Woverine has a short memory. You have NO memory whatsoever. I'm not a Democrat. I don't like Democrats. I don't like Bill Clinton. I don't Like Hillary Clinton. I never did.
Fortunately, you don't have to rely on my memory either. Everything I've ever written here is archived for your perusal. Go find where I supported Bill.
Those who look for hypocrisy are liable to find it.
They can FIRE them for any reasons whatsoever. But, they can't LIE about why they did it.
How about saying nothing on the subject at all? You seem to be fine with that. Does the admin have to give a reason for firing the attorneys? Clinton didn't. Neither did any other President. It was never even questioned before Bush came along.
If instead of testifying "I don't remember" (which is the same thing as saying "no comment" in my book) Gonzalez had come out and directly "no comment", do you think the Dem Congress would have stopped pressing the issue? Would they have been satisfied with that response?
The point is that the question should never have been asked in the first place. Congress has no right to know the answer to the question. It's none of their business. The entire affair bordered on (stepped over?) breaking the separation of powers between the Legislative and the Executive.
Gonzo could have answered, "I fired them because I didn't like their ties", or "I fired them because none of them would let me screw their wives." He could have said anything he wanted or nothing at all on the subject. He could have lied through his teeth on the subject. None of it is actionable by Congress or anyone else except the President. Congress doesn't have the right to know. The PEOPLE don't have a right to know in this case. And therefore, Gonzo could have deliberately lied to the public under oath and it wouldn't have mattered, because Congress has no say in the matter.
Gonzo was indeed a fool, but not because he fired these guys or even because he lied or claimed he didn't remember why they were fired. He's a fool because he let Congress dictate the fight without simply telling them in the strongest of terms "Go screw yourselves, this is none of your business, and I have no intention of honoring your illegal subpoena on a matter that is outside your constitutional powers. You don't like it? Arrest me, if you like, and we'll have a nice little Constitutional crisis." And Bush should have backed up such a statement with his own. THAT was Gonzo and Bush's error. Not any lies that may or my not have been told, not the firings themselves, just not telling Congress to go screw themselves.
Linear Mode
