Do you know the difference between firing ALL attorneys, and just picking 8?
Sunday, April 6th, 2008 at
6:27 pm
overseas online pharmacy src=”/wp-content/uploads/cc/attorneys23.jpg” title=’attorneys’ alt=’attorneys’ />d j asked:
Yes, Clinton fired all 93 attorneys. Almost every president in history has done the same. This way it avoids the conflicts Bush ran into. Clinton fired them all when he started his term.
Bush only fired the 8 that were involved in investigating corrupt republicans. There is a BIG difference between the 2, and those that compare them make complete @sses of themselves when they do.
Yes, Clinton fired all 93 attorneys. Almost every president in history has done the same. This way it avoids the conflicts Bush ran into. Clinton fired them all when he started his term.
Bush only fired the 8 that were involved in investigating corrupt republicans. There is a BIG difference between the 2, and those that compare them make complete @sses of themselves when they do.
I’m sorry, I can’t answer your question at this time. I don’t recall.
If you think Clinton didn’t have certain attorneys in mind youre kidding yourself. He fired them all to cover his tracks.
They should fire that US attorney attacking Ted Stevens.
Yes, I know the difference. And so does everyone else. That;’s why they are investigating for wrong doing. I guess if there was no problem, and no crime, the admin would release the info and let people testify. But instead, they are so scared, they will allow their friends to take the fall (and the contempt citations) for them. Who needs enemies with friends like that, eh?
FIRING them because they wont engage in witch hunts of the political opposition or dissenters is wrong. flat wrong.
Most Presidents fired all the attorneys when they took office. That’s what Clinton did also.
Bush is the only one in history who fired a select few, in the middle of his term, for political reasons and then lied and said it was for performance reasons.
See the difference?
To be fair, not all 8 were investigating alleged Republican corruption. Some had refused to investigate alleged Democratic corruption.
On the other hand, you can’t expect those defending the administration to start using facts in their arguments, now can you?
shame on you for using facts young man — go write I can’t recall on the blackboard 47 times
Who were the corrupt Republican politicians that these 8 where investigating?
Don’t say Duke Cunningham, because he plead guilty resigned in 2005.