Comments on: Gonzales Chief Of Staff Rebuts Rove Claim That Clinton Purged Prosecutors Too http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/13/sampson-rove-attorney/ Thu, 26 Nov 2009 22:53:25 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 By: mia http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/13/sampson-rove-attorney/comment-page-2/#comment-2618445 mia Mon, 26 Mar 2007 17:46:44 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/13/sampson-rove-attorney/#comment-2618445 my friend joe has a great piece on this on his site www.joeleonardi.wordpress.com/ mia my friend joe has a great piece on this on his site
http://www.joeleonardi.wordpress.com/

mia

]]> By: Erik http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/13/sampson-rove-attorney/comment-page-2/#comment-2371049 Erik Wed, 21 Mar 2007 01:45:23 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/13/sampson-rove-attorney/#comment-2371049 Welcome to the Democratic Fiction Machine. The plain fact is that Clinton is the ONLY president to fire all 93 attorneys, in the middle of their terms, for purely political reasons. Since U.S. Attorneys serve 4-year terms, in post-Clinton America, these terms expire now shortly after the presidential innauguration. Bush replaced most of the Clinton-appointed attorneys after their terms had expired, as had been traditionally done, by every president except Clinton. I don't know if Clinton replaced any of his attorneys after their initial 4 years, but if any of them were not performing their jobs satisfactorally, as was the present case, then he should have. Welcome to the Democratic Fiction Machine. The plain fact is that Clinton is the ONLY president to fire all 93 attorneys, in the middle of their terms, for purely political reasons. Since U.S. Attorneys serve 4-year terms, in post-Clinton America, these terms expire now shortly after the presidential innauguration. Bush replaced most of the Clinton-appointed attorneys after their terms had expired, as had been traditionally done, by every president except Clinton. I don’t know if Clinton replaced any of his attorneys after their initial 4 years, but if any of them were not performing their jobs satisfactorally, as was the present case, then he should have.

]]> By: Zev Mo Bloggin’ » Blog Archives » Republicans and U.S. attorneys — then and now http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/13/sampson-rove-attorney/comment-page-2/#comment-2336522 Zev Mo Bloggin’ » Blog Archives » Republicans and U.S. attorneys — then and now Tue, 20 Mar 2007 01:52:44 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/13/sampson-rove-attorney/#comment-2336522 [...] own Chief of Staff recognized the unprecedented nature of what they were planning in an email he wrote to the White [...] [...] own Chief of Staff recognized the unprecedented nature of what they were planning in an email he wrote to the White [...]

]]> By: James Bain http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/13/sampson-rove-attorney/comment-page-2/#comment-2327667 James Bain Mon, 19 Mar 2007 18:05:22 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/13/sampson-rove-attorney/#comment-2327667 Great posts, everyone! Yeah, even those of you who could only muster the energy to call names. I admit to not being in Mr. Bush's camp; my standards for evaluating public figures was developed outside the United States in a much more corrupt and rough and tumble political environs and would require a bit more space here than I deem polite to occupy, but suffice it to say that, where I come from, for a born-again Christian, or anyone of that ilk, in a position to grant clemency to a similarly born-again Christian, or someone of that ilk who has been condemned to death, to allow execution to proceed is widely considered hypocrisy of the most blatant kind. Needless to say, no words or deeds originating thenceforth from said person are considered above scrutiny, criticism and/or rebuke. I may not be able to raise the average intellectual currency of the cumulative postings here, but I assure you all, it would have been far easier for me to just call Bush names. Just for the record, no one is safe. Politics by its very nature is hypocritical. In all likelihood the very reason more women don't flock to the profession in droves-it is such drudgery to put makeup on two faces. Great posts, everyone! Yeah, even those of you who could only muster the energy to call names.
I admit to not being in Mr. Bush’s camp; my standards for evaluating public figures was developed outside the United States in a much more corrupt and rough and tumble political environs and would require a bit more space here than I deem polite to occupy, but suffice it to say that, where I come from, for a born-again Christian, or anyone of that ilk, in a position to grant clemency to a similarly born-again Christian, or someone of that ilk who has been condemned to death, to allow execution to proceed is widely considered hypocrisy of the most blatant kind.
Needless to say, no words or deeds originating thenceforth from said person are considered above scrutiny, criticism and/or rebuke.
I may not be able to raise the average intellectual currency of the cumulative postings here, but I assure you all, it would have been far easier for me to just call Bush names.
Just for the record, no one is safe. Politics by its very nature is hypocritical. In all likelihood the very reason more women don’t flock to the profession in droves-it is such drudgery to put makeup on two faces.

]]> By: The legal issues in the firings of the US attorneys « Over the line, Smokey! http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/13/sampson-rove-attorney/comment-page-2/#comment-2327375 The legal issues in the firings of the US attorneys « Over the line, Smokey! Mon, 19 Mar 2007 17:56:34 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/13/sampson-rove-attorney/#comment-2327375 [...] own Chief of Staff recognized the unprecedented nature of what they were planning in an email he wrote to the White [...] [...] own Chief of Staff recognized the unprecedented nature of what they were planning in an email he wrote to the White [...]

]]> By: trrll http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/13/sampson-rove-attorney/comment-page-2/#comment-2209740 trrll Fri, 16 Mar 2007 15:02:35 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/13/sampson-rove-attorney/#comment-2209740 "Has Pres. Bush done something immoral here?" Absolutely. To cover up a political move, the Bush administration dishonestly impugned the performance and potentially damaged the careers of US Attorneys who were doing their jobs and doing it well. I think that's immoral in anybody's book. “Has Pres. Bush done something immoral here?”

Absolutely. To cover up a political move, the Bush administration dishonestly impugned the performance and potentially damaged the careers of US Attorneys who were doing their jobs and doing it well. I think that’s immoral in anybody’s book.

]]> By: mike http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/13/sampson-rove-attorney/comment-page-2/#comment-2201273 mike Fri, 16 Mar 2007 07:57:08 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/13/sampson-rove-attorney/#comment-2201273 Serious Question (as so many of you seem to hate more than think or attempt to dialogue) : Has Pres. Bush done something illegal here? Has Pres. Bush done something immoral here? Yes... I think#14 is still right and so many responses simply said 'stupid!' and left it at that as if it was a self-evident truth why he/she was wrong. Don't get pissed- talk to me. Even if Pres Bush fires somebody who does not agree with his policies... what is wrong with this? This is the point of exercising you authority/power. See... at the end of the day you are like him! You want to fire him because you don't agree with his policy. So many of you react as if its HORRIBLE, unlawful, etc that BUSH has an agenda which I find is not uniquely Bush; in other words... nobody really thinks BUSH is guilty because he holds and carries out policies. Rather many of you feel there is something about the nature of his policies that bothers you and yet you dont articulate them. This smells of the Dubai report all over again (which btw Dems and Republicans pulled the funding for port security since it has not been in the news and even today the Dubai company hosts more U.S. navy ships than the U.S. navy itself!!!) It is similar because all I hear is freaking out because Bush is exercising political power/ playing politics rather than discussing the nature of the policy by talking facts. It goes like this. Pres Bush is at it again with his crazy cowboy stupid decisions; case closed no need to dialogue about other possibilities. I digress. its late. by my liberal friends! Serious Question (as so many of you seem to hate more than think or attempt to dialogue) :

Has Pres. Bush done something illegal here?
Has Pres. Bush done something immoral here?

Yes… I think#14 is still right and so many responses simply said ’stupid!’ and left it at that as if it was a self-evident truth why he/she was wrong.

Don’t get pissed- talk to me. Even if Pres Bush fires somebody who does not agree with his policies… what is wrong with this? This is the point of exercising you authority/power. See… at the end of the day you are like him! You want to fire him because you don’t agree with his policy. So many of you react as if its HORRIBLE, unlawful, etc that BUSH has an agenda which I find is not uniquely Bush; in other words… nobody really thinks BUSH is guilty because he holds and carries out policies. Rather many of you feel there is something about the nature of his policies that bothers you and yet you dont articulate them.

This smells of the Dubai report all over again (which btw Dems and Republicans pulled the funding for port security since it has not been in the news and even today the Dubai company hosts more U.S. navy ships than the U.S. navy itself!!!) It is similar because all I hear is freaking out because Bush is exercising political power/ playing politics rather than discussing the nature of the policy by talking facts. It goes like this. Pres Bush is at it again with his crazy cowboy stupid decisions; case closed no need to dialogue about other possibilities.

I digress. its late.

by my liberal friends!

]]> By: Fedup http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/13/sampson-rove-attorney/comment-page-2/#comment-2199863 Fedup Fri, 16 Mar 2007 03:25:53 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/13/sampson-rove-attorney/#comment-2199863 Well Roger this is a "Grandma "and I do care about the future of this country. I'd like to ask Attorney General Gonzales this-if the justice system is peopled with Republican toadies does justice follow? I think not. Firing judges because they did what they are suppose to do--mete out justice--instead of following the administration's game plan, shows me <em><strong>how corrupt they are.</strong></em> Well Roger this is a “Grandma “and I do care about the future of this country.
I’d like to ask Attorney General Gonzales this-if the justice system is peopled with Republican toadies does justice follow? I think not. Firing judges because they did what they are suppose to do–mete out justice–instead of following the administration’s game plan, shows me how corrupt they are.

]]> By: Afi K. James http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/13/sampson-rove-attorney/comment-page-2/#comment-2189794 Afi K. James Thu, 15 Mar 2007 04:35:39 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/13/sampson-rove-attorney/#comment-2189794 Oh Please, Karl Rove, you are the biggest joke in america, right next to kenneth starr. Oh Please, Karl Rove, you are the biggest joke in america, right next to kenneth starr.

]]> By: ArchPundit » Blog Archive » Oops, Bush Administration Pointed Out That Clinton Was Different http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/13/sampson-rove-attorney/comment-page-2/#comment-2186274 ArchPundit » Blog Archive » Oops, Bush Administration Pointed Out That Clinton Was Different Wed, 14 Mar 2007 20:40:14 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/13/sampson-rove-attorney/#comment-2186274 [...] Kyle Sampson, Gonzalez’s Chief-of-Staff explains in an e-mail to Harriet Miers.  Rove attempted to say that the replacements were sort of like finally getting around to replacing holdovers. Not true. [...] [...] Kyle Sampson, Gonzalez’s Chief-of-Staff explains in an e-mail to Harriet Miers.  Rove attempted to say that the replacements were sort of like finally getting around to replacing holdovers. Not true. [...]

]]> By: (Gonzales Chief Of Staff Rebuts Rove Claim That Clinton Purged Prosecutors « Tons of Fresh News http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/13/sampson-rove-attorney/comment-page-2/#comment-2185711 (Gonzales Chief Of Staff Rebuts Rove Claim That Clinton Purged Prosecutors « Tons of Fresh News Wed, 14 Mar 2007 18:52:59 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/13/sampson-rove-attorney/#comment-2185711 [...] Chief Of Staff Rebuts Rove Claim That Clinton Purged Prosecutors (Gonzales Chief Of Staff Rebuts Rove Claim That Clinton Purged Prosecutors At a speech last week in Little Rock, Karl Rove described the Bush administration ’s purge of [...] [...] Chief Of Staff Rebuts Rove Claim That Clinton Purged Prosecutors (Gonzales Chief Of Staff Rebuts Rove Claim That Clinton Purged Prosecutors At a speech last week in Little Rock, Karl Rove described the Bush administration ’s purge of [...]

]]> By: Think Progress » Bush Falsely Claims His Prosecutor Purge Is ‘A Customary Practice By Presidents’ http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/13/sampson-rove-attorney/comment-page-2/#comment-2185606 Think Progress » Bush Falsely Claims His Prosecutor Purge Is ‘A Customary Practice By Presidents’ Wed, 14 Mar 2007 18:28:34 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/13/sampson-rove-attorney/#comment-2185606 [...] chief of staff Kyle Sampson (resigned two days ago), 1/9/07: In recent memory, during the Reagan and Clinton Administrations, Presidents Reagan and Clinton [...] [...] chief of staff Kyle Sampson (resigned two days ago), 1/9/07: In recent memory, during the Reagan and Clinton Administrations, Presidents Reagan and Clinton [...]

]]> By: No_Radio http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/13/sampson-rove-attorney/comment-page-2/#comment-2185400 No_Radio Wed, 14 Mar 2007 17:38:29 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/13/sampson-rove-attorney/#comment-2185400 This e-mail from Sampson, quoted in <em>NY Times</em> story on 3/14, tells you all you need to know about the honor and integrity of the Bush team. <blockquote>“I think we should gum this to death,” Mr. Sampson wrote. “Ask the senators to give Tim a chance, meet with him, give him some time in office to see how he performs, etc. If they ultimately say ‘no never’ (and the longer we can forestall that the better), then we can tell them we’ll look for other candidates, ask them for recommendations, interview their candidates, and otherwise run out the clock. All this should be done in ‘good faith’ of course.”</blockquote> All presidents are necessarily political--they have to be elected and to try for re-election. The difference is that Bush & Co. have nothing but politics to offer, and place that above governing the country. April 1 would be a good day, but I don't see Gonzales as lasting nearly that long. As soon as he got his "Heckuva job" statement from Bush, he was toast. This e-mail from Sampson, quoted in NY Times story on 3/14, tells you all you need to know about the honor and integrity of the Bush team.

“I think we should gum this to death,” Mr. Sampson wrote. “Ask the senators to give Tim a chance, meet with him, give him some time in office to see how he performs, etc. If they ultimately say ‘no never’ (and the longer we can forestall that the better), then we can tell them we’ll look for other candidates, ask them for recommendations, interview their candidates, and otherwise run out the clock. All this should be done in ‘good faith’ of course.”

All presidents are necessarily political–they have to be elected and to try for re-election. The difference is that Bush & Co. have nothing but politics to offer, and place that above governing the country.

April 1 would be a good day, but I don’t see Gonzales as lasting nearly that long. As soon as he got his “Heckuva job” statement from Bush, he was toast.

]]> By: Jeremias X http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/13/sampson-rove-attorney/comment-page-1/#comment-2182628 Jeremias X Wed, 14 Mar 2007 06:31:27 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/13/sampson-rove-attorney/#comment-2182628 This is another in a long string of DoJ/Bush/Rove abuses of our country...how much longer will we allow it to persist before we (or preferably our elected leadership) DO something about it. http://jeremiasx.wordpress.com/2007/03/09/impeachment-vs-revolution/ http://www.impeachbush.org This is another in a long string of DoJ/Bush/Rove abuses of our country…how much longer will we allow it to persist before we (or preferably our elected leadership) DO something about it.

http://jeremiasx.wordpress.com/2007/03/09/impeachment-vs-revolution/

http://www.impeachbush.org

]]> By: Raymond Funamoto http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/13/sampson-rove-attorney/comment-page-1/#comment-2181839 Raymond Funamoto Wed, 14 Mar 2007 04:05:55 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/13/sampson-rove-attorney/#comment-2181839 TYPICAL Rovian SHIT-SKID-MARK STRATEGY--LIE THROUGH YOUR TEETH AND HOPE THEY DON'T NOTICE AND HOPE YOU DON'T GET CAUGHT--NOT POSSIBLE IN THESE DAYS OF E-WARRIORS WITH E-MAILED FISTS THAT ARE EVEN NOW PUMMELLING THAT FAT-F*CK Rove AND CRUSHING HIS FOUR-EYED FACE IN WITH OUR IRON FISTS OF VENGEANCE!!!!! TYPICAL Rovian SHIT-SKID-MARK STRATEGY–LIE THROUGH YOUR TEETH AND HOPE THEY DON’T NOTICE AND HOPE YOU DON’T GET CAUGHT–NOT POSSIBLE IN THESE DAYS OF E-WARRIORS WITH E-MAILED FISTS THAT ARE EVEN NOW PUMMELLING THAT FAT-F*CK Rove AND CRUSHING HIS FOUR-EYED FACE IN WITH OUR IRON FISTS OF VENGEANCE!!!!!

]]> By: * Hater http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/13/sampson-rove-attorney/comment-page-1/#comment-2181506 * Hater Wed, 14 Mar 2007 01:58:16 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/13/sampson-rove-attorney/#comment-2181506 Roger Roger: You're a Moron Moron. Roger Roger:

You’re a Moron Moron.

]]> By: WC http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/13/sampson-rove-attorney/comment-page-1/#comment-2180242 WC Tue, 13 Mar 2007 22:55:52 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/13/sampson-rove-attorney/#comment-2180242 Hey Roger! According to documents released, it appears that a list of attorneys was perused, and that the people recommended for retaining are (were) those that “exhibit loyalty to the President and the Attorney General.” I thought the attorneys were supposed to be impartial. You apparently don't have a problem with that. Why do you hate America? Hey Roger! According to documents released, it appears that a list of attorneys was perused, and that the people recommended for retaining are (were) those that “exhibit loyalty to the President and the Attorney General.”

I thought the attorneys were supposed to be impartial. You apparently don’t have a problem with that. Why do you hate America?

]]> By: WC http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/13/sampson-rove-attorney/comment-page-1/#comment-2180232 WC Tue, 13 Mar 2007 22:49:51 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/13/sampson-rove-attorney/#comment-2180232 And answer this, Roger. What business does a <em>political advisor</em> have in "advising" the President on attorney purges? Especially if those purges are done solely on performance issues, as the administration claims? Why the hell would Rove be concerned with performance issues? Hmmmm? And answer this, Roger. What business does a political advisor have in “advising” the President on attorney purges? Especially if those purges are done solely on performance issues, as the administration claims?

Why the hell would Rove be concerned with performance issues?

Hmmmm?

]]> By: WC http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/13/sampson-rove-attorney/comment-page-1/#comment-2180193 WC Tue, 13 Mar 2007 22:46:37 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/13/sampson-rove-attorney/#comment-2180193 <em>You’re right! How dare Bush give these attorney’s a chance to do his bidding before firing them. He should not have even giving them a chance like Clinton did and simply purged them all from the start. I at least understand now. If you purge all the US attorney’s at the start of your presidency for political reasons it is acceptable, but if you purge them after giving them a chance, your’re wrong. Makes perfect sense! Comment by Roger_Roger — March 13, 2007 @ 2:41 pm</em> Here's the big question, Roger. Just what the hell does replacing attorneys at "the pleasure of the President" and not having any approved by the Senate have to do with national security to the point it has to be in the Patriot Act? Can you answer that?? Didn't think so. You’re right!

How dare Bush give these attorney’s a chance to do his bidding before firing them. He should not have even giving them a chance like Clinton did and simply purged them all from the start. I at least understand now. If you purge all the US attorney’s at the start of your presidency for political reasons it is acceptable, but if you purge them after giving them a chance, your’re wrong. Makes perfect sense!

Comment by Roger_Roger — March 13, 2007 @ 2:41 pm

Here’s the big question, Roger. Just what the hell does replacing attorneys at “the pleasure of the President” and not having any approved by the Senate have to do with national security to the point it has to be in the Patriot Act?

Can you answer that?? Didn’t think so.

]]> By: WC http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/13/sampson-rove-attorney/comment-page-1/#comment-2180136 WC Tue, 13 Mar 2007 22:43:42 +0000 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/13/sampson-rove-attorney/#comment-2180136 Just heard on CBS Evening News that the original plan that Gonzo turned down would have purged all 93 attorneys. I've just skimmed a couple of the threads on this today...anybody heard this????? Just heard on CBS Evening News that the original plan that Gonzo turned down would have purged all 93 attorneys.

I’ve just skimmed a couple of the threads on this today…anybody heard this?????

]]>