Comments on: Leahy writes to AG nominee Mukasey with ‘concerns.’ http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/03/leahy-writes-to-ag-nominee-mukasey-with-concerns/ Fri, 27 Nov 2009 01:48:15 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 By: Doc Rock http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/03/leahy-writes-to-ag-nominee-mukasey-with-concerns/comment-page-1/#comment-4104104 Doc Rock Wed, 03 Oct 2007 19:25:38 +0000 http://edit.thinkprogress.org/2007/10/03/leahy-writes-to-ag-nominee-mukasey-with-concerns/#comment-4104104 I hope Leahy has the cajones to "stay the course" and, at last, to get some ground truth out of the Department of inJustice. I hope Leahy has the cajones to “stay the course” and, at last, to get some ground truth out of the Department of inJustice.

]]> By: Spudge Boy http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/03/leahy-writes-to-ag-nominee-mukasey-with-concerns/comment-page-1/#comment-4103808 Spudge Boy Wed, 03 Oct 2007 17:30:47 +0000 http://edit.thinkprogress.org/2007/10/03/leahy-writes-to-ag-nominee-mukasey-with-concerns/#comment-4103808 <blockquote>BTW: I’m female. Comment by Rory — October 3, 2007 @ 12:00 pm</blockquote> Is that when you are Rory or Jake or both. Is Jake the Baptist or the Catholic or is the Rory. Fu*k it, we will just call you troll #2346-b. JADFT

BTW: I’m female.

Comment by Rory — October 3, 2007 @ 12:00 pm

Is that when you are Rory or Jake or both. Is Jake the Baptist or the Catholic or is the Rory.

Fu*k it, we will just call you troll #2346-b.

JADFT

]]> By: Spudge Boy http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/03/leahy-writes-to-ag-nominee-mukasey-with-concerns/comment-page-1/#comment-4103683 Spudge Boy Wed, 03 Oct 2007 17:00:49 +0000 http://edit.thinkprogress.org/2007/10/03/leahy-writes-to-ag-nominee-mukasey-with-concerns/#comment-4103683 <blockquote>OK, so the President can fire them for political reasons, but there’s somehow a “scandal” if he fires them for political reasons? That doesn’t make any sense. Comment by Rory — October 3, 2007 @ 12:00 pm</blockquote> It is when and how he fired them you stupid piece of sh!t.

OK, so the President can fire them for political reasons, but there’s somehow a “scandal” if he fires them for political reasons? That doesn’t make any sense.

Comment by Rory — October 3, 2007 @ 12:00 pm

It is when and how he fired them you stupid piece of sh!t.

]]> By: TripMaster Monkey http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/03/leahy-writes-to-ag-nominee-mukasey-with-concerns/comment-page-1/#comment-4103640 TripMaster Monkey Wed, 03 Oct 2007 16:48:34 +0000 http://edit.thinkprogress.org/2007/10/03/leahy-writes-to-ag-nominee-mukasey-with-concerns/#comment-4103640 missmolly sez: <blockquote><em>Actually, I didn’t say that at all. </em></blockquote> Wow..."Rory" completely mischaracterized your position...<i>quelle suprise</i>. missmolly sez:

Actually, I didn’t say that at all.

Wow…”Rory” completely mischaracterized your position…quelle suprise.

]]> By: missmolly http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/03/leahy-writes-to-ag-nominee-mukasey-with-concerns/comment-page-1/#comment-4103597 missmolly Wed, 03 Oct 2007 16:34:29 +0000 http://edit.thinkprogress.org/2007/10/03/leahy-writes-to-ag-nominee-mukasey-with-concerns/#comment-4103597 I think if I am reading missmolly right, Leahy will NOT hold the next President (assuming he or she is a Democrat) to that same bar. Comment by Rory — October 3, 2007 @ 11:40 am Actually, I didn't say that at all. The new president (Dem or Repub) will appoint a new AG upon taking office, so that really doesn't have anything to do with Mukasey. But I would hope that Leahy (and all senators and representatives) would apply the same standard to all presidents. It's customary for a new president to replace all U.S. Attorneys appointed by their predecessor, particularly when that predecessor was from the opposing party. Clinton did this, but so did Reagan. And so did Dubya, when he first entered office. There's nothing wrong with this. It's when a president fires his OWN appointees in the middle of his term for blatantly political reasons that eyebrows go up. Especially when the replacements are "interim" appointees to serve indefinitely without Senate confirmation. And that applies to the standard Leahy is trying to set. I think if I am reading missmolly right, Leahy will NOT hold the next President (assuming he or she is a Democrat) to that same bar.

Comment by Rory — October 3, 2007 @ 11:40 am

Actually, I didn’t say that at all. The new president (Dem or Repub) will appoint a new AG upon taking office, so that really doesn’t have anything to do with Mukasey.

But I would hope that Leahy (and all senators and representatives) would apply the same standard to all presidents. It’s customary for a new president to replace all U.S. Attorneys appointed by their predecessor, particularly when that predecessor was from the opposing party. Clinton did this, but so did Reagan. And so did Dubya, when he first entered office. There’s nothing wrong with this.

It’s when a president fires his OWN appointees in the middle of his term for blatantly political reasons that eyebrows go up. Especially when the replacements are “interim” appointees to serve indefinitely without Senate confirmation. And that applies to the standard Leahy is trying to set.

]]> By: Leftside Annie http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/03/leahy-writes-to-ag-nominee-mukasey-with-concerns/comment-page-1/#comment-4103562 Leftside Annie Wed, 03 Oct 2007 16:25:39 +0000 http://edit.thinkprogress.org/2007/10/03/leahy-writes-to-ag-nominee-mukasey-with-concerns/#comment-4103562 I wish I could get excited about the possibility of the Democrats actually doing more than just blustering and posturing about oversight.... I feel like I've been had at least a dozen times, and frankly, at this point, I feel like Leahy's just crying "wolf!!" <strong>again</strong>. *sigh* C'mon, Dems - put up or just roll over and shut up. I wish I could get excited about the possibility of the Democrats actually doing more than just blustering and posturing about oversight….

I feel like I’ve been had at least a dozen times, and frankly, at this point, I feel like Leahy’s just crying “wolf!!” again.

*sigh*

C’mon, Dems – put up or just roll over and shut up.

]]> By: PollM http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/03/leahy-writes-to-ag-nominee-mukasey-with-concerns/comment-page-1/#comment-4103527 PollM Wed, 03 Oct 2007 16:17:46 +0000 http://edit.thinkprogress.org/2007/10/03/leahy-writes-to-ag-nominee-mukasey-with-concerns/#comment-4103527 <strong>Former Bush Lawyer On Spy Program: "The Biggest Legal Mess I Had Ever Encountered"</strong> Professor Goldsmith told the Judiciary Committee that chances to create a legally justified program were undercut by senior White House officials who were averse to any restraint on presidential power and devoted to extreme secrecy. Do you believe the Bush Administration has set new precedence for future Presidents, as no one has successfully challenged White House position? -----------------> <a href="http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=630" rel="nofollow">http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=630 </a> . Former Bush Lawyer On Spy Program:
“The Biggest Legal Mess I Had Ever Encountered”

Professor Goldsmith told the Judiciary Committee that chances to create a legally justified program were undercut by senior White House officials who were averse to any restraint on presidential power and devoted to extreme secrecy.

Do you believe the Bush Administration has set new precedence for future Presidents, as no one has successfully challenged White House position? —————–> http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=630

.

]]> By: Nevar http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/03/leahy-writes-to-ag-nominee-mukasey-with-concerns/comment-page-1/#comment-4103510 Nevar Wed, 03 Oct 2007 16:11:16 +0000 http://edit.thinkprogress.org/2007/10/03/leahy-writes-to-ag-nominee-mukasey-with-concerns/#comment-4103510 "BTW: I’m female." Is this for the record? “BTW: I’m female.”

Is this for the record?

]]> By: cha cha cha http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/03/leahy-writes-to-ag-nominee-mukasey-with-concerns/comment-page-1/#comment-4103509 cha cha cha Wed, 03 Oct 2007 16:10:55 +0000 http://edit.thinkprogress.org/2007/10/03/leahy-writes-to-ag-nominee-mukasey-with-concerns/#comment-4103509 there's a scandal when there's a plan in place to install, without any senate input/confirmation, underqualified cronies who happen to announce bogus indictments in swing states shortly before a federal election with the intent of influencing voters. there are a bunch of emails (and people pleading the 5th) which suggest there were meetings about such a plan. there’s a scandal when there’s a plan in place to install, without any senate input/confirmation, underqualified cronies who happen to announce bogus indictments in swing states shortly before a federal election with the intent of influencing voters. there are a bunch of emails (and people pleading the 5th) which suggest there were meetings about such a plan.

]]> By: TripMaster Monkey http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/03/leahy-writes-to-ag-nominee-mukasey-with-concerns/comment-page-1/#comment-4103484 TripMaster Monkey Wed, 03 Oct 2007 16:02:38 +0000 http://edit.thinkprogress.org/2007/10/03/leahy-writes-to-ag-nominee-mukasey-with-concerns/#comment-4103484 Candyce sez: <blockquote><em>reductio ad Clinton</em></blockquote> Ha! That's brilliant! Candyce sez:

reductio ad Clinton

Ha! That’s brilliant!

]]> By: RUCerious http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/03/leahy-writes-to-ag-nominee-mukasey-with-concerns/comment-page-1/#comment-4103473 RUCerious Wed, 03 Oct 2007 15:59:59 +0000 http://edit.thinkprogress.org/2007/10/03/leahy-writes-to-ag-nominee-mukasey-with-concerns/#comment-4103473 An independent Department of Justice is not a bad thing. Regardless of what the Bush stooges say or think. The Attorney General is beholden to the people and their Constitution, not the President. An independent Department of Justice is not a bad thing.
Regardless of what the Bush stooges say or think.

The Attorney General is beholden to the people and their Constitution, not the President.

]]> By: Candyce http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/03/leahy-writes-to-ag-nominee-mukasey-with-concerns/comment-page-1/#comment-4103457 Candyce Wed, 03 Oct 2007 15:55:39 +0000 http://edit.thinkprogress.org/2007/10/03/leahy-writes-to-ag-nominee-mukasey-with-concerns/#comment-4103457 Candyce: I was referring to a possible President HILLARY Clinton in the future, not Bill in the past. Catch up, why don’t you? Comment by Rory — October 3, 2007 @ 11:50 am You could have said "will Leahy ensure that all future presidents do not fire U.S. Attorneys for political reasons." Why only a Clinton? And don't be coy. It's not attractive in old men. Candyce:

I was referring to a possible President HILLARY Clinton in the future, not Bill in the past. Catch up, why don’t you?

Comment by Rory — October 3, 2007 @ 11:50 am

You could have said “will Leahy ensure that all future presidents do not fire U.S. Attorneys for political reasons.” Why only a Clinton?

And don’t be coy. It’s not attractive in old men.

]]> By: Spudge Boy http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/03/leahy-writes-to-ag-nominee-mukasey-with-concerns/comment-page-1/#comment-4103456 Spudge Boy Wed, 03 Oct 2007 15:55:17 +0000 http://edit.thinkprogress.org/2007/10/03/leahy-writes-to-ag-nominee-mukasey-with-concerns/#comment-4103456 <blockquote>Will Leahy make sure another President Clinton does not fire U.S. Attorneys for political reasons too? Comment by Rory — October 3, 2007 @ 11:24 am</blockquote> All presidents fire the US AGs for political reason you fu*king piece of sh!t troll.

Will Leahy make sure another President Clinton does not fire U.S. Attorneys for political reasons too?

Comment by Rory — October 3, 2007 @ 11:24 am

All presidents fire the US AGs for political reason you fu*king piece of sh!t troll.

]]> By: VerbalKint http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/03/leahy-writes-to-ag-nominee-mukasey-with-concerns/comment-page-1/#comment-4103454 VerbalKint Wed, 03 Oct 2007 15:54:55 +0000 http://edit.thinkprogress.org/2007/10/03/leahy-writes-to-ag-nominee-mukasey-with-concerns/#comment-4103454 <em>I was referring to a possible President HILLARY Clinton in the future, not Bill in the past. Catch up, why don’t you? Comment by Rory — October 3, 2007 @ 11:50 am</em> Nice try. You said "another" and "too". Your comment clearly referred to the first Clinton, and clearly repeated the FALSE claim that Bush's political firings were of the same type as Clinton's PERFECTLY NORMAL changing of the guard at the beginning of his administration. Your intellectual dishonesty shines on that one, fool. I was referring to a possible President HILLARY Clinton in the future, not Bill in the past. Catch up, why don’t you?
Comment by Rory — October 3, 2007 @ 11:50 am

Nice try. You said “another” and “too”. Your comment clearly referred to the first Clinton, and clearly repeated the FALSE claim that Bush’s political firings were of the same type as Clinton’s PERFECTLY NORMAL changing of the guard at the beginning of his administration.

Your intellectual dishonesty shines on that one, fool.

]]> By: mongo http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/03/leahy-writes-to-ag-nominee-mukasey-with-concerns/comment-page-1/#comment-4103449 mongo Wed, 03 Oct 2007 15:53:41 +0000 http://edit.thinkprogress.org/2007/10/03/leahy-writes-to-ag-nominee-mukasey-with-concerns/#comment-4103449 "... will not be fired at the behest of the White House ..." Actually, the president can fire the US attorneys that he wants to, whenever he wants to...the issue at hand is re: the scandal is *why* they were fired--the ones at the center of the scandal appear to have been fired because of political purity: either a lack of it in themselves, or a desire to hire someone else with more. “… will not be fired at the behest of the White House …”

Actually, the president can fire the US attorneys that he wants to, whenever he wants to…the issue at hand is re: the scandal is *why* they were fired–the ones at the center of the scandal appear to have been fired because of political purity: either a lack of it in themselves, or a desire to hire someone else with more.

]]> By: cha cha cha http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/03/leahy-writes-to-ag-nominee-mukasey-with-concerns/comment-page-1/#comment-4103447 cha cha cha Wed, 03 Oct 2007 15:53:22 +0000 http://edit.thinkprogress.org/2007/10/03/leahy-writes-to-ag-nominee-mukasey-with-concerns/#comment-4103447 <em>"Will Leahy make sure <strong>another</strong> President Clinton does not fire U.S. Attorneys for political reasons too?"</em> so if you're not implying that bill did it, why use the word 'another.' grow a pair. “Will Leahy make sure another President Clinton does not fire U.S. Attorneys for political reasons too?”

so if you’re not implying that bill did it, why use the word ‘another.’ grow a pair.

]]> By: VerbalKint http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/03/leahy-writes-to-ag-nominee-mukasey-with-concerns/comment-page-1/#comment-4103429 VerbalKint Wed, 03 Oct 2007 15:48:09 +0000 http://edit.thinkprogress.org/2007/10/03/leahy-writes-to-ag-nominee-mukasey-with-concerns/#comment-4103429 Yeah, "Rory", Clinton did it. We all know that already. Just keep chanting it to yourself. Be sure to cover your eyes and ears, though. You wouldn't want reality to get through to you, lest it fry the circuits in your pea brain. Yeah, “Rory”, Clinton did it. We all know that already. Just keep chanting it to yourself. Be sure to cover your eyes and ears, though. You wouldn’t want reality to get through to you, lest it fry the circuits in your pea brain.

]]> By: rocks911 http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/03/leahy-writes-to-ag-nominee-mukasey-with-concerns/comment-page-1/#comment-4103424 rocks911 Wed, 03 Oct 2007 15:47:23 +0000 http://edit.thinkprogress.org/2007/10/03/leahy-writes-to-ag-nominee-mukasey-with-concerns/#comment-4103424 TripMaster Monkey, It makes no difference, Scooter was under oath. TripMaster Monkey,

It makes no difference, Scooter was under oath.

]]> By: Candyce http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/03/leahy-writes-to-ag-nominee-mukasey-with-concerns/comment-page-1/#comment-4103423 Candyce Wed, 03 Oct 2007 15:46:53 +0000 http://edit.thinkprogress.org/2007/10/03/leahy-writes-to-ag-nominee-mukasey-with-concerns/#comment-4103423 Why the “ding”? Comment by Rory — October 3, 2007 @ 11:40 am <em> reductio ad Clinton</em> Why the “ding”?

Comment by Rory — October 3, 2007 @ 11:40 am

reductio ad Clinton

]]> By: cha cha cha http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/03/leahy-writes-to-ag-nominee-mukasey-with-concerns/comment-page-1/#comment-4103422 cha cha cha Wed, 03 Oct 2007 15:46:43 +0000 http://edit.thinkprogress.org/2007/10/03/leahy-writes-to-ag-nominee-mukasey-with-concerns/#comment-4103422 the next president probably will not (much like clinton, bush 41, and reagan did not) sneak a last-minute provision into the patriot act eliminating the senate's role in the approval of potential a.g.'s. only the bush administration did that. the next president probably will not (much like clinton, bush 41, and reagan did not) sneak a last-minute provision into the patriot act eliminating the senate’s role in the approval of potential a.g.’s. only the bush administration did that.

]]>