Aide (Sampson): Attorneys Fired For Not Supporting Bush

[Newsjock]

Source: AP

By LAURIE KELLMAN
Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) — Eight federal prosecutors were fired last year
because they did not sufficiently support President Bush’s
priorities, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales’ former chief of
staff says in remarks prepared for delivery Thursday to Congress.

“The distinction between ’political’ and ’performance-related’
reasons for removing a United States attorney is, in my view,
largely artificial,” said Kyle Sampson.

The aide, who quit because of the furor over the firings, is to
testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee. A copy of his
prepared remarks was obtained Wednesday by The Associated Press.

Read more: http://www.myfoxwghp.com/myfox/pages/News/Detail?contentId=2791015&version=1&locale=EN-US&layoutCode=TSTY&pageId=3.3.1

[aquart]

1. Priorities, Kyle? Tsk, tsk, tsk.

[tanyev]

2. Sad thing is, many Republicans don't see why that is a problem.

[L. Coyote]

12. FELONS AT WORK: This is what they are really worried about.

Email-Gate FACTS: Felons, georgewbush.com, gwb43.com , et. al.
Discussion here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x523978

This scandal involved the Republicons doing time in prison right now!!

[leQ]

44. until it happens to them, then they're all up in arms (eom)

[maddezmom]

3. Sampson? McNulty?

[youngdem]

4. Ra Roh Raggie

[givemebackmycountry]

5. And here is his number one priority!

Banana!

[19jet54]

39. Curious George?

:rofl:

[More Than A Feeling]

6. Impeach. 'nuff said.

[Egalitariat]

20. It's wrong, but not illegal. Must break the law to impeach.

There are plenty of other options if our representatives grow spines.

But when was the last time we were known for our fortitude?

[Jack Rabbit]

22. Incorrect

Must break the law to impeach.

Wrong.

While Nixon was about to be impeached for obstruction of justice before resigning, the other charges against him did not involve violation of statutory law. They have been lumped together under the heading abuse of power.

There is no specific law against the president sicking the IRS or the FBI on someone because he doesn't like him. There is no law against the president keeping a secret investigative unit within the office of the President, financed with campaign funds so it's completely off the books. Yet these are things we don't want the president to do. Nixon did them and these acts were enumerated in the second article of impeachment recommended by the House Jusdiciary Committee.

[SlowDownFast]

25. .

[thereismore]

26. high crimes and midemeanors. NOT just felonies. nt

[jobycom]

38. That's not what "high crimes and misdemeanors" means.

The phrase means "distinctly political crimes against the state." These firings may fit that description, if it is proven that Bush fired attorneys for refusing to investigate his political opponents or, even more, if Bush fired them for prosecuting his own cronies. But the phrase does NOT mean misdemeanors in the sense that we use the word now. The phrase at the time the Constitution was written was a single phrase with a distinct, exact, legal meaning.

[thereismore]

48. Yes, I agree. I was just sayin' that impeachment does not require a felony.

There are political crimes that are not felonies.

[jobycom]

40. Right and wrong. There are specific crimes that are impeachable

ANd those who claim it is just a political process expressing the will of the people are completely wrong. We know historically that the Founders wanted impeachment to be rare, difficult, and never for political reasons. They spelled out quite specifically what a president could be impeached for. The Republicans ignored the Constitution when they impeached Clinton, and I hope that the Democrats have more integrity. I'd rather see two more years of Bush with us defending the Constitution than two years of Cheney with us shredding it.

You are right that the president must violate the law to be impeached, but you aren't right that these firings don't violate the laws laid out by the Constitution. If Bush fired these attornerys specifically to interfere with their defense of the state, that is clearly impeachable. In other words, the Constition says a president can be impeached for "high crimes and misdemeanors," which means crimes which harm the state. If Bush fired these attorneys specifically to prevent them from pursuing cases against Republicans who had violated the law, or to punish them for not making up cases against Democrats, or even to punish them for pursuing cases against Republicans (like Cunningham), then a strong argument could be made that Bush was attacking the state--in other words, interfering with the government's ability to defend itself.

THAT is a violation of the Constitution, making it illegal, and THAT is clearly impeachable.

Now, so far Bush hasn't been proven to be behind the firings (though we know he was), and we haven't proven his motivation (though Sampson's testimony might do that). So we aren't at impeachment yet. But we're pretty damn close to making a case for it. Even if we can't prove Bush ordered Gonzales to fire the attorneys, we still might have a case against him.

SO you're right, laws must be broken, but you're not exactly right that they haven't been.

[Toots]

49. Impeachment is a political act and not a "legal act" no crime has to be committed.

:shrug: They must impeach for "High Crimes and Misdemeanors" but they can also Impeach for less if the "people" want it that way.

[cassiepriam]

7. Lying, cheating, stealing, killing....... yep Repug family values.

[DCKit]

8. And now we know they eat their own : )

[cassiepriam]

10. Yes, all those staunch repug supporters have become their victims.

They are all so naive to think they were immune from the Rove treatment.

[BootinUp]

9. There is a serious flaw

in that man's logic wiring.

[Eugene]

11. Here's a longer version of the AP article. Sampson's words are damning.

Source: Associated Press
Link: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070328/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/fired_prosecutors

"A U.S. attorney who is unsuccessful from a political perspective ...
is unsuccessful," Sampson said.

Sampson sees nothing wrong with what the Bushies did.

[caligirl]

13. If gonzo leaves and there is no AG approved by Leahy, he said he

would not hold hearings to approve a new AG for bush until he gets the facts about the firings,
What happens to the bushies then? No AG, or Bush is stuck with Gonzo until Leahy gets his facts in the firings.

Bush really can't fire AG because he wouldn't be able to replace him. Meantime Gonzo is pulling Bush and Rove down like the Titanic.

[pinerow]

14. I would imagine that he could use a "recess" appointment...

I'm not an attorney, so if any of you are, please correct me if I'm wrong...

[robinlynne]

17. from what gonzales says, he's not involved in any of the DOJ's activities anyway...

[tom_paine]

21. A nonviolent yet Psycopathic and Conscienceless Person wouldn't see

anything wrong.

I am using this term as Vonnegut does...and the author of The Mask of Sanity.

http://edstrong.blog-city.com/kurt_vonnegut_on_psychopathic_personalities_running_america.htm

[renate]

27. fine, let him appear before the committee and say it

It's okay with me if somebody from this adminstration goes on record with that.

I think the citizens of this country who've been raised to believe that justice is for EVERYBODY, not just Republicans, will be interested in his remarks.

[MannyGoldstein]

36. This is Gonna Be Great

I was hoping this would be Bush's John Dean moment - John Dean was the young Nixon White House Counsel who went in front of Congress and said "Yeah, Nixon did all that - so what"? BOOM.

Looks like young Kyle is taking the same route. Expect a BOOM in the near future.

[jaybeat]

47. Dean didn't say "So what?" He said, "What the Fuck?"

He came clean to the Senate select committee when the rest of the Nixon white house was stonewalling. This was before Nixon fired the Special Prosecutor and half the Justice Dept., before Nixon lost in the Supreme Court, and over a year before he resigned.

Dean stuck his neck out *long* before there was consensus that Nixon was a crook. He was seen as a traitor; he and his family received death threats. He urged Nixon to come clean, and not cover up, but Nixon wouldn't hear of it, so Dean resigned and told all.

Now, he may have been motivated by self-preservation and not having the inflated sense of imperial invisibility that the rest of the Nixon crooks had, so I'm not saying he's a saint. But, regardless of his motivations, he ratted them out, and as such, he was a patriot. He put the needs of the country ahead of the needs of the President, when the Nixonian Imperialists were arguing they were one and the same. Those same people are now seeing version 2.0 unravel before their eyes, and you can be sure they'll fight even harder this time to hold it together, best interests of the country be damned.

Kyle is testifying that he thinks they *are* the same. Nixon said, "If the President does it, that means it is not illegal." Kyle and his former boss would no doubt agree. That makes them predictable, but it also makes them traitors.

Here's hoping they all get treated as such.

:patriot:

[originalpckelly]

15. Merriam webster's definitions of political and performance:

political:
1 a : of or relating to government, a government, or the conduct of government b : of, relating to, or concerned with the making as distinguished from the administration of governmental policy
2 : of, relating to, involving, or involved in politics and especially party politics
3 : organized in governmental terms <political units>
4 : involving or charged or concerned with acts against a government or a political system <political prisoners>

performance:
1 a : the execution of an action b : something accomplished : DEED, FEAT
2 : the fulfillment of a claim, promise, or request : IMPLEMENTATION
3 a : the action of representing a character in a play b : a public presentation or exhibition <a benefit performance>
4 a : the ability to perform : EFFICIENCY b : the manner in which a mechanism performs <engine performance>
5 : the manner of reacting to stimuli : BEHAVIOR
6 : the linguistic behavior of an individual : PAROLE; also : the ability to speak a certain language -- compare COMPETENCE 3

[Doctor_J]

16. I thought Kyle was going to take the 5th

:shrug:

[robinlynne]

18. that's Monica. Kyle is the testifier.

[Jackpine Radical]

19. Nope. That was an erroneous report, I think maybe by Yahoo,

that was quickly corrected. It was Monica Goodling who said she's taking the 5th.

[KansDem]

23. So much for an "independent judiciary" (eom)

[onenote]

37. prosecutors are never really "independent"

Hell, at the state level, they often are elected officials.

[tblue]

24. Hope this is the beginning of the end of the B*sh Abomination

[Cha]

28. Shout it out Kyle..

They didn't Suck Hard enough! :freak:

[annabanana]

29. “The distinction is, in my view,largely artificial,”

I'm sure the prosecutors on the committee will be interested in your interpretation...

[ToeBot]

30. Glad I won't have to waist any sympathy on this creep...

Paging John Yoo, Paging John Yoo. We've found your love child.

[mohinoaklawnillinois]

33. No, actually I think he's KKKarl's love child..

Is this piss poor excuse for a lawyer a member of the Federalist Society?

[prolesunited]

31. At what point do we start impeachment?

I'm thinking this is way worse than a blow job.

[whistle]

32. Sampson begins testimony at 20:00am Thursday is that correct?

[Dhalgren]

35. There is no such time as 20:00am. Well maybe with THIS administration...

[annabanana]

41. (10 am Eastern) - CSpan 3. . . . n/t

[corporatemedia]

34. Madison: the "wanton removal of meritorious officers" is grounds for impeachment.

That's James Madison, "Father of the Constitution"

http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/03/27/113/

[Rammy]

42. Contradicting story on CNN.COM

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/03/29/fired.attorneys/index.html

[Eugene]

43. Dems Reject Reasons for Attorney Firings

Source: Associated Press

Dems Reject Reasons for Attorney Firings
Democrats Reject As 'Highly Improper' Reasons Given
by Gonzales Aide for Firing Prosecutors

By LAURIE KELLMAN

WASHINGTON Mar 29, 2007 (AP)— Eight federal prosecutors were
fired last year because they did not sufficiently support President
Bush's priorities, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales' former chief
of staff said Thursday, defending a standard that Democrats called
"highly improper."

-snip-
The committee's ranking Republican, Sen. Arlen Specter, scolded
Sampson for causing an uproar that has distracted the Justice
Department and jeopardized Gonzales' job.

-snip-

Read more: http://www.abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=2991832

[NashVegas]

45. Mr. Sampson, Would You Name These Priorities, Please

yes, do.

[Alexander]

46. Stay out of small planes, Mr. Sampson

The fate of our country may hinge on your health.

And don't go hunting with Dick Cheney either.