Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Washington Post)   U.S. attorneys are poltical appointees and can be fired for any reason. Career DOJ prosecutors are not, and it would be illegal to consider their politics in the hiring process. Guess what the DOJ is being investigated for now?   ( washingtonpost.com) divider line
    More: Followup  
•       •       •

1003 clicks; posted to Politics » on 03 May 2007 at 6:49 PM (10 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



71 Comments     (+0 »)
 


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2007-05-03 03:01:40 PM  
non-issue. The DOJ IG is just trying to criminalize the politicization of the civil service hiring system.
 
2007-05-03 03:02:49 PM  
Ham?.... It's ham, isn't it?
 
2007-05-03 03:03:22 PM  
Not enough pie in the lunchroom?
 
2007-05-03 03:09:17 PM  
They ripped those tags of the mattress, didn't they?
 
2007-05-03 03:11:20 PM  
Lupus? Is it lupus?
 
2007-05-03 03:11:57 PM  
Is sodomy still illegal?
 
2007-05-03 03:13:45 PM  
This is turning into a heck of a Non-story. Imagine the sinking feeling in your stomach every day if you had to keep finding ways to defend this whole thing... oops, sorry "conservatives".
 
2007-05-03 03:13:59 PM  
Giving chunky peanut butter to a horse?
 
2007-05-03 03:14:39 PM  
www.regent.edu

I'd subpoena it.
 
2007-05-03 03:19:58 PM  
I'm sooooooo glad my brother decided not to work for these skeezy assholes.

You know it's bad when lawyers are calling out other lawyers for unethical behaviour
 
2007-05-03 03:23:14 PM  
I knew this was all over when she plead the fifth. Seriously, this would be frickin hilarious and largely unbelievable if it were happening in a movie.
 
2007-05-03 03:27:34 PM  
It's not a toomah!
 
2007-05-03 03:39:40 PM  
I'm going with "no sneeze guard over the salad bar"

/Big bucks! Big bucks!
//No whammies! No whammies!
///STOP!
 
2007-05-03 03:42:40 PM  
I'm sorry, but why is Alberto Gonzales still in office?
 
2007-05-03 03:57:37 PM  
Yeah, I'm sure this investigation will lead to mass indictments of powerful people. The DOJ is investigating the DOJ. $10 says either no one is indicted, or everyone who is indicted has already resigned.
 
2007-05-03 04:09:59 PM  
Taping a baseball game without the express written consent of the Commissioner of baseball?
 
2007-05-03 04:30:24 PM  
Non-story. Criminalization of tree-dwelling cats.
 
2007-05-03 04:38:41 PM  
So... is it ham, or not?
 
2007-05-03 04:40:34 PM  
BooBoo23: "Non-story. Criminalization of tree-dwelling cats."

If tree-dwelling cats are criminalized, then only criminals will have... tree... uhhh...

I thought I gave up already!
 
2007-05-03 04:43:14 PM  
If Bush doesn't ruin all prospects for the Republicans for a least the next seven years, the previous eight will have been totally wasted.

.
 
2007-05-03 04:51:03 PM  
Non-story. Criminalization of the politicalization of ham
 
2007-05-03 05:09:57 PM  
You guys just hate Bush because he likes ham.
 
2007-05-03 05:37:50 PM  
Oh, there's more to it than this story. Opening this particular investigation is a convenient and devilishly clever way to foreclose an immunity grant and save Goodling avoid from testifying.

Someone's going to have to pull the tapeworm out of the rectum some other way. It's long past time to commence Gonzales' impeachment proceedings.
 
2007-05-03 05:46:59 PM  
mapants!
 
2007-05-03 06:28:23 PM  
kronicfeld Lupus? Is it lupus?

It's never lupus.
 
2007-05-03 06:29:20 PM  
<img src="http://www.fiftiesweb.com/tv/peter-lupus.jpg" width="149" height="202">
"What?"
 
2007-05-03 06:58:26 PM  
Well how would the DOJ know about federal laws?
 
2007-05-03 07:02:40 PM  
tnpir: I'm sorry, but why is Alberto Gonzales still in office?

Maybe I am cynical but my guess is that Bush had Gonzales do something very bad. And now he is afraid that any new attorney general that takes over will notice and blow the whistle.

This is why he is fighting tooth and nail to keep him in office.

Just a hypothesis.
 
2007-05-03 07:04:58 PM  
So... what is hams feelings about all this?
 
2007-05-03 07:07:48 PM  
Corvus

Maybe I am cynical but my guess is that Bush had Gonzales do something very bad. And now he is afraid that any new attorney general that takes over will notice and blow the whistle.

This is why he is fighting tooth and nail to keep him in office.

Just a hypothesis.


My hypothesis is that you are a partisan hack.

It's just a hypothesis.
 
2007-05-03 07:09:18 PM  
FlashLV: My hypothesis is that you are a partisan hack.

What's your hypothesis?
 
2007-05-03 07:10:39 PM  
img519.imageshack.us
 
2007-05-03 07:11:16 PM  
Now now now...Goodling won't testify. At least not yet. The DOJ has opened an internal investigation into the order that allowed her and McNulty to select career employees. That means while she is under investigation, she can't testify to Congress because it could jeopardize the DOJ's internal investigation. They get her first.

slick gad'ang motherfrackers.
 
2007-05-03 07:15:22 PM  
FlashLV
A hypothesis is an educated guess. Finish High School then get back to us on that one.
 
2007-05-03 07:16:32 PM  
Comey absolutely destroyed the "fired for performance" nonsense that they have been peddling. Absolutely destroyed it.
 
2007-05-03 07:17:30 PM  
"The administration isnt credential queens"
-stephen colbert, last night's show
 
2007-05-03 07:19:55 PM  
"I wont testify, I will invoke the 5th"

"We give you immunity from prosecution, so you have to testify"

"I can't testify, I am under investigation by the people you are investigating"

D'oh!
 
2007-05-03 07:20:42 PM  
I'm starting to think Regent law school may have been misunderestimated by a few of us.
 
2007-05-03 07:35:16 PM  
cltbuilder suggests,

I'm starting to think Regent law school may have been misunderestimated by a few of us.

Please don't be confused by delaying tactics. While this can stall proceedings, it is only temporary and will more than likely infuriate the very people you do not want to piss off - at least, any more than they already are.

The only way this would make sense would be if the DoJ felt they could destroy any evidence and/or coach the story across a fleet of people - something that is dubious thinking, at best.

No, I think our estimation of the Regent staffing is right on the money. While this is a move that buys some time, it isn't anything more than a stall.

I like the idea of putting things off until just before the 2008 elections - these scandals will have more of a Foley-esque flavor by then.
 
2007-05-03 07:37:06 PM  
How about the residency clause?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/01/AR2007​05010196 1.html

The practice has come under scrutiny in Congress because of claims by the Justice Department that it fired New Mexico prosecutor David C. Iglesias in part because he was absent from the job too much. Iglesias, who is a Naval Reserve officer, has filed a complaint with the Office of Special Counsel alleging that the firing was, among other things, a violation of federal laws prohibiting discrimination against military personnel.

"It's a curious contrast that leaders in the Department of Justice would slip a change into law to allow one U.S. Attorney to spend only a few days a month in his district and keep his job, while at the same time claiming to fire another for spending a few days a month away from his district to serve his country," Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.) said in a statement.
 
2007-05-03 07:39:30 PM  
Sessions seeking AG memo
Thursday, May 03, 2007
WASHINGTON - Sen. Jeff Sessions is among six senators asking U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to release a copy of an internal 2006 memo that gave two of his aides authority to hire and fire federal prosecutors.

The Alabama Republican, normally a steady defender of Bush administration appointees, joined three Democrats and two other Republicans in the request, which was sent to Gonzales Wednesday.

The internal memo from Gonzales, according to the National Journal, delegated broad personnel authority to two Gonzales aides who have since left the department. Congress is investigating whether Gonzales' office improperly fired several U.S. attorneys for political reasons unrelated to job performance.

The six members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, including the Democratic chairman and the top Republican, complained that the memo should have been included in documents already released having to do with the firings.

Mary Orndorff --
 
2007-05-03 07:51:20 PM  
Did FlashLV Just call someone a partisan hack? Classic.
 
2007-05-03 07:52:56 PM  
boomaze

No I did not call anyone anything. I hypothesized it.
 
2007-05-03 07:55:25 PM  
FlashLV: My hypothesis is that you are a partisan hack.

How is this not a blatant troll?
Dont you have anything? Any interesting arguments, you know to defend your team? I mean you are all for corruption, you defend it all the time.

Can you at least say its a non-story?

boomaze: Did FlashLV Just call someone a partisan hack? Classic.

Sure is.
 
2007-05-03 07:56:00 PM  
He may be a hack, but....wait, He may be partisan, but....fark it. The Republicans are ready to spin each other off the stage at MSNBC.

/heffers at the county fair. :)
 
2007-05-03 07:58:42 PM  
FlashLV

BWahahahah!!! LOL! The great thing about you is your dead serious. Don't ever change. I mean, I know you won't, but please don't. Your awesome! Not trolling, I mean it!

Gotta go and catch the bus home. Thanks for the chuckle.

//"Partisan Hack". *sniff* Aw man...awesome... *chuckle*
 
2007-05-03 08:01:00 PM  
To be precise, they can be fired for no reason, but they can't be fired for certain reasons. Wrap your head around that one.
 
2007-05-03 08:01:49 PM  
boomaze

BWahahahah!!! LOL! The great thing about you is your dead serious. Don't ever change. I mean, I know you won't, but please don't. Your awesome! Not trolling, I mean it!

Fark is to boring lately. The Democrats are getting more and more ridiculous. I don't feel like having fun anyone. People keep making it to personal.

Gotta go and catch the bus home. Thanks for the chuckle.

Why can I not call another person a hack? can't a fat person call another person fat? Can't a hot girl call another hot girl hot?
 
2007-05-03 08:03:32 PM  
FlashLV


I'm a heavy dude and I can call other fat people fat, sure. But when i do I look like a total goddamn moran.
 
2007-05-03 08:13:10 PM  
You know...if the rest of you people would just stop replying to Flash's obvious trolls, he probably would quit making them at some point. Of course, I did take the bait in one his trolls last week, but I have since learned my lesson.
 
Displayed 50 of 71 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.

In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report