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.

(Think Progress)   US Attorney in Pittsburgh: "I don't care who's President. I appoint myself to the next term." Yes, she's the one who hired Monica Goodling. Why do you ask?   (thinkprogress.org) divider line 118
    More: Dumbass  
•       •       •

14361 clicks; posted to Main » on 05 Dec 2008 at 1:33 PM (5 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



118 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2008-12-05 02:15:59 PM
Hit it? Anyone...
 
2008-12-05 02:16:43 PM
Wait, a well programmed Bushtard told me how to answer this question...

"They serve at the descretion of the prsident."

Or something like that. Hell I'd keep her around, the damn toilets don't clean themselves.
 
2008-12-05 02:17:54 PM
"Despite a new administration coming into power, U.S. Attorney Mary Beth Buchanan said she plans to stick around."

Otherwise known as the Lieberman Gambit. It worked for him.
 
2008-12-05 02:19:42 PM
monoski: Hit it? Anyone...

cache.daylife.com

Meh, I'd plant a dick in her crapper if she begged.
 
2008-12-05 02:23:03 PM
Just watched a/k/a Tommy Chong. Great flick. Thought I recognized her face/name.
Geesh.
 
2008-12-05 02:23:14 PM
Damn maniacbastard, can't ya find a good camel toe for us?
 
2008-12-05 02:23:20 PM
Obviously she's as stupid as she's ugly, and that's saying something.

But, one possible non-political explanation which jibes nicely with the displayed amounts of stupidity and self-delusion. She has spent her way into a deep hole, her McMansion is underwater mortgage-wise, the real estate market sucks, law-firm's are not hiring now, especially for someone as tarnished (and having as few connections going forward) as her. She needs the two remaining paychecks, and maybe the unemployment too.

Plus she probably thought McCain was going to win, because the crazy liberal media were lying about how pissed everyone was with Bush and the GOP and made no back-up plans. Oops, they weren't.

So, in the immortal words of Sir Nelson Muntz: "Ha Ha!"
 
2008-12-05 02:24:34 PM
X-boxershorts: Highend...

The firing of a small handful of Bush Appointed attorney's, by Bush, in the MIDDLE of a Bush term, is what was so farking unusual about that whole gig.

And it wasn't the dummys in congress that started biatching about it first...it was the Bush appointed attorney's who let that cat outta the bag.

At first, congress didn't give a damn...but the Bush appointed atttorneys kept bugging them. So Congrass Asked the Bush administration 1 simple question.....why?

And instead of saying..."they serve at the discretion of the president"....no, the Bush administration made up some crapfest about performance. The Bush Administration LIED to Congress when asked a simple question.

As always, when it comes to the ideologically pure GOP apologists...they will continue to completely miss all the relevant points.

Sorry junior, that cat's already outta the bag and it AINT goin back in. No matter how hard you work at remaining ignorant.


Thank you for that - though conservative I am, in this case, I was speculating on her motivation for sticking around someplace where she is not wnated just TO bring up the fallacious argument posed by many conservatives who don't know the full history of the Bush/Attorney-Firing.

Carry on, though; two years ago I was still riding the GOP bandwagon out of denial and empty optimism.
 
2008-12-05 02:24:48 PM
Diogenes: "It doesn't serve justice for all the U.S. attorneys to submit their resignations all at one time," she said yesterday.

But firing them all was just A-OK.


Ah ha, but if Clintons attorneys had all resigned then Bush would not have had to fire them.

Surely OBAMATRON will not compound the illegality and unethicality of the Bush attorney firings by firing any of them. He can CREATE new jobs for them with his magic WIGGLE STICK.
 
2008-12-05 02:25:05 PM
She was already forced to work out of Pittsburgh, hasn't she suffered enough?

/Just kidding
//From Pittsburgh
/Fire her...
 
2008-12-05 02:25:41 PM
Rodddxl: ifarkthereforiam:
She'll hang on until she is 'released' and then she will cry like a biatch about how persecuted republicans are. And the same righties who's mantra was "they serve a the president's pleasure' will eat it up.

Or she'll get canned by Obama and quietly walk away and the righties won't say a thing just to show how retarded the left was when Bush canned some US Attorneys. There is a precedent for it.


I sincerely doubt she will walk away in quiet dignity. It will be interesting to see how this plays out. It will also be interesting to see if Obama uses Bush's precedent to use the US attorneys office as the retribution apparatus for political revenge.
 
2008-12-05 02:26:09 PM
etyer: An attorney can be fired at any time by its client, for no reason whatsoever. [...] U.S. Attorneys can be fired for political reasons

FAIL. "No reason" and "political reasons" are not equivalent.
 
2008-12-05 02:26:10 PM
maniacbastard: monoski: Hit it? Anyone...



Meh, I'd plant a dick in her crapper if she begged.


Thanks for reminding me that democrats stand for the rights of all women who know how to keep their whore mouths shut.
 
2008-12-05 02:27:47 PM
Came for the Ha Ha, enjoy the irony! Stayed for the bitter delusions freepers. Definitely good times.

/Yes We Can!
//Yes We Can!!
///Slashies are fun
 
2008-12-05 02:28:52 PM
archichris: maniacbastard: monoski: Hit it? Anyone...



Meh, I'd plant a dick in her crapper if she begged.

Thanks for reminding me that democrats stand for the rights of all women who know how to keep their whore mouths shut.


Only the fat orange ones.
 
2008-12-05 02:28:52 PM

Ah ha, but if Clintons attorneys had all resigned then Bush would not have had to fire them.

Surely OBAMATRON will not compound the illegality and unethicality of the Bush attorney firings by firing any of them. He can CREATE new jobs for them with his magic WIGGLE STICK.


Every president brings in his own set of attorneys when they come in. They are some of the most powerful people in the executive branch.

The Bush scandal was about firing attorneys he had previously approved of because of political reasons. It had nothing to do with the turnover at the start of his term.

God damn republicans are dumb. Do we really need to keep that thermometer thing just to placate these morons?
 
2008-12-05 02:30:23 PM
highendmighty: I was speculating on her motivation for sticking around someplace where she is not wnated just TO bring up the fallacious argument posed by many conservatives who don't know the full history of the Bush/Attorney-Firing.

My money's on "Martyr Fetish"
 
2008-12-05 02:30:48 PM
archichris: Thanks for reminding me that democrats stand for the rights of all women who know how to keep their whore mouths shut.

And republicans remind me to lock the door in public restroom stalls.
 
2008-12-05 02:31:54 PM
Best example ever of a US Atty.... Wilford Brimley's character (U.S. Atty. Gen. James A. Wells) in Absence of Malice with Newman/Field.

The entire movie is really good, and at the end there's this huge bonus of a smack-down when Wilford comes to town.
 
2008-12-05 02:43:55 PM
X-boxershorts: Highend...

The firing of a small handful of Bush Appointed attorney's, by Bush, in the MIDDLE of a Bush term, is what was so farking unusual about that whole gig.

And it wasn't the dummys in congress that started biatching about it first...it was the Bush appointed attorney's who let that cat outta the bag.

At first, congress didn't give a damn...but the Bush appointed atttorneys kept bugging them. So Congrass Asked the Bush administration 1 simple question.....why?

And instead of saying..."they serve at the discretion of the president"....no, the Bush administration made up some crapfest about performance. The Bush Administration LIED to Congress when asked a simple question.

As always, when it comes to the ideologically pure GOP apologists...they will continue to completely miss all the relevant points.

Sorry junior, that cat's already outta the bag and it AINT goin back in. No matter how hard you work at remaining ignorant.


Moreover, even in "at-will" jurisdictions, you can fire someone for a good reason or no reason at all, but you cannot fire them for a BAD reason. These bad reasons include: race, religion, and (in the case of the Dept of Justice) political gain. There is ample evidence that the third was what was really being pursued when those USAs were fired.
 
2008-12-05 02:46:07 PM
It's so cute when they struggle.
 
2008-12-05 02:48:45 PM
Don't know if its been mentioned in the thread, but I'm fairly certian that she is the one behind the whole Operation Pipe Dream/Tommy Chong bong case.

She's an ass of the highest order.
 
2008-12-05 02:52:13 PM
etyer: An attorney can be fired at any time by its client, for no reason whatsoever.

When the attorney is a US Atty, I am the client, and when I delegate the duty of hiring and firing my attorneys to the executive branch I trust that they will not base their decisions on whether or not the attorneys in question pursued enough specious, trumped-up, politically motivated prosecutions, at the expense of actually prosecuting real federal crimes. In fact, I think I speak for most of my fellow Americans when I say I'd rather fire the people that pursued too many of those, rather than not enough.

And at the very minimum, if the executive branch employees to whom I delegated my duty feel somehow constrained by the bounds of ethics, laws, regulations, case law, and common sense, then I would at least hope they would be skilled enough not to leave a paper trail a mile wide so that every one of their lies could be proven and a bunch of other acts, like conducting government business over campaign email servers, revealed.

But I'm probably a little more sensitive than most.
 
2008-12-05 02:52:27 PM
archichris: Diogenes: "It doesn't serve justice for all the U.S. attorneys to submit their resignations all at one time," she said yesterday.

But firing them all was just A-OK.

Ah ha, but if Clintons attorneys had all resigned then Bush would not have had to fire them.

Surely OBAMATRON will not compound the illegality and unethicality of the Bush attorney firings by firing any of them. He can CREATE new jobs for them with his magic WIGGLE STICK.


Ooooo...burned!

Come bacdk when you have something other than callow sarcasm to contribute.
 
2008-12-05 02:57:01 PM
i54.photobucket.com
 
2008-12-05 03:00:31 PM
Rodddxl: ifarkthereforiam:
She'll hang on until she is 'released' and then she will cry like a biatch about how persecuted republicans are. And the same righties who's mantra was "they serve a the president's pleasure' will eat it up.

Or she'll get canned by Obama and quietly walk away and the righties won't say a thing just to show how retarded the left was when Bush canned some US Attorneys. There is a precedent for it.


Except when Obama, if he did this, would be doing the same thing as every president before, whereas Bush did it far past the resigning/firing phase and did it illegally.
 
2008-12-05 03:09:38 PM
The US Attorneys that remained after Bush's loyalty purges are the ones that put party ahead of country.

They collectively represent a stain on the American justice system.
 
2008-12-05 03:21:21 PM
etyer: An open comment to everyone who doesn't know their head from a hole in the ground:

An attorney can be fired at any time by its client, for no reason whatsoever. That is a basic ethical principle in the practice of law. Whether the client is an individual or an entity like a corporation or even the government. U.S. Attorneys can be fired for political reasons and it is perfectly legal and ethical. It is common practice for new POTUS to fire the previous administration's attorneys. No questions asked. It is then up to the new POTUS to decide to rehire them, usually upon the advice of the new Attorney General.

So, in conclusion, all you dingbat liberals that think Bush firing the U.S. Attorneys was a scandal, IT WASN'T. And President Obama will do the same. Rightfully so.


and it not being a scandal was why the top 5-6 people at DOJ all resigned in Disgust or disgrace over it?
 
2008-12-05 03:23:18 PM
Massa Damnata: Good God man, she's an orange!

That was my first thought. My second was is she from Jersey?
 
2008-12-05 03:24:03 PM
archichris: maniacbastard: monoski: Hit it? Anyone...



Meh, I'd plant a dick in her crapper if she begged.

Thanks for reminding me that democrats stand for the rights of all women who know how to keep their whore mouths shut.


I am no democrat sir...
 
2008-12-05 03:24:18 PM
GOSLING'S BIG BOOK O' POLITICAL ADVICE, TIP #15:

When you are in one party, and the job of your boss changes hands to the other party, that is not the time to be making power plays.
 
2008-12-05 03:34:57 PM
RsquaredW: X-boxershorts: Highend...

The firing of a small handful of Bush Appointed attorney's, by Bush, in the MIDDLE of a Bush term, is what was so farking unusual about that whole gig.

And it wasn't the dummys in congress that started biatching about it first...it was the Bush appointed attorney's who let that cat outta the bag.

At first, congress didn't give a damn...but the Bush appointed atttorneys kept bugging them. So Congrass Asked the Bush administration 1 simple question.....why?

And instead of saying..."they serve at the discretion of the president"....no, the Bush administration made up some crapfest about performance. The Bush Administration LIED to Congress when asked a simple question.

As always, when it comes to the ideologically pure GOP apologists...they will continue to completely miss all the relevant points.

Sorry junior, that cat's already outta the bag and it AINT goin back in. No matter how hard you work at remaining ignorant.

Moreover, even in "at-will" jurisdictions, you can fire someone for a good reason or no reason at all, but you cannot fire them for a BAD reason. These bad reasons include: race, religion, and (in the case of the Dept of Justice) political gain. There is ample evidence that the third was what was really being pursued when those USAs were fired.


I agree with you completely, and although all of this is relevant, I was merely referring to what kicked this whole shiatbag off in the first place.

The Bush Administration lied to congress...(again)
 
2008-12-05 03:34:58 PM
co-conspirator: She's also the twat that pushed the ridiculous case against Tommy Chong, and then made sure he went to jail by striking down the deal they brokered on a flimsy pretext.

She's a puffed-up, self-aggrandizing empty suit, and a "security" bully.


One that looks like she needs some serious c*ck in her mouth.
 
2008-12-05 03:35:24 PM
The Why Not Guy: My, how things change in only a couple of years. Remember how "they serve at the pleasure of the President" was the big talking point from the Right?

Sounds like the Left agrees with them now.
 
2008-12-05 03:36:24 PM
Loyal Bushie

Idiot

Bye-bye on Jan 20
 
2008-12-05 03:36:37 PM
RemyDuron:
Except when Obama, if he did this, would be doing the same thing as every president before, whereas Bush did it far past the resigning/firing phase and did it illegally.

There is a mandated resigning/firing phase for political appointees?
Firing a political appointee outside this mysterious phase is illegal?

Who knew?
 
2008-12-05 03:37:33 PM
Cat Food Sandwiches: The Why Not Guy: My, how things change in only a couple of years. Remember how "they serve at the pleasure of the President" was the big talking point from the Right?

Sounds like the Left agrees with them now.


Every president gets rid of all the US Attorneys at the beginning of their term. This is not unusual. Reagan did it. Bush I did it (not all, but many), Clinton did it. Bush II did it. US Attorney is not a lifetime appointment.
 
2008-12-05 04:03:26 PM
DEA Agent: "Do you have any narcotics in your home, sir?"

Tommy Chong: "I'm Tommy farking Chong, what do you think?"

just adding to the Chong love.
 
2008-12-05 04:17:07 PM
Awesome... is she really that dense that she doesn't realize that she can be fired?
 
2008-12-05 04:19:28 PM
rodeofrog: This raises so many questions.

Number 1: While she's busy over this, who's cooking pie for her husband?


Her handmaiden?
 
2008-12-05 04:22:32 PM
monoski: Hit it? Anyone...

Picture if you will, her, Nancy Grace, and Ann Coulter in a threesome. Would you watch? Would you pay for the DVD or download?
 
2008-12-05 04:25:58 PM
fanbladesaresharp: monoski: Hit it? Anyone...

Picture if you will, her, Nancy Grace, and Ann Coulter in a threesome. Would you watch? Would you pay for the DVD or download?


ugghh.. hurling now.
 
2008-12-05 04:31:31 PM
MadMonk: DEA Agent: "Do you have any narcotics in your home, sir?"

Tommy Chong: "I'm Tommy farking Chong, what do you think?"

just adding to the Chong love.


Nice to know he and Cheech finally settled their differences. That was a Duo no one would ever thought to fall apart.
 
2008-12-05 04:36:20 PM
RemyDuron: Rodddxl: ifarkthereforiam:
She'll hang on until she is 'released' and then she will cry like a biatch about how persecuted republicans are. And the same righties who's mantra was "they serve a the president's pleasure' will eat it up.

Or she'll get canned by Obama and quietly walk away and the righties won't say a thing just to show how retarded the left was when Bush canned some US Attorneys. There is a precedent for it.

Except when Obama, if he did this, would be doing the same thing as every president before, whereas Bush did it far past the resigning/firing phase and did it illegally.


You don't understand. There is no such thing as a "resigning/firing phase." The President can fire a U.S. Attorney at ANY time for ANY reason. A politically motivated reason is NOT illegal. A lawyer is not an "at-will" employee. They have a fiduciary relationship with their client. It is ALWAYS within the client's discretion to sever that relationship. That is a basic principle in this country of an attorney-client relationship.

People are free to diasgree with the firing of any U.S. Attorney. But that doesn't make it illegal. If Bush fired they for political reasons, it doesn't matter. People can look down on the reason and not like it, but that doesn't take away that right of the President to do so.

Does no one remember Nixon's firings? And how he "got away with it"? It was all legal.

If you don't understand it, fine. Be upset about it. Disagree with it. But don't call it illegal. It's not.
 
2008-12-05 04:37:44 PM
Rodddxl: RemyDuron:
Except when Obama, if he did this, would be doing the same thing as every president before, whereas Bush did it far past the resigning/firing phase and did it illegally.

There is a mandated resigning/firing phase for political appointees?
Firing a political appointee outside this mysterious phase is illegal?

Who knew?


Please repeat after me; I want to make sure you actually are reading this:

Bush fired U.S. Attorneys for political reasons, which is illegal.
 
2008-12-05 04:41:44 PM
INTERTRON: Rodddxl: RemyDuron:
Except when Obama, if he did this, would be doing the same thing as every president before, whereas Bush did it far past the resigning/firing phase and did it illegally.

There is a mandated resigning/firing phase for political appointees?
Firing a political appointee outside this mysterious phase is illegal?

Who knew?

Please repeat after me; I want to make sure you actually are reading this:

Bush fired U.S. Attorneys for political reasons, which is illegal.


PLEASE REPEAT AFTER ME: YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. YOU ARE IGNORANT AND POMPOUS WHICH IS A DANGEROUS COMBINATION.
 
2008-12-05 04:44:53 PM
etyer: INTERTRON: Rodddxl: RemyDuron:
Except when Obama, if he did this, would be doing the same thing as every president before, whereas Bush did it far past the resigning/firing phase and did it illegally.

There is a mandated resigning/firing phase for political appointees?
Firing a political appointee outside this mysterious phase is illegal?

Who knew?

Please repeat after me; I want to make sure you actually are reading this:

Bush fired U.S. Attorneys for political reasons, which is illegal.

PLEASE REPEAT AFTER ME: YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. YOU ARE IGNORANT AND POMPOUS WHICH IS A DANGEROUS COMBINATION.


So are you denying that he fired them for political reasons, or are you denying that firing attorneys for political reasons is illegal? I want to know exactly which of your ignorant, uninformed talking points I should easily refute next.
 
2008-12-05 04:48:10 PM
Well, INTERTRON, I am denying that firing U.S. Attorneys for political reasons is illegal.

Cite me the case law and/or laws and regulations that state such a thing. I am 100% confident you cannot. Because it does not exist. And don't go citing dicta or dissenting opinions to me.
 
2008-12-05 04:55:48 PM
etyer: Well, INTERTRON, I am denying that firing U.S. Attorneys for political reasons is illegal.

Cite me the case law and/or laws and regulations that state such a thing. I am 100% confident you cannot. Because it does not exist. And don't go citing dicta or dissenting opinions to me.


An internal Justice Department investigation released Monday has concluded that senior officials broke the law by hiring immigration and other officials based on partisan considerations. The report - issued by the inspector general and the Office of Professional Responsibility - culminates an investigation that lasted more than a year, stemming from the firing of seven U.S. attorneys in one day in 2006.
 
2008-12-05 04:57:01 PM
etyer: Well, INTERTRON, I am denying that firing U.S. Attorneys for political reasons is illegal.

Cite me the case law and/or laws and regulations that state such a thing. I am 100% confident you cannot. Because it does not exist. And don't go citing dicta or dissenting opinions to me.


The Hatch Act prohibits employees of the Department of Justice from participating in partisan political activities. Any employee of the DoJ applying a political test to a US Attorney is against the law.

The President can fire anyone he wants. However, if a DoJ employee advises him to fire someone based on politics, that is illegal. If someone conducts a political test on US Attorneys at the direction of the President, that is also illegal.

Bush isn't the lawbreaker. It's all the political hacks he put in the DoJ that broke the law.
 
Displayed 50 of 118 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report