Jump to content
Paulding.com

46 US Attorneys Asked to Resign or be Fired

doc310

By doc310,
in Paulding County NEWS

 Share Followers 0

Recommended Posts

doc310

doc310

Posted
Posted
According to reports and an article posted on Rollingout.com, (http://rollingout.com/2017/03/13/trump-fires-us-attorney-may-investigating-administration/) " President Donald Trump asked for the resignations of 46 US Attorneys in the Justice Department. The news came on Friday at the end of the working day and shocked many members of the Justice Department. It is normal for presidents to replace attorney generals from prior administrations, but the timing of the move has some questioning whether this is an attempt to cause disarray over possible investigations of the Trump administration and associates. One prominent example of this is US Attorney General for the Southern District of New York, Preet Bharara."
Since the recusal of Jeff Sessions from matters dealing with the election of Donald Trump, there seems to be a scramble to protect and shield the Trump Administration from inquiries into the nature of the Trump camp's relationship with a foreign power. While it appears the Independent Bipartisan Investigative Committee approaches a decision to call for an independent prosecutor, the WH appears to be muddying the waters of making it possible for such an investigation/prosecution to take place.
Without a deputy yet appointed, who would or could be appointed. One fear of the new administration appears to be Preet Bharara. According to the article, "When Bharara was attorney general, he was feared by major Wall Street companies and hedge funds because of his prosecution of criminal misconduct. Earlier this month, the government ethics watch group Democracy 21, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) and the Campaign Legal Center sent a letter to Bharara. The letter asked for an investigation of Trump and read in part, “Democracy 21, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) and the Campaign Legal Center request that you undertake an investigation to determine if the Trump Organization LLC, the Trump Organization, Inc., and any related Trump businesses based in the Southern District of New York are receiving payments and financial benefits from foreign governments that benefit President Donald Trump and that do not comply with Article I, Section 9, Clause 8 of the United States Constitution, the ‘Foreign Emoluments Clause.'”
It appears that subterfuge is the name of the game. How better to muddy the waters than to appoint cronies in the justice department in place of prosecutors that might want or actually look for the truth.
According to a tweet by Preet Bharara on March 11th at 2:29 PM he did not resign, he was fired by Trump. Is it because of his professional history, or because Bharara would have jurisdiction over a case that took place in New York.
If the reports are accurate (CNN, Raw Story, Vox, businessinsider, thehillnews, etc.), it seems just a matter of time before Trump's towering house of cards comes tumbling down.

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Coppertop's Pop

Coppertop's Pop

Posted
Posted

This is fake news.../study history and see where past presidents have relieved U S Attorneys. Obama, Clinton, Bush .,etc...all of them did the same thing, but this is supposedly a huge story now? Nope. When the media gets you to focus on one thing on Page 1, look deeper elsewhere to see what they're hiding.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
rockysmom

rockysmom

Posted
Posted

From what I understand, yes, this has been done under previous administrations, but they normally stay on until their replacement is hired. Not so in this case.

So, all those cases they were working on........???

 

I can't grasp how anyone thought firing 46 attorneys at once, without replacement, is a good plan.

Link to post
Share on other sites
NewsJunky

NewsJunky

Posted
Posted

So, all those cases they were working on........???

 

I can't grasp how anyone thought firing 46 attorneys at once, without replacement, is a good plan.

US Attorneys usually oversee the cases that others actually work. It will not be a problem. It is not unusual for this to happen when there is a change in the WH.

Link to post
Share on other sites
rockysmom

rockysmom

Posted
Posted

Yup

I've read a bit more about this and, as several have already said, it's pretty normal for this to happen. I just don't trust either trump or sessions so anything they do gets my scrutiny.

 

I still don't see, no matter who did/does this, how this is a good idea. Guess par for the course for politics.

Link to post
Share on other sites
gpatt0n

gpatt0n

Posted
Posted

I think that Preet Bharara had been invited to trump tower during the transition and had been asked to stay on after the change. The reading by some was that this was an effort by Trump to show Sen. Chuck Shumer that he was interested in playing. Shumer, as we all know, has been somewhat dismissive of the Trump administration and, also, as we all know (even Republicans who pay even the slightest attention) Trump lies. So, he promised to keep him on, he fires him, is just another lie.

 

The one thing I will note is that Obama's administration had eight years with out a governmental scandal and I don't think GWB, Poppy, the late great Ronnie or Tricky Dick were able to go more than a couple of years without someone, even or especially those in the DOJ, being indicted and/or convicted. (I'm just not sure about Gerry Ford and I don't want to take the time to look it up.)

 

Anyway, what this does portend is more corruption. Indeed, in the realm of it takes one to know one (Republican) ... the writings of David Frum, GWB's speechwriter who coined the "Axis of Evil" line ... sees Trump and his cronies as the American oligarchs for kleptocracy crew.

 

In true hold on to your wallet form, consider that over 40 percent of the 'cuts' to Obamacare and medicare are returned not only as tax breaks, but as tax breaks to the top 1 percent.

 

Meaning that instead of the $12,000 subsidy that a 50 year old Georgia man with $50,000 income would get for a $15,000 health care insurance tab under Obamacare, he'll get a $2,000 tax break and will have to come up $13,000 or so out of pocket. Oh, he might get a $200 tax break somewhere in there too but anyone with a third-grader understanding of math will recognize the GOP mantra of "more for me" echoing in the distance. (Wait, it ain't so distant now that Trump is in office.)

 

pubby

Link to post
Share on other sites
mrshoward

mrshoward

Posted
Posted

 

Meaning that instead of the $12,000 subsidy that a 50 year old Georgia man with $50,000 income would get for a $15,000 health care insurance tab under Obamacare, he'll get a $2,000 tax break and will have to come up $13,000 or so out of pocket. Oh, he might get a $200 tax break somewhere in there too but anyone with a third-grader understanding of math will recognize the GOP mantra of "more for me" echoing in the distance. (Wait, it ain't so distant now that Trump is in office.)

 

pubby

 

 

^^^ Not even close to accurate.

 

:nea:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Stonewall

Stonewall

Posted
Posted

Children-in-Nazi-concentration-camp-duri

Differences aside these people probably died a horrible death and surely had family members who did.

Show a little respect. Using unspeakable human suffering to promote your point of view is disgusting and quite frankly bordering sociopathic behavior.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Followers 0
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...