Purge the Non-Loyal Bushies
16 March 2007 7:30 am by Taylor Marsh
Purge the Non-Loyal Bushies
Karl\’s politics
is at the root of the U.S. Attorney purge. It\’s permeated the Bush administration
since the start. Emails
coming out of the Bush administration prove it.
From Gonzales\’s top aide, Kyle Sampson\’s email:
2. As an historical matter, U.S. Attorneys served at least until the expiration
of their 4-year term, even where an election changed the party in power —
until President clinton fired the Bush41-appointed U.S. attorneys in 1993,
nearly all of whom were in the midst of their 4-year terms. In 2001, President
Bush43 fired the Clinton appointed U.S. Attorneys, some of whom were in the
midst of a 4-year term, but many of whom had completed their 4-year terms
and were serving in holdover status.3. As an operational matter, we would like to replace 15-20 percent of the
current U.S. Attorneys — the underperforming ones. (This is a rough guess;
we might want to consider doing performance evaluations after Judge comes
on board.) The vast majority of U.s. Attorneys, 80-85 percent, I would guess,
are doing a great job, are loyal Bushies, etc., etc.Due to the history, it
would certainly send ripples through the U.S. Attorney community if we told
folks they got one term only (as a general matter, the Reagan U.S. Attorneys
appointed in 1981 stayed on through the entire Reagan Administration; Bush
41 even had to establish that Reagan-appointed U.S. Attorneys would not be
permitted to continue on through the Bush41 Administration) — indeed, even
performance evaluations likely would create ripples, though this wouldn\’t
necessarily be a bad thing.
Response from the Office of Counsel to the President, Mr. Newman:
David — Karl Rove stopped by to ask you (roughly quoting) \”how we planned
to proceed regarding US Attorneys, whether we were going to allow all to stay,
request resignations from all and accept only some of them, or selectively
replace them, etc.\” … ..
Putting \”loyal Bushies\” in the U.S. Attorney slots is a horrendous
thing to contemplate, because we\’re speaking about stacking our justice system
in favor of a certain political ideology. Justice is supposed to be just that,
fair and judicious, as well as a-political. Politics in the court is a recipe
for catastrophe. It is certainly not democratic. But for this Administration, that is hardly the point.
Photo via Salon.com
