finethen wrote: So lets see. Against the administration we've got Hurricane Katrina...Guantanamo...gay marriage...global warming...voter disenfranchisement...the DC vote...oh yeah, and IRAQ. But what are Dems harping on? Fired Republican attorneys. This is a bad strategy. Times reports: The potential for the investigation to broaden into a constitutional confrontation has created a tricky political calculus for the newly empowered Democrats. As they consider their strategy, they are acutely aware that they are already entangled in another major clash with the administration over the question of pulling American troops out of Iraq.
Um, yeah, there's always that. But what about the fact that they are requesting documents, calling witnesses, spending money on a huge investigation to prove *at most* that the Executive branch violated a "traditional" separation of U.S. attorneys from political endeavors. Fired atty David Iglesias wrote in the Times yesterday, United States attorneys have a long history of being insulated from politics. Although we receive our appointments through the political process (I am a Republican who was recommended by Senator Pete Domenici), we are expected to be apolitical once we are in office. I will never forget John Ashcroft, then the attorney general, telling me during the summer of 2001 that politics should play no role during my tenure. I took that message to heart. Little did I know that I could be fired for not being political.
Not being political? A few pararaphs later, he describes his noble fight (but eventual failure) to prosecute voter fraud, which was number 1 political priority for the GOP at the time. So. Its not that he wasn't being political... its that he was doing a shitty job at it. Why do I not feel sorry for him? Ethics are important in government. But in this extraordinarily unethical administration, why are we focusing on firings of GOP attys that are pissed that they didn't get rewarded for their noble attempts to fuck over voters, prosecute illegal immigrants, and otherwise be good ole boys for Bush? I'll admit that this investigation has its value in pointing out what a racket these political appointments have become. But are dems really going to waste their time and cred on a constitutional showdown over this, when they've got so many more valuable constitutional fights to fight? Someone please explain this to me.
For one reason, it's a place the Democrats can stake out a clear opposition position. It's hard for them to even say "withdrawl" and getting them to agree on a version of that or what is done after that is sort of like herding cats. Agreement on the US Attorneys mess is easy. Second, they have something that is really interesting here. As came out at the press meeting, the White House is in a very ugly corner, and it's one of their own making. On the one hand they want to claim executive privilege about the decisions made on this issue. On the other, they have been making public statements that W was not informed about any of this. That's a very tricky box. They can't claim privilege on something that was not discussed with W, but they can't very well let these guys go to the floor and have to say "These people were fired because they were prosecuting our buddies." Third, this is a subject that has traction with likely voters. These guys were trying to turn Justice into the right hand of the party? That will get the left going even more ballistic, the middle (what's left of it) going against the administration in a hurry, and fracture off the "get government out of my space" wing of their own party. Fourth, it's a way to cut out even more of the political machinery. This is more than enough to take down Alberto, and might be enough to take down Turd Blossom with him. Even if Rove stays, it weakens the hand being played by W even more. It's a fight they can win, and win going away. At that point they stop looking like loser Democrats and can maybe start running with other balls that need to be moved downfield, like the wiretaps, like the Iraq war, like botching Afghanistan, like bungling Katrina, like torture and extraordinary renditions for that purpose. As Newton put it, an object at rest tends to remain at rest, an object in motion tends to remain in motion. I'm not happy with the Democrats at the moment, but I'll take this as a first step. RE: More on U.S. Attorney Firings- this stuff is getting out of hand |