Quote:
Originally Posted by ernie
The thing with the removal of the prosecutors isn't so much they are removed as I understand that it can happen but rather just how unprofessional the administration is. You don't immediately remove a whole host of people leaving no time to transition. Heck they don't even have replacements lined up from what I can see. They did that with the ambassadors as well. Just said "you're done come home".
I guess I shouldn't say unprofessional as what they are doing is really dictatorship 101.
|
Wow, what an over-reaction by you. This is not even a big deal, it's par for the course and it happens in ever Presidency (with party change especially).
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slate...ean_house.html
Quote:
With new leadership in the Department of Justice come new ideas about how best to enforce federal law, and that means the attorney general brings in prosecutors who see things his or her way.
Naturally, the fact that these kinds of dramatic changes are normal doesn’t mean they don’t spark partisan rancor: When Clinton’s Attorney General Janet Reno announced in March of 1993 that 77 George H.W. Bush–era U.S. attorneys had been asked to resign, the news was greeted with calls for congressional hearings by some in the GOP. Then-Sen. Bob Dole even went so far as to call it a “March Massacre.” Don’t be surprised if you see similar fireworks erupt in response to Trump—especially if any of the prosecutors who are getting the boot have cases pending that in some way affect Trump’s presidency or the Trump Organization.
It remains to be seen whether all 46 U.S. attorneys who were affected by Friday’s announcement will actually end up leaving—it’s possible that Attorney General Jeff Sessions will reject some of the resignations, or ask some attorneys to stay on until their replacements have been found.
|