# Fired U.S. attorney says the orders came from Bush himself. (But how does he know?) **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 29, 2007, 10:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fired-u-s-attorney-says-the-orders-came-from-bush-himself-but-how-does-he-know/417430 "2007-08-29T22:56:40Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2007, 10:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fired-u-s-attorney-says-the-orders-came-from-bush-himself-but-how-does-he-know/417430/1 "2007-08-29T22:56:40Z")
Journalist Greg Palast recently [interviewed](http://www.gregpalast.com/american-nightmare-gonzales-wrong-and-illegal-and-unethical/) David Iglesias, one of the U.S. attorneys fired during Gonzales’ tenure as AG. From that interview: > [@](#): > > Captain Iglesias, cool and circumspect, added something I didn’t expect: > > _“They misjudged my character, I mean they really thought I was just going to roll over and give them what they wanted and when I didn’t, that I’d go away quietly but I just couldn’t do that. You know US Attorneys and the Justice Department have a history of not taking into consideration partisan politics. That should not be a factor. And what they tried to do is just wrong and illegal and unethical.”_ > > When a federal prosecutor says something is illegal, it’s not just small talk. And the illegality wasn’t small. It’s called, “obstruction of justice,” and it’s a felony crime. > > Specifically, Attorney General Gonzales, Iglesias told me, wanted him to bring what the prosecutor called “bogus voter fraud” cases. In effect, US Attorney Iglesias was under pressure from the boss to charge citizens with crimes they didn’t commit. Saddam did that. Stalin did that. But Iglesias would NOT do that - even at the behest of the Attorney General. Today, Captain Iglesias, reached by phone, told me, “I’m not going to file any bogus prosecutions.” > > But it wasn’t just Gonzales whose acts were “unethical, wrong and illegal.“ > > It was Gonzales’ boss. > > Iglesias says, _“The evidence shows right now, is that [Republican Senator Pete] Domenici complained directly to President Bush. And that Bush then called Alberto Gonzales, the Attorney General, and complained about my alleged lack of vigorous enforcement of voter fraud laws.“_ > > In other words, it went to the top. The Decider had decided to punish a prosecutor who wouldn’t prosecute innocents. If this is true we’re definitely into impeachable-offense territory, in fact we’re into **criminal** -offense territory – but how does Iglesias know W gave the orders, and for the reasons stated above? On the one hand, when an attorney that prominent and with Iglesias’ reputation makes a flat declaration of fact about something so important, we can be reasonably sure he’s not just talking out his ass; OTOH, what and where is this “evidence” he speaks of? WRT communications between Gonzales, Domenici and W, Iglesias presumably would have been out of the loop. ---
**Author:** ![silenus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/silenus/32/166_2.png) [@silenus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/silenus)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2007, 11:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fired-u-s-attorney-says-the-orders-came-from-bush-himself-but-how-does-he-know/417430/2 "2007-08-29T23:10:33Z")
IF. Yep. That’s a mighty big IF. It would be nice, but I’m not seeing any smoking gun. Where’s the paperwork or emails that could actually be, you know, _evidence_? So far it’s just one guy talking smack Put up or shut up, David. Produce something Congress can use to impeach, or go back to your knitting. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2007, 11:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fired-u-s-attorney-says-the-orders-came-from-bush-himself-but-how-does-he-know/417430/3 "2007-08-29T23:13:57Z")
“…Domenici complained directly to President Bush. Bush then called Alberto Gonzales, the Attorney General, and complained about my alleged lack of vigorous enforcement of voter fraud laws.” How is that illegal? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2007, 11:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fired-u-s-attorney-says-the-orders-came-from-bush-himself-but-how-does-he-know/417430/4 "2007-08-29T23:30:37Z")
Is it a legitimate use of Justice Dept. power? And, if not, who gives a rat’s if its legal? ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2007, 11:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fired-u-s-attorney-says-the-orders-came-from-bush-himself-but-how-does-he-know/417430/5 "2007-08-29T23:33:58Z")
[QUOTE=John Mace] “…Domenici complained directly to President Bush. Bush then called Alberto Gonzales, the Attorney General, and complained about my alleged lack of vigorous enforcement of voter fraud laws.” How is that illegal? [/QUOTE] Because it was in furtherance of a conspiracy to commit [malicious prosecution](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malicious_prosecution). Which I would argue is impeachable, even if not actionable (prosecuting attorneys are usually immune from suit for malicious prosecution). ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2007, 11:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fired-u-s-attorney-says-the-orders-came-from-bush-himself-but-how-does-he-know/417430/6 "2007-08-29T23:35:54Z")
[QUOTE=elucidator] Is it a legitimate use of Justice Dept. power [/quote] Is what a legitimate use? Investigating voter fraud? Why wouldn’t it be? > [@](#): > > And, if not, who gives a rat’s if its legal? Did you read the OP? That’s part of his thesis. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2007, 11:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fired-u-s-attorney-says-the-orders-came-from-bush-himself-but-how-does-he-know/417430/7 "2007-08-29T23:41:13Z")
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton] Because it was in furtherance of a conspiracy to commit [malicious prosecution](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malicious_prosecution). Which I would argue is impeachable, even if not actionable (prosecuting attorneys are usually immune from suit for malicious prosecution). [/QUOTE] Who are you impeaching here? Bush, Gonzales or both? ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2007, 11:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fired-u-s-attorney-says-the-orders-came-from-bush-himself-but-how-does-he-know/417430/8 "2007-08-29T23:41:22Z")
There’s also the question of [obstruction of justice,](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obstruction_of_justice) although I am not as confident as Palast seems to be that bringing a groundless and frivolous prosecution (or exerting political pressure for that purpose) can be made to fit within the definition of that crime. Then again, maybe: > [@](#): > > The crime of obstruction of justice includes crimes committed by judges, prosecutors, attorneys general, and elected officials in general. It is misfeasance, malfeasance or nonfeasance in the conduct of the office. Most commonly it is prosecuted as a crime for perjury by a non governmental official primarily because of prosecutorial discretion. Prosecutors and attorneys general however commit obstruction of justice when they fail to prosecute judges and other government officials for malfeasance misfeasance or nonfeasance in office. > > Modern obstruction of justice, in United States jurisdictions, refers to the crime of offering interference of any sort to the work of police, investigators, regulatory agencies, prosecutors, or other (usually government) officials. Often, no actual investigation or substantiated suspicion of a specific incident need exist to support a charge of obstruction of justice. Common law jurisdictions other than the United States tend to use the wider offense of Perverting the course of justice. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2007, 11:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fired-u-s-attorney-says-the-orders-came-from-bush-himself-but-how-does-he-know/417430/9 "2007-08-29T23:42:38Z")
[QUOTE=John Mace] Who are you impeaching here? Bush, Gonzales or both? [/QUOTE] Bush. Gonzales has already rendered himself unimpeachable by resigning. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2007, 11:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fired-u-s-attorney-says-the-orders-came-from-bush-himself-but-how-does-he-know/417430/10 "2007-08-29T23:51:12Z")
Even more interesting/alarming, BTW, is this, from the same interview: > [@](#): > > In New Mexico, the 2004 announcement of Iglesias’ pending prosecution of voters (which he ultimately refused to do) put the chill on the turnout of Hispanic citizens already harassed by officialdom. The bogus “vote fraud” hysteria helped sell New Mexico’s legislature on the Republican plan to require citizenship IDs to vote - all to stop “fraudulent” voters that simply don’t exist. > > The voter witch-hunt worked. “Wrong” or “insufficient” ID was used to knock out the civil rights of over a quarter million voters in 2004. In New Mexico, that was enough to swing the state George Bush by a mere 5,900 votes. > > So what is most frightening is not the resignation of Alberto Gonzales, the Pinocchio of prosecutorial misconduct, but the resignation of Karl Rove. Because New Mexico 2004 was just the testing ground for the roll-out of the “ID” attack planned for 2008. The last sentence is, of course, pure speculation on Palast’s part – but by no means groundless speculation. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2007, 12:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fired-u-s-attorney-says-the-orders-came-from-bush-himself-but-how-does-he-know/417430/11 "2007-08-30T00:05:00Z")
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton] Bush. [/quote] That’s what I thought. You have no idea what Domenici said to Bush and what Bush said to Gonzales. All we know is the former called the latter, said “something” and then Bush called AG and said “something”. > [@](#): > > Gonzales has already rendered himself unimpeachable by resigning. Actually, no. He can be. Didn’t you participate in that recent debate? He can’t be removed from office, of course. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2007, 12:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fired-u-s-attorney-says-the-orders-came-from-bush-himself-but-how-does-he-know/417430/12 "2007-08-30T00:10:30Z")
[QUOTE=John Mace] That’s what I thought. You have no idea what Domenici said to Bush and what Bush said to Gonzales. All we know is the former called the latter, said “something” and then Bush called AG and said “something”. [/quote] That was the point I made in the OP: How does Iglesias know the content of these communications? But I do say that **if** Iglesias has it right, that means Bush can and should be impeached for this alone. [QUOTE=John Mace] Actually, no. He can be. Didn’t you participate in that recent debate? He can’t be removed from office, of course. [/QUOTE] I’ve participated in several debates touching on the possible impeachment of AGAG. AFAIK, there can be no impeachment procedure for a **former** official. (The House could, of course, return articles of impeachment before AGAG’s resignation is effective on September 17, but why would they? By the time the matter got to the Senate for trial, he would already be gone.) ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2007, 12:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fired-u-s-attorney-says-the-orders-came-from-bush-himself-but-how-does-he-know/417430/13 "2007-08-30T00:12:51Z")
Honest engine, **John** , tell me straight: this _doesn’t_ stink to high heaven? Nothing here to be concerned about? ---
**Author:** ![fessie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/c37758/32.png) [@fessie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fessie)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2007, 12:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fired-u-s-attorney-says-the-orders-came-from-bush-himself-but-how-does-he-know/417430/14 "2007-08-30T12:44:21Z")
**BrainGlutton** , I’m confused – you posted on 8/25 that the firings of the prosecutors had to do with efforts to rig elections against Dems (someone else argued it was _past_ elections, not future ones). Your post obviously predates this OP - were you talking about something that corroborates this OP, or were you referring to something else? I have to admit some ignorance here - although I despise Bush, I never understood why firing those attorneys was a huge honking deal, I thought the President could fire/hire whomever he pleased for that kind of job. If there’s a scandal behind it, like voter fraud or election rigging, I think that’s been under-reported. (not that it isn’t MY responsibility to address my ignorance - just reflecting back that from a typical headline-readin 'merikun perspective, the soundbytes aren’t compelling). ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2007, 1:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fired-u-s-attorney-says-the-orders-came-from-bush-himself-but-how-does-he-know/417430/15 "2007-08-30T13:24:03Z")
I understood that the basic reason the attorneys were fired is that they were considered too slow to prosecute Dems, or unwilling to prosecute Dems on trumped up charges, and willingto prosecute Repubs when they, um, broke the law. This is illegal I believe. If it’s legal, they really oughtta give that department a name other than “Dept. of Justice” – that’s way too doublethink. How about, “Dept. of Selective Prosecutions”? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2007, 1:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fired-u-s-attorney-says-the-orders-came-from-bush-himself-but-how-does-he-know/417430/16 "2007-08-30T13:35:00Z")
Well, yes, they do serve at the pleasure of the President. That point seems to have been adequately stressed by our journalistic watchdogs, such that sufficient awareness of that fact has been achieved. And, just as you note, the elections under ah, scrutiny were indeed past elections. What some find questionable is that the actions under scrutiny were either innocent, tirival, or otherwise laughable. And that the AGs were urged to bring indictments at such a time as to impact _impending_ elections. One in particular can best be desribed by the technical legal definition of “bullshit”. What appears is a pattern on the part of the Bushiviks to implant loyal _apparartchiks_ in positions to harrass Dem candidates, and to further Republican efforts to suppress voter registration amongst undesirable citizens, whose loyalty is suspect. It has been noted that Sen Dominici called one such SAG to inquire as to progress in one such case, which is non-kosher to the point of illegality. (See [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/04/AR2007030400507.html](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/04/AR2007030400507.html)…) As he puts it “to ask about an ongoing corruption probe of Democrats, but said he 'never pressured him nor threatened him in any way.” Simply a friendly Sunday afternoon call, talk about the weather, how are the kids, are you going to bring charges in time for the next election, that sort of chit chat. And there’s more, lots more. Great hulking gobs more, and that’s just what they’ve let us know so far. There are huge gaps. E-mails that have mysteriously evaporated, memory lapses most commonly associated with a 5 bong a day pot habit. Stuff like that. “Huge honking deal”? Speaking as a lifelong honky, yeah. Hugh Betcha. A honka honka burning funk. Did I mention that they serve to pleasure the President? Good, didn’t want to overlook that crucial point… ---
**Author:** ![fessie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/c37758/32.png) [@fessie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fessie)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2007, 1:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fired-u-s-attorney-says-the-orders-came-from-bush-himself-but-how-does-he-know/417430/17 "2007-08-30T13:47:48Z")
Yeah, I know – I googled a bit and now hang my head in shame. It’s out there. Too bad the Republicans are so much better at getting their points into press, they had me going. Makes me wonder if Craig took it up the butt for the good of the party, so to speak. Palast’s use of Saddam and Stalin is an effective tool (got my attention anyway). I hope it works. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2007, 1:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fired-u-s-attorney-says-the-orders-came-from-bush-himself-but-how-does-he-know/417430/18 "2007-08-30T13:50:50Z")
[QUOTE=fessie] Yeah, I know – I googled a bit and now hang my head in shame… [/QUOTE] Not a bit of it! You have performed your first duty as a citizen. \* Jay Voosaloot!\* ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2007, 2:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fired-u-s-attorney-says-the-orders-came-from-bush-himself-but-how-does-he-know/417430/19 "2007-08-30T14:23:35Z")
[QUOTE=fessie] I have to admit some ignorance here - although I despise Bush, I never understood why firing those attorneys was a huge honking deal, I thought the President could fire/hire whomever he pleased for that kind of job. If there’s a scandal behind it, like voter fraud or election rigging, I think that’s been under-reported. (not that it isn’t MY responsibility to address my ignorance - just reflecting back that from a typical headline-readin 'merikun perspective, the soundbytes aren’t compelling). [/QUOTE] It did not have to be a big deal, but given the ham-handed manner in which this administration has tended to carry out its actions, they made it a big deal. First, it was only noted in passing that the administration had done something vey odd. This was the first time in history that a president had fired multiple Attorneys General (particularly of his own party) in the middle of his presidency. While it is not against any laws, it had never happened in the previous 217 years of the Republic. Now, it might have passed by as simply a quirk of the administration, raising a few eyebrows and finding itself recorded as a trivia note for historians. However, rather than simply saying, “They serve at the pleasure of the president and he decided to make changes,” the administration made the claims that each of the AGs had been removed for poor performance. This, of course, irritated the various attorneys who decided they would not simply sit by while their names were smeared. So they responded, each of them pointing out that they had excellent fitness reviews, making the “poor performance” claims look like the (unnecessary) smear campaign they were. As the adminstration sputtered around trying to paint them as incompetent boobs who had been fired for cause, they began coming forward with their own versions of the events that preceded their firings. Among the stories told by at least six of the eight, were narratives that they had each received pressure to behave in manners that were directly contrary to Department of Justice guidelines. Specifically, the DoJ has rules that the attorneys are supposed to deliberately postpone trials and investigations within a fixed number of weeks prior to an election if the news of the investigation or the trial would have a probable effect on the election. Depending on the specific attorney, sometimes they were pressured to go to trial when they told the administraion flack that they did not have enough evidence and sometimes they were told to “push forward” the investigation in ways that would sap resources in their office from the pursuit of more serious criminal matters–often for matters that were the Federal equivalent of a third degree misdemeanor, but which would show up in the news media as a major complaint. Since this was “only” a violation of Department of Justice regulations, it might not have qualified as breaking the law, but it would clearly violate ethical standards. (In a parallel incident, an AG who was not fired was found to have brought a bullshit claim to court that was so flawed that the judge personally reamed the attorney for idiocy as the judge threw out the case. Of course, the actual dismissal of the case occurred just after the election which the Democrat had lost, with most observers noting that news of the criminal indictment swayed much of the electorate.) News of this deliberate effort to interfere with elections caught the attention of the news media, who then began poking around looking at other actions. Among the points discovered were that several of the attorneys fired were replaced by less qualified attorneys with better records as party flacks. (Using a political test to determine those appointments is against a law.) When the (now Democratic) Congress began investigating the issue, just about every top official in DoJ who testified was caught in one lie or another, several of them have now resigned under a cloud. Has there been massive activity that was unlawful? Possibly not, with a few lesser laws bent or broken. However, there is substantial evidence that there has been massively unethical behavior in the DoJ–behavior about which Gonzales has “failed to remember” the details or about which his testimony has been contradicted by just about everyone else involved in the scandal. (On preview, I see that the question has been answered, but I typed this so I’m posting it. ) As to the OP, here. It looks pretty pointless. One disgruntled former Attorney General has linked President Bush directly to his termination using claims that provide the president with completely plausible deniability. (If Domineci told the president only that Iglesias was failing to pursue cases of election fraud, then the president would have been obligated to order Gonzales to make sure that the AG was admonished or replaced. So even if the president happened to be in the loop that Iglesias has described, the president’s actions, as described, were appropriate.) And we really have no way to know whether or not Iglesias made up the entire conversations. So we are basically being asked to speculate on the ramifications of a conversation that may not have occurred and, if it did occur might have said many things diffferently than how we might speculate. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2007, 3:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fired-u-s-attorney-says-the-orders-came-from-bush-himself-but-how-does-he-know/417430/20 "2007-08-30T15:05:29Z")
[QUOTE=fessie] **BrainGlutton** , I’m confused – you posted on 8/25 that the firings of the prosecutors had to do with efforts to rig elections against Dems (someone else argued it was _past_ elections, not future ones). Your post obviously predates this OP - were you talking about something that corroborates this OP, or were you referring to something else? I have to admit some ignorance here - although I despise Bush, I never understood why firing those attorneys was a huge honking deal, I thought the President could fire/hire whomever he pleased for that kind of job. If there’s a scandal behind it, like voter fraud or election rigging, I think that’s been under-reported. (not that it isn’t MY responsibility to address my ignorance - just reflecting back that from a typical headline-readin 'merikun perspective, the soundbytes aren’t compelling). [/QUOTE] It involves past **and** future elections and a great deal besides. For background and gloriously ugly spectacle, go to [this](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=411175) thread. See posts #28, 34, 36, 37, 59, 60, 62, 70, 74, 76, 78, 86, 93, 108, 109, 110, 119, 129, 148, 158, 173, 194, 198, 202, **204,** 205, 207, 212, 216, 219, 221, 226, 229, 231, 237, 241, 242, 249, **250, 251,** 259, **260,** 263, **269, 274,** 275, 305, 338, **359, 361,** 363, 365, 367, 380, **385, 386,** 389, **393,** 402, 409, 421, 432, **451,** 457, 458, **459,** and links therein. See also [this](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=417466) thread, [this](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=423240) one, [this](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=422199) one, and [this](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=420582&highlight=crime) one. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fired-u-s-attorney-says-the-orders-came-from-bush-himself-but-how-does-he-know/417430.md?page=2)