Now they know what he meant by Happy Hunting - happy job hunting! Apparently there is precedent, Reno did it during the early Clinton administration. I can understand why you wouldn’t want attorneys with diametrically-opposed views working for you, still something of a shock though.
It was coming sooner or later, but the only “shock” was how long he waited to do it, new Presidents usually clean house of old U.S. Attorneys early on.
I’m also not sure that the fact they had “diametrically-opposed views” on issues related to Trump was the main factor, as their office involves the prosecution of federal crimes and racketeering and statutes violations and so on; it’s not really a political office.
Definitely. I am shocked, SHOCKED, to find that this happened.
Sessions probably gets less opposition from making a clean sweep and firing all of them then he would have if he had picked some to fire and some to keep.
This is routine. What’s not routine I think is that they took this long to get organized about it.
And there are 90-some U.S. attorneys. The other half resigned on their own already.
How routine is this?
(Link goes to story about Preet Bharara announcing that he’s not resigning, and that if the administration wants him out, they’ll have to explicitly fire him.)
There’s nothing remotely shocking or surprising about the announcement. But I think you’re both wrong about the notion that it usually happens faster.
For Clinton, in March 1993 (right after she took office), Reno summarily fired all 90-odd US Attorneys.
Bush replaced them in a staggered manner, with most gone by April.
Obama waited until May, and then announced that he was replacing them in batches. “Elections matter–it is our intention to have the U.S. Attorneys that are selected by President Obama in place as quickly as they can.” Eric Holder explained.
So, this falls somewhere between Clinton and Bush in timeframe. I think it is unusual that half of the US Attorneys have already left; but since they’re more or less guaranteed to be fired, resigning makes a lot of sense.
Of note, Preet Bharara has both made a career of exposing and prosecuting corruption in New York politics, while having jurisdiction to investigate the Trump Organization since their offices are in New York. In fact, three days ago – only three days ago – the executive director of Citizens for Ethics and Responsibility in Washington sent this letter to Bharata, noting:
Preet Bharara, as acting US attorney over Manhattan, can investigate the Trump business for Emoulments Clause violations independent of Congress or any kind of Washington meddling.
Also of note? Robert Morgenthau, in 1969, was the last US attorney that refused to resign after being asked by their new administration… Richard Nixon, before Watergate broke wide.
It is not. It has almost never happened, except during Watergate, from what I can find.
As with most everything else the Trump administration has done, it has been with as little notice as possible. It’s not like these people broke any laws, other than that they had the audacity not to drink the Trump Kool-Aid. But then I guess that’s the newest felony…
Bharara has been fired.
Governor Cuomo will be happy.
What are you talking about? Letting the attorneys go from the previous administration is SOP, and has nothing to do with them being accused of a crime.
I can hardly wait until Thanksgiving rolls around, and folks get outraged that Trump is pardoning turkeys…
It depends. Are the turkeys birds or members of his administration?
Did Trump actually tell Bharara he would stay on back in November?
I’ve been told that the unusual thing is that there aren’t any or many replacements already lined up. People who think so say it’s a sign that Trump intends to leave those offices understaffed as long as possible in order to get away with… stuff. And to break down the administrative state as Bannon promised. True?
Very unlikely. Federal law enforcement doesn’t disappear when these attornies leave their positions. It’s the same as it was when Obama’s cabinet officials left office; various deputies fill the position on an acting basis until the Trump appointees are confirmed.
So right now, the Trump administration has a bunch of second-tier Obama appointees running the federal legal system. I’m sure they’ll want to get their own people into those positions as quickly as possible.
I don’t know. The senior assistants (now Acting US Attorneys) are career professionals. There are those who might think that the legal system is in better hands without the political appointees.
Are you sure about that? From what I’ve read, it seems like a political appointment. Assistant US Attorneys don’t take civil service tests, are appointed by the Attorney General, and serve one or two year terms.
Well, it certainly shocked the attorneys themselves, as stated in the story. I do concede though that the shock was in all likelihood over the abrupt way it was announced rather than the fact of the firing itself.