Typical of his, ah, “style”. Do what you were gonna do anyway, but do it in a sudden and assertive fashion. Looks more like what a really powerful guy does.
US Attorneys (one for each district) are appointed by the President, confirmed by the Senate, and serve at his pleasure.
Assistant US Attorneys are hired by the local US Attorney. There is no civil service test, but they are hired from vacancy announcements like most (all?) government attorneys. Some only serve a couple of years, but that’s usually because the private sector pays a lot more. I think that most are career government attorneys (there’s also a misconception that AUSA’s are all prosecutors, but the offices also have a civil division that handle both affirmative and defensive civil cases). Most of the AUSA’s I know are there for 10-15 years. If they leave, most leave for the money.
Within the office, there is a hierarchy. Depending on the size, you’ll have section chiefs and division chiefs. If there is more than one office in the district, you’ll have a local managing assistant. And, each district will have a First Assistant. That person is a career attorney and often occupies the office during several administrations.
For example, Dana Boente (the former Acting AG and current Acting DAG) joined the US Attorney’s Office in 2001 (after a number of years at Main Justice). He was made First Assistant at some point and served as Acting US Attorney both following the firing of the Bush-appointed attorney and when one of Obama’s appointees left. In 2015, he was nominated to be the actual US Attorney, which he still is. (I have no idea if he’s asked himself to resign).
Joon Kim (who was Bhara’s First Assitant and is now Acting US Attorney) was at SDNY for six years, went into private practice, came back as the Criminal Chief in 2013, and then was promoted to First Assistant.
I will say that SDNY (in my experience) has more AUSA’s that stay for only a couple of years to boost their private practice resume. But they’re not political appointees.
The felony is not drinking the Trump Kool-Aid. Sardonic (and not entirely off-base) humor.
Why was this met with surprise ? Isn’t it SOP for an incoming President to have his own appointees to the positions ?
Much ado about nothing. Just the press bitching about anything and everything.
To me the issue has more to do with Trump going back against his word if he had told Bharara he was going to stay on and then didn’t have the balls to call him directly and explain the situation.
Who are these appointees?
What difference does it make? He serves at the pleasure of the President. Things often change in 3+ months.
When a new Party takes the White House, is it normal for ALL the U.S. Attorneys to be fired? What if the Attorney is in the middle of an important prosecution? It sounds like the firings were handled incompetently but that’s a different issue from the firings themselves.
This Administration provides much to be outraged about. I join those calling to limit our outrage to the truly outrageous.
If he was dumb enough to believe Trump, he shouldn’t be working as a lawyer. Or in any capacity, really. Should maybe just be put in a home where he can’t hurt himself.
Looks more like what a guy who does what Sean Hannity says, does:
Saying “Be out by midnight” isn’t standard, in case it wasn’t made clear.
I think the media is more interested in this than usual because as with everything this administration does, it was pretty sloppy.
THe Bush attorney firings were actually a big scandal in 2006 or so, but that was six years into his Presidency, so that was an unusual thing to do. Plus the firings were politically motivated.
What’s being reported WRT this is that Trump’s people reached out to Bharara and asked to set up a phone call with him and Trump. Bharara consulted with some DOJ people and concluded it would violate protocol if he spoke to the Prez, and he informed the Trump people that he would not participate in such a call.
Cite: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-justice-idUSKBN16J0Y3
Thank you very much for that update.
Watergate didn’t start until 1972. 
As for ongoing prosecutions, it’s rare for the politically appointed U.S. Attorney for a district to be integrally involved in an ongoing prosecution. These people aren’t typically doing a lot of litigation, they’re very upper level management for a district’s office of Federal lawyers, with one office (that may have multiple physical locations) per U.S. Federal court district. But nonetheless, in past clean outs the existing U.S. Attorneys will sometimes be given leeway in the scheduling of their departure for reasons like unusual involvement with an ongoing case. But that’s rare.
Trump’s house cleaning is that unusual, but the genuine slowness with which he’s filled most of his appointment-power positions is quite unusual, and is also reflected in this.
As for Bharara, the word on the street initially was Trump asked him to stay in his post (and made the public announcement of this fact) as a favor to Chuck Schumer to curry favor with him, likewise another rumor is that once Sessions was confirmed he really didn’t want Bharara to stay, and it had become obvious the Democrats in the Senate weren’t going to work with Trump at all, so his motivation for keeping him on was gone.
The idea that Sean Hannity— a man who would lose a battle of wits with a cinder block, even if he cheated— has real influence over the President of the United States is the most horrible thing I’ve ever imagined so far today.
Government of the dunces, by the dunces, for the dunces. (Certainly not “for” most Americans.)
Trump is so far up his own corrupt practicing ass that I’m guessing there are at least half a dozen investigations on the docket which could conceivably lead back to him.So this ordinary event has a lot of meaning in terms of conflicts and corruption.
Is there a modern-day equivalent of lead paint chips we haven’t discovered yet? I swear I often think there is.