# That CRAAAAAAAAZY conspiracy theory: the mass firings of US Attorneys **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 6, 2007, 5:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/that-craaaaaaaazy-conspiracy-theory-the-mass-firings-of-us-attorneys/394824 "2007-03-06T17:45:35Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![samclem](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a9a28c/32.png) [@samclem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/samclem)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2007, 11:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/that-craaaaaaaazy-conspiracy-theory-the-mass-firings-of-us-attorneys/394824/61 "2007-03-11T23:26:18Z")
[QUOTE=Sam Stone] Actually, I remembered that Clinton fired all the U.S. attorneys, but I wanted to make sure of my fact before asking the question, so I Googled it. The first hit I looked at said that he fired every one except for Chertoff. So that’s what I posted. I had no idea what the difference was between Clinton’s action and Bush’s, since I didn’t follow the first one very closely, or the second one at all. I even said in my message that I have no opinion on that. If I need to issue a standard anti-Bush disclaimer to keep people from jumping all over me, here it is: I don’t like Bush. It wouldn’t surprise me at all if these firings were A) done incompetently, and B) the result of some political machinations. That seems par for the course for politicians in general, and the Bush administration in particular. In addition, my question could easily be turned around against conservatives if that would make you feel all warm and fuzzy. Let me rephrase it to keep everyone’s panties from getting in a bunch: “I’m curious as to whether or not the conservatives who are willing to accept this from Bush were equally tolerant when Clinton fired every single U.S. Attorney except for one?” Does that make you happy? Can everyone climb down off their high horses now? [/QUOTE] Sam. I’ll take that at face value. Thanks for replying. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2007, 10:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/that-craaaaaaaazy-conspiracy-theory-the-mass-firings-of-us-attorneys/394824/62 "2007-03-12T10:39:41Z")
[McClatchy (the chain formerly known as Knight Ridder)](http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/16884148.htm) has been doing some more great reporting: > [@](#): > > Perino offered Rove’s account of his dealings with the Justice Department after talking with him by telephone. She said Rove routinely passed along complaints about various U.S. attorneys to the Justice Department and then-White House counsel Miers. > > Among the complaints that Rove relayed were concerns among Republican Party officials in various jurisdictions that the Justice Department was not being aggressive in pursuing allegations of election fraud by Democrats. Such allegations by Republicans were a particular concern in New Mexico and Washington. > > Rove acknowledged that he personally complained to Miers that “voter fraud cases were not being treated as a priority” by the Justice Department, Perino said. He also passed along complaints about Iglesias that he had heard going back as far as 2004. > > In addition to the voter fraud issue, some New Mexico Republicans were angry that Iglesias refused to speed up his corruption investigation of several Democratic state officials. At the time, party leaders were looking for any advantage they could get that might help them retain control of Congress. > > Neither Rove nor his deputy, Scott Jennings, recalled talking to Weh, the New Mexico Republican Party chairman, about Iglesias, but they did not dispute Weh’s account of the conversation, Perino said. > > In an interview Saturday with McClatchy Newspapers, Weh said he complained in 2005 about Iglesias to a White House liaison who worked for Rove and asked that he be removed. Weh said he followed up with Rove personally in late 2006 during a visit to the White House, but Rove told him Iglesias had already been fired. ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2007, 1:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/that-craaaaaaaazy-conspiracy-theory-the-mass-firings-of-us-attorneys/394824/63 "2007-03-12T13:21:27Z")
Interesting to see how this story is developing. Now Chuck Schumer has called for AG Gonzales’s resignation; Arlen Specter has offered only tepid support, at best. His DoJ days may be numbered. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2007, 2:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/that-craaaaaaaazy-conspiracy-theory-the-mass-firings-of-us-attorneys/394824/64 "2007-03-12T14:02:06Z")
[QUOTE=Elendil’s Heir] Interesting to see how this story is developing. Now Chuck Schumer has called for AG Gonzales’s resignation; Arlen Specter has offered only tepid support, at best. His DoJ days may be numbered. [/QUOTE] Here’s the deal on Gonzales: there’s never been any evidence that he has the least bit of independence from the White House. Whatever he’s done here, you can bet the orders came from up the ladder. So focusing on Gonzales would be a mistake. His departure would be useful in that it might be hard for the Bush White House to find someone equally pliant who can survive an AG confirmation hearing. (They’ve used up Harriet Miers, I’m afraid.) But even in the post-Katrina political landscape, the ‘liberal’ media tends to shut down on a story once a single head rolls. (For instance, after Katrina itself, once Heckuva Job Brownie was fired, his boss Chertoff got a free pass.) So it’s essential to aim higher - to find out who gave Gonzales his marching orders (Rove, probably) and take _him_ down. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2007, 2:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/that-craaaaaaaazy-conspiracy-theory-the-mass-firings-of-us-attorneys/394824/65 "2007-03-12T14:26:18Z")
[QUOTE=RTFirefly] So it’s essential to aim higher - to find out who gave Gonzales his marching orders (Rove, probably) and take _him_ down. [/QUOTE] How? ---
**Author:** ![Cervaise](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cervaise/32/16693_2.png) [@Cervaise](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cervaise)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2007, 2:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/that-craaaaaaaazy-conspiracy-theory-the-mass-firings-of-us-attorneys/394824/66 "2007-03-12T14:47:13Z")
[QUOTE=RTFirefly] So it’s essential to aim higher - to find out who gave Gonzales his marching orders (Rove, probably) and take _him_ down. [/QUOTE] Unlikely. This White House has mastered deniability and political insulation; there’s a huge procedural gulf, documentation-wise, between the decision-makers and the water-carriers. The best the opposition can hope for in the short and medium term is to keep the pressure on said water-carriers, encouraging the administration to bounce them out of a basic need for survival, to sacrifice them on the altar of political expediency, each time one of these scandals breaks (and with the Dems in power, it seems like they’re coming fast and furious, doesn’t it?). By so doing, it should become more and more difficult, over time, for the administration to enact its policies, mostly because they’ll have a harder and harder time convincing competent and qualified people to sign up to be fall guys, people to be tossed overboard to protect the higher-ups from accusations of malfeasance. That isn’t to say there’ll be a shortage of people for these positions; there’ll always be sharks and merceneries aplenty in DC. What there will be a shortage of, however, is _competence_, of people with actual experience and skill, which means that the sacrificial apparatchiks will be increasingly green and clumsy, ergo they’ll be less and less able to carry out their missions quietly and efficiently, which in turn means that their nefarious deeds will be caught by the spotlight more and more quickly, which means mounting frustration, turnover, and distraction, which, finally, means that the administration’s unsavory agenda will be more and more paralyzed. It’ll be slow, but unless one of the higher-ups gets caught on video or audio saying or doing something so spectacularly corrupt that even Joe Public can grasp the malfeasance based on a seven-second clip, none of this stuff is going to stick to anybody above the deputy level. So, slow it may be, but that’s the way it’s probably going to work. ---
**Author:** ![Apos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/838e76/32.png) [@Apos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Apos)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2007, 4:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/that-craaaaaaaazy-conspiracy-theory-the-mass-firings-of-us-attorneys/394824/67 "2007-03-12T16:23:00Z")
[QUOTE=Sam Stone] I don’t really have an opinion on this, not knowing the details, but I’m curious as to whether or not you were all this enraged when Clinton fired every single U.S. Attorney except for one - Michael Chertoff. Was that equally bad? [/QUOTE] Sorry Sam, I don’t buy your story. I believe when you wrote these words, you were interested in needling and dismissing this issue, just as John Mace and Bricker tried to do, by trying to obscure the actual issue: that’s it’s highly odd for a President to em masse fire his OWN people midway into his second term, and that on inspection of this odd event, it then turned out to be rife with some pretty awful ethical problems with it (i.e. punishing attorneys for not bowing to direct political threats and pressure). The issue has virtually NOTHING to do with the fact that every President traditionally puts his own people in place upon taking office. Virtually every story on this issue has noted this, and it’s noted several times in the thread. My OP makes an offhand mention of it by noting that it happened mid-term (And note that the OP does not, in fact, fret about the fact that they were fired: all anyone found it at first was an odd move and worthy of more digging) So, at the very very best, your comment is an example of you posting a nasty driveby jibe without you even bothering to figure out what the issue under discussion was. There are worse interpretations. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2007, 5:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/that-craaaaaaaazy-conspiracy-theory-the-mass-firings-of-us-attorneys/394824/68 "2007-03-12T17:00:31Z")
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton] How? [/QUOTE] Put people under oath in Congressional committee hearings. Start with the small fry, and work your way up, just like prosecutors do. At this point, you’d want to start with the people who report to Gonzales, and also with the people who are known to have called in to the White House or DoJ and complained. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2007, 5:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/that-craaaaaaaazy-conspiracy-theory-the-mass-firings-of-us-attorneys/394824/69 "2007-03-12T17:30:52Z")
[QUOTE=RTFirefly] Put people under oath in Congressional committee hearings. Start with the small fry, and work your way up, just like prosecutors do. At this point, you’d want to start with the people who report to Gonzales, and also with the people who are known to have called in to the White House or DoJ and complained. [/QUOTE] Do all of that, conclusively prove Rove was in the loop and gave the orders, and you still have to prove he committed a **crime** by doing so – see the problem? ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2007, 6:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/that-craaaaaaaazy-conspiracy-theory-the-mass-firings-of-us-attorneys/394824/70 "2007-03-12T18:23:49Z")
Say, [now the WH is admitting Rove **was** in the loop!](http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0703120144mar12,1,2117787.story?coll=chi-newsnationworld-hed) ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2007, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/that-craaaaaaaazy-conspiracy-theory-the-mass-firings-of-us-attorneys/394824/71 "2007-03-12T18:35:31Z")
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton] Do all of that, conclusively prove Rove was in the loop and gave the orders, and you still have to prove he committed a **crime** by doing so – see the problem? [/QUOTE] Crime, schmime - he could be impeached, AFAICT: > [@](#): > > The President, Vice President **and all civil Officers of the United States** , shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors. Now it may be that ‘civil officer’ is a legal term of art that includes political appointees in Cabinet agencies, but excludes White House employees. But that seems to be a longshot. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2007, 6:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/that-craaaaaaaazy-conspiracy-theory-the-mass-firings-of-us-attorneys/394824/72 "2007-03-12T18:47:22Z")
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton] Say, [now the WH is admitting Rove **was** in the loop!](http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0703120144mar12,1,2117787.story?coll=chi-newsnationworld-hed) [/QUOTE] That’s certainly sleazy and unethical, but we already knew that about Creepy Unca Karl. What we really want to know is, was he the one who forwarded names to Gonzales, with the implication that they shouldn’t be U.S. attorneys much longer? ---
**Author:** ![Frostillicus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e9bcb4/32.png) [@Frostillicus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frostillicus)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2007, 8:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/that-craaaaaaaazy-conspiracy-theory-the-mass-firings-of-us-attorneys/394824/73 "2007-03-12T20:32:31Z")
The shedding of light on this stinker of a story is exactly why people should be grateful that the Congress switched hands last November. This story would be dead and buried otherwise. ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2007, 5:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/that-craaaaaaaazy-conspiracy-theory-the-mass-firings-of-us-attorneys/394824/74 "2007-03-13T05:24:57Z")
[White House Said to Prompt Firing of Prosecutors](http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/13/washington/13attorneys.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin) > [@](#): > > The White House was deeply involved in the decision late last year to dismiss federal prosecutors, including some who had been criticized by Republican lawmakers, administration officials said Monday. > > Last October, President Bush spoke with Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales to pass along concerns by Republicans that some prosecutors were not aggressively addressing voter fraud, the White House said Monday. Senator Pete V. Domenici, Republican of New Mexico, was among the politicians who complained directly to the president, according to an administration official. [Firings Had Genesis in White House](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/12/AR2007031201818_pf.html) > [@](#): > > The White House suggested two years ago that the Justice Department fire all 93 U.S. attorneys, a proposal that eventually resulted in the dismissals of eight prosecutors last year, according to e-mails and internal documents that the administration will provide to Congress today. > > The dismissals took place after President Bush told Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales that he had received complaints that some prosecutors had not energetically pursued voter-fraud investigations, according to White House spokeswoman Dana Perino. > Gonzales approved the idea of firing a smaller group of U.S. attorneys shortly after taking office in February 2005. The Gonzales aide in charge of the dismissals – his chief of staff, D. Kyle Sampson – resigned yesterday Does anyone know whether Gonzales was under oath January 18th, when he told the Senate Judiciary Committee “I would never, ever make a change in the United States attorney position for political reasons”? ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2007, 11:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/that-craaaaaaaazy-conspiracy-theory-the-mass-firings-of-us-attorneys/394824/75 "2007-03-13T11:19:14Z")
[QUOTE=Squink] Does anyone know whether Gonzales was under oath January 18th, when he told the Senate Judiciary Committee “I would never, ever make a change in the United States attorney position for political reasons”? [/QUOTE] If only we had some sort of resident expert on legal matters, someone who could offer an opinion on this whole affair… ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2007, 12:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/that-craaaaaaaazy-conspiracy-theory-the-mass-firings-of-us-attorneys/394824/76 "2007-03-13T12:05:40Z")
From the Washington Post, via [Kevin Drum](http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/) at the Washington Monthly. > [@](#): > > The documents also provide new details about the case of [Tim] Griffin, a former Rove aide and Republican National Committee researcher who was named interim U.S. attorney in Little Rock in December. > > E-mails show that Justice officials discussed bypassing the two Democratic senators in Arkansas, who normally would have had input into the appointment, as early as last August. By mid-December, Sampson was suggesting that Gonzales exercise his newfound appointment authority to put Griffin in place until the end of Bush’s term. > > “There is some risk that we’ll lose the authority, but if we don’t ever exercise it then what’s the point of having it?” Sampson wrote to a White House aide. “(I’m not 100 percent sure that Tim was the guy on which to test drive this authority, but know that getting him appointed was important to Harriet, Karl, etc.).” Sampson is the chief of staff to Gonzales who just resigned. Here he was, writing to the White House that Harriet and Karl wanted to get Rove’s former aide installed as a US Attorney. All of this is increasingly linked to manipulating votes and gaming the system. I just wonder how much this will help to reduce the cognitive barriers that have existed for many in terms of believing that Republicans have been trying to carry out large scale manipulations of voting practices for a long time now (see, e.g. the RNC’s links to the phone jamming scandal in N.H.). ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2007, 2:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/that-craaaaaaaazy-conspiracy-theory-the-mass-firings-of-us-attorneys/394824/77 "2007-03-13T14:05:39Z")
[QUOTE=Squink] Does anyone know whether Gonzales was under oath January 18th, when he told the Senate Judiciary Committee “I would never, ever make a change in the United States attorney position for political reasons”? [/QUOTE] Lying to Congress is a criminal offense, even if he wasn’t under oath. But it would be nice to nail the fucker on perjury, wouldn’t it? My vague recollection is that this was asked, and answered in the affirmative, somewhere in the lefty blogs recently. And [mcjoan of dKos](http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/3/7/191045/4055), one of the front-pagers there, referred to Gonzales’ “sworn testimony” on January 18 in a post last week. I’d like better confirmation, but that’s what I’ve got. ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2007, 3:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/that-craaaaaaaazy-conspiracy-theory-the-mass-firings-of-us-attorneys/394824/78 "2007-03-13T15:10:48Z")
[Perjury it Is:](http://www.statesman.com/blogs/content/shared-blogs/washington/washington/entries/2007/03/13/senate_judiciar_1.html) > [@](#): > > Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy did not mince his words this morning after learning that records show a collusion between the White House and Attorney General Alberto Gonzales over the firing. He vowed to “summon whoever we need in our hearings to get to the bottom of this.” > > “I am outraged that the attorney general was less than forthcoming with the Senate while under oath before the Judiciary Committee,” Leahy said. “It is deeply disturbing that this plan appears to have originated from high-ranking officials at the White House and executed in secret with a complicit Department of Justice.” ---
**Author:** ![Merijeek](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f05b48/32.png) [@Merijeek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Merijeek)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2007, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/that-craaaaaaaazy-conspiracy-theory-the-mass-firings-of-us-attorneys/394824/79 "2007-03-13T15:41:49Z")
So, any chance that ol’ Alberto will get subjected to any of that stuff that totally, definitely ain’t torture? You know, if it’s suspected that he isn’t revealing enough? -Joe ---
**Author:** ![Onomatopoeia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/onomatopoeia/32/4145_2.png) [@Onomatopoeia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Onomatopoeia)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2007, 3:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/that-craaaaaaaazy-conspiracy-theory-the-mass-firings-of-us-attorneys/394824/80 "2007-03-13T15:49:32Z")
[QUOTE=Squink] [Perjury it Is:](http://www.statesman.com/blogs/content/shared-blogs/washington/washington/entries/2007/03/13/senate_judiciar_1.html) [/QUOTE] hahaha. This is all just too delish. Senator Leahy is “astonished” that someone practically everyone knows is a freaking lying weasel is, well, a freaking lying weasel, and has been since day one. I’m smelling me some Gonzales meat on a spit …and is that a whiff Rove meat wafting through as well? Yummm. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/that-craaaaaaaazy-conspiracy-theory-the-mass-firings-of-us-attorneys/394824.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/that-craaaaaaaazy-conspiracy-theory-the-mass-firings-of-us-attorneys/394824.md?page=5)