--- In [email protected], [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > In a message dated 3/13/07 9:12:45 P.M. Central Standard Time, > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > Question: How many of the 93 Clinton appointees in 1993 were > replaced by Bush in 2001?
Almost all of them. > Bush could have fired all 93, so are these 8 the > only changes he made out of 186 opportunities? Where's the > scandal? No, he fired most of the 93 Clinton appointees in 2001. The eight he just fired were all his own appointees. The scandal is that they were removed not for incompetence or malfeasance, but because they weren't serving the political purposes of the administration. U.S. attorneys, once appointed, become part of law enforcement and should be entirely independent of politics. Another part of the scandal is that various members of the administration, including the attorney general, appear to have lied to Congress during the initial hearings into the firings. And still another part of the scandal is the distinct possibility that the attorneys who kept their jobs may have done so because they acceded to administration political pressure.
