Large Number Of Prosecutor Replacements Went To Bush Insiders
April 1st, 2007 by JOE GANDELMAN, Editor-In-Chief
The Washington Post has analyzed the prosecutors the Bush administration has appointed and contends there is an unprecedented pattern of filling them with its own staff members — a development which supports the growing belief that the fired prosecutors were too independent for administration bigwigs:
About one-third of the nearly four dozen U.S. attorney’s jobs that have changed hands since President Bush began his second term have been filled by the White House and the Justice Department with trusted administration insiders.
The people chosen as chief federal prosecutors on a temporary or permanent basis since early 2005 include 10 senior aides to Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales, according to an analysis of government records. Several came from the White House or other government agencies. Some lacked experience as prosecutors or had no connection to the districts in which they were sent to work, the records and biographical information show.
And here are the “nut graphs”:
No other administration in contemporary times has had such a clear pattern of filling chief prosecutors’ jobs with its own staff members, said experts on U.S. attorney’s offices. Those experts said the emphasis in appointments traditionally has been on local roots and deference to home-state senators, whose support has been crucial to win confirmation of the nominees.
The pattern from Bush’s second term suggests that the dismissals were half of a two-pronged approach: While getting rid of prosecutors who did not adhere closely to administration priorities, such as rigorous pursuit of immigration violations and GOP allegations of voter fraud, White House and Justice officials have seeded federal prosecutors’ offices with people on whom they can depend to carry out the administration’s agenda.
So while Bush continues to defend Gonzales as “honorable and honest” he is making it clear that he is not going to ask Gonzales to stand down.
But if you look at it another way, why would politicos and pundits expect Bush to ask Gonzales to step down?
Clearly, as this Post piece shows and other reports that are emerging, the modus operandi of the administration has been to seemingly purge the ranks of not just prosecutors but clamp down on other areas of the government where people holding posts did not adhere to a specific, pre-set political agenda. Old “given” expectations about letting lawyers, scientists, do their jobs and report and act on what they uncovered have been systematically “adjusted” to create one of the most intensely political administrations in American history.
The New Republic, in an editorial (registration required), makes a critical point that is often lost:
The Bush administration on a host of fronts is BREAKING THE NORMS of past American governments — which may or may not be illegal but can have lasting damage:
But one can’t help feeling a sense of helplessness in the face of this partisan subversion of process. If a president breaks the law, then he stands to incur the retributive justice laid out in the Constitution–Sam Ervin’s gavel landing hard. Breaking a norm, on the other hand, isn’t a punishable offense–except with shame and name-calling. And denouncing a president as a “norm-breaker” is, let’s face it, not the most devastating retort.Worst of all, once a president destroys an old norm, it isn’t very easy to restore it. The next presidents, even high-minded ones, will have difficulty denying themselves the political advantages accrued by Bush. The history of reform, not to mention the annals of cultural anthropology, is filled with cautionary tales about the near-impossibility of restoring old standards. For example, every time a candidate or political party discovers a new loophole in the campaign finance laws–soft money, 527s–every other candidate quickly embraces the very same reform-skirting device.
If they set aside partisan interests, Bush’s supporters would understand the toll of his presidency. Conservatives, at least those in the Burkean tradition, have eloquently extolled the wisdom embedded in norms and the futility of restoring them after they fall. Nixon’s ghost is surely hearing Bush’s footsteps.
In other words: the administration is taking actions that may fall within their legal right to do so. But these are actions that fundamentally change the way American governments have operated — in effect institutionalizing and protecting the preference towards polarization which held the Bush team attain power.
UPDATE: Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell seemingly now makes it official: principles can be abandoned — depending on who the President is. Consistency conschmistency?
This entry was posted on Sunday, April 1st, 2007 at 7:28 am and is filed under Republicans, Ideology, Alberto Gonzales, George W. Bush, Conservatives, Politics, Congress, Law & Legal Matters. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
