I had this idea that I would research both the US Attorney firings under Clinton and Bush. My initial thought — and I am in a bad mood right now so deal — was that anyone who actually knew anything about the way political appointments go would understand why firing ALL US proscutors at the beginning of a presidential term is COMPLETELY DIFFERENT from scouring all of their political positions and firing a few for not being "loyal Bushies" (note: this is their term, not mine, and many reputable news organizations have said this. Alas, time has not permitted me to do all the research I needed but I found an article on Salon that pretty much gives my opinion and lists some sources.
When a new president takes office all political appointees are fired. That is not a partisan thing, when Reagan left I am pretty sure Bush Sr. brought in his new own crew. That Dubya did not fire them is not necessarily bad, it just goes against precedent.
And for anyone who emails me some nonsense about anyone 'serving at the pleasure of the president' they had better find me some reasonable citation because it is not in the Constitution. And, look it up if you do not believe me Congress has tried to impeach presidents for firing Cabinet level positions, Andrew Johnson was impeached for firing the Secretary of War after Congress passed a law forbidding the president from firing such people but the law was unconstitutional, not because the Secretary 'served his pleasure' — a phrase that dates back pretty far but seems utterly ridiculous but Article II, Section 2 of the US Constitution says:
Section 2 – Civilian Power over Military, Cabinet, Pardon Power, Appointments
The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to Grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.
He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.
The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.
Anyway, I don't need a lot of research, though a number of organizations have, to say that the branches of the federal government exist to do their jobs and push the policies — not the partisan politics — of whatever administration we have. Some will say there is no difference but there is. When Karl Rove holds video conferences with the General Services Administration about how to win elections, neither is doing their job and it would be wrong if Clinton did it and is wrong today.
(PS. if this has not been abundantly clear, Clinton fired all political appointees when he took office regarless of their party affiliation and as far as I know no Senator asked for any prosecutors to be fired because he did not approve of their actions, THAT IS THE DIFFERENCE).
AlysonChadwick.com 