DOJ having issues of there own

[zyqwert]

[ QUOTE ]

So was it OK for Clinton to fire 93 DAs, including those tasked with investigating the Whitewater scandal one month after he was sworn in?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think fire is a good word for what Clinton did, and mass replacement does not seem to be unusual. From wikipedia:

[ QUOTE ]
At the beginning of each presidential term, it is traditional for anyone occupying a "political office" to turn in a signed letter of resignation. A political office is generally thought of as one where a person "serves at the pleasure of the President."


If there is a new President from a different party, it is expected that all of the resignations would be accepted. The attorneys are then replaced by political appointees from the new President's party.[43] For example, President Clinton dismissed all 93 US attorneys when he came to office in 1993, and shortly after President George W. Bush took office in 2001, he received the resignations from 91 of 93 sitting U.S. attorneys.[44]

[/ QUOTE ]

In the emails to Karl Rove from 2005, the suggestion was floated to replace them all again. This would have been defensible, but instead they decided it would be disruptive, so they only fired those who failed to use the office as directed by Karl Rove (see wiki link for detailed reasons).

Replacing all US Attorneys at the start of your term?
Standard, not double standard.

Replacing US Attorneys for failing to prosecute opponents in time for an election, or for daring to prosecute friends?
Not illegal, but worthy of scrutiny and reproach.