A question about the US attorneys firing...

[adios]

[ QUOTE ]
these attorneys were Bush's own appointments, apparently fired during Bush's second term, because they did not follow his political line. it is incredibly suspicious, and while they certainly serve at the pleasure of the president, he can't ask them to do anything illegal and fire them when they say no.

[/ QUOTE ]

Controversy Regarding U.S. Attorney Firings

In October of 2006, George W. Bush told Alberto Gonzales that he had received complaints that some of the U.S. Attorneys had not pursued certain voter-fraud investigations.[16] The complaints came from Republican officials, who demanded fraud investigations into a number of Democratic campaigns. The 2006 United States general election was forthcoming (November) and Republicans were concerned about losing Congressional seats to Democrats. (The election in fact did overturn Congressional control to the Democratic party).

One of the attorney's fired was David Iglesias who had New Mexico as one of the places where he served. I live in New Mexico and I can tell you for cetain that a group tried to register my then 14 year old granddaughter to vote prior to the November elections. They were trying to register voters at a rock concert of some sort that she attended. According to my daughter they would have succeeded if she hadn't interceded. The Washington Post in a story speculated that Iglesias was fired for not bringing charges against a New Mexico state legilator, Democrat Manny Aragon, prior to the elections but that's pure speculation on the Washington Post's part IMO.

Also this story from the Washington Post claims that Dominichi wanted Iglesias to pursue voter fraud cases:

Firings Had Genesis in White House

Iglesias, the New Mexico prosecutor, was not on that list. Justice officials said Sampson added him in October, based in part on complaints from Sen. Pete V. Domenici and other New Mexico Republicans that he was not prosecuting enough voter-fraud cases.

[sylar]

i am sorry, but it sounds like heresay. i am not saying your daughter may not have been subject to pressure from a voting registration group. but i am confident that the prosecutors did their job and did not find enough evidence to file a formal case, and that was not acceptable to the administration.

you can argue about the voter registration people being guilty, but if the prosecutor doesn't have enough for a charge, then he doesn't have enough.

[cardcounter0]

[ QUOTE ]
I live in New Mexico and I can tell you for cetain that a group tried to register my then 14 year old granddaughter to vote prior to the November elections. They were trying to register voters at a rock concert of some sort that she attended.

[/ QUOTE ]
Proof that online poker is rigged!

[AngusThermopyle]

[ QUOTE ]
.. a group tried to register my then 14 year old granddaughter to vote prior to the November elections. They were trying to register voters at a rock concert of some sort that she attended. According to my daughter they would have succeeded if she hadn't interceded.

[/ QUOTE ]

Rock concert. Dark. Ask anybody "Are you registered to vote? Are you 18?"
And some 14 yr old, flattered to be mistaken for 18, decided it would be "cool" to register, despite the fact that she knows she is not supposed to. Luckily your daughter understands what your granddaughter does not.

Since most states require some sort of ID when you show up at a polling place (Cal does), I guess you granddaughter wouldn't have been able to vote anyway.

But this is surely proof of massive voter fraud by (I assume you are sure the group was the NM Dem Party ) the 'bad guys'.