rooster59

Top U.S. prosecutor says he is fired by Trump administration

68 posts in this topic

3 hours ago, ilostmypassword said:

Now that you've posted your opinion, why don't you try to actually read the article. Sessions and Trump had a meeting with Bharara and asked him to stay on.  Now they've reneged.

Which is perfectly within their power to do. These AG's serve "at the pleasure of the President". He can fire them any time, for any (or no) reason.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ID: 17   Posted (edited)

22 minutes ago, Ahab said:

Which is perfectly within their power to do. These AG's serve "at the pleasure of the President". He can fire them any time, for any (or no) reason.

I don't deny that it's his right. It's just sleazy. Especially, given Trump's obvious deep affection for Wall Street.

Edited by ilostmypassword
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ID: 18   Posted (edited)

He may be a good or even great Assistant AG, but at the end of the day he, like most all top-level agency employees, largely serve at the discretion of the current president..  therefore, as much as he may have done good work, this is a pen inherent risk of being in a politically-appointed position -- like US Ambassadors accredited to key foreign countries... you serve at the discretion of the president.. and it is well known that when administrations do change, there is some measure of risk as the new administration may choose to have a different person in that position and you'll largely be expected to resign to facilitate that change.

 

Regardless if I like Trump, Obama or Bush (example) I recognize and accept that this is how positions of this nature and level are handeled.

Edited by new2here
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, new2here said:

He may be a good or even great Assistant AG, but at the end of the day he, like most all top-level agency employees, largely serve at the discretion of the current president..  therefore, as much as he may have done good work, this is a pen inherent risk of being in a politically-appointed position -- like US Ambassadors accredited to key foreign countries... you serve at the discretion of the president.. and it is well known that when administrations do change, there is some measure of risk as the new administration may choose to have a different person in that position and you'll largely be expected to resign to facilitate that change.

Except that Trump and Sessions specifically asked him to stay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Except that Trump and Sessions specifically asked him to stay.


Fair enough and largely true... but that then does not say that the President can't, at some later date, choose to make such change.

I think in the "normal" work world this kind is of job action/security would be unsettling at minimum for the employees and even disruptive to the organization.. but IMHO, it is a risk that one must recognize and accept when taking any politically appointed position.


Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, rooster59 said:

A prominent U.S. prosecutor said he was fired by the Trump administration on Saturday after refusing to step down,

A habit left over from his Apprenticeship days. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, nervona81732 said:

I take the stance of ( wait and see )

I think we are well past this point with Trump. A real draw and quarter speech for sure. I would sure hate to walk in your bitter shoes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ID: 23   Posted (edited)

Trump realises the error he has made in calling for investigations. He now needs 93 loyal US Attorneys to minimise the chance that any will cause him legal problems/challenges. He also needs as many of the outstanding law suits against him dropping.

Edited by Andaman Al
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, darksidedog said:

Getting rid of the US Attorneys right now, does dramatically and very conveniently, reduce the number of people who could potentially file against the travel ban.

Or any other breaches of the constitution that come to light, of which I am sure there will be some fairly soon.

I think you are confusing US attorneys who work for the US AG with state AG which every state has. The travel Ban will be opposed by the State AG who will attempt to demonstrate that the executive  order damages the state . Any US attorney that publicly opposes the executive order  regardless of their political affiliation would be immediately fired by their boss  the US AG  Sessions.

At least that's my understanding, anyone with better info please correct me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Grubster said:

Maybe you will be right, and if you are I will be man enough to admit it, but I am sure hoping you are wrong as I sure saw no indication that any of the last few presidents were doing any good overall.

20 million people who were uninsured before now have health insurance. What's sad is that a lot of these people supported Trump because they believed him when he said he was going to make health insurance better for them. Yet it's overwhelmingly Trump supporters who are going to suffer if Trumpcare gets enacted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

'Nothing but another wingnut boohoo moment.  Incoming presidents always reshuffle at least to some extent.  The wonderfully inept Janet Reno famously fired all U.S. attorneys after Clinton took office, one of whom was engaged at the time in an investigation of Clinton ally Dan Rostenkowski, a particularly powerful Democratic congressman (who later went to prison).  <yawn>

 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While it is normal practice to remove political appointees after an election win, normally it is done after replacements have been hired and not in such a rushed fashion as this. Also, if draining the swamp is what Trump would like to do, this particular prosecutor, Bharara, was actually doing just that. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, boomerangutang said:

               Trump has not killed people.  He's only 6 weeks into his term.  He's already gearing up for wars predicated on flawed info, and fueled by his hot headed, quick-to-blame, quick-recriminations, and easily-bruised ego.  If a shouting right-winger screams something ridiculous, Trump will likely believe it and take it as a signal to go to war.  War kills people.   Note:  The personal secretary to Trump's #1 adviser, Bannon, was asked to describe Bannon.  Without hesitating, she said he's fixated on war and war-strategies. 

 

             Firing so many judges is unprecedented.  It's yet another way, among many, in which Trump and his defective people are trying to avoid getting found guilty of illegal activity.  

What judges? A district attorney general is not in any way a judge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess he was also investigating multiple cases in the whole Fox News payoff/harassment/sexual assault fiasco, and the Ailes/O'Reilly settlement payments.

 

https://mediamatters.org/research/2017/03/12/us-attorney-preet-bharara-was-investigating-fox-news-when-trump-fired-him/215644

 

Probably just a coincidence? I'm sure it will have no affect on these investigations. /justkidding

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, ilostmypassword said:

20 million people who were uninsured before now have health insurance. What's sad is that a lot of these people supported Trump because they believed him when he said he was going to make health insurance better for them. Yet it's overwhelmingly Trump supporters who are going to suffer if Trumpcare gets enacted.

The subject is about a two bit lawyer getting fired, but since you bring it up any thing short of getting the insurance lobby and the bar association out of our health care system is an absolute joke anyway. Just another smoke screen issue while the bigs on both sides of the isle rob you blind. I had expensive health insurance in a group plan it payed 70% of what was covered [ which takes up more time of your nurse to find out which procedure or medicine you do or don't qualify for ], after my yearly $2,000 deductible. All this a bargain at $12,000 per year. Do you think Obama really did anything for the working class on this issue? I don't think Trump or anybody else can or will take on the Bar association, insurance lobby, big Pharma, etc.. If he brings jobs back and slows immigration down to those we want and need it will a big step in the right direction. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

BANGKOK 27 July 2017 10:00
Sponsors