That's all B.S.

The Atlanta Urinal and Constipation is a DNC rag.

The AJC opinion piece is heavy on the finger wagging and innuendo and light on facts.

1)  If Gonzales said in so many words "it would be wrong to remove prosecutors for political reasons" and then he is found to have violated that statement, then he is behaving foolish.  US Attorney's (US_A's) serve at the pleasure of the president and may be removed by the president at his desire.  Every president I can recall in recent history has made wholescale removels/firings of US_A's.  Don't say things that are contrary to legal actions and precident.

2)   "One of the eight, for example, was removed as U.S. attorney in Arkansas despite glowing performance reviews. Why? So an aide to White House political adviser Karl Rove could get the job."

So what.  Did work still get done?  Yes.  The US_A replacement was legal and backed by precedent.  Would you care to bet money that none of Clinton's US_A appointments were for political capital?

3)   "Now, that's not a huge scandal. Such decisions, even if made on a political basis, are clearly within a president's perogative."

And that is where all this political grandstanding should have begun and ended.  But the bloodlust is not yet requited...

4)  "They do bring into question the judgment of those who would treat one of the most important jobs in federal law enforcement like a mere political plum..."

Do you remember any questioning of Clinton's removal of all but one US_A?  I don't either.  The US_A jobs are political plum jobs!  Anyone that says differently is either an idiot or an agitprop.  You can decide which fits the authour of this AJC "hit job".

5)  "By denying any political motive or involvement by the White House, Gonzales and other Bush officials lied to the U.S. Senate."

The AJC may be correct here.  In Washington, or any political arena, all actions/behaviours are seen as political in nature.  As long as there is no tampering, or other illegal behaviour, firing or replacing an US_A when their term expires is legal, even if it is for political reasons.  So why even say otherwise.  Say it out loud, you fired them and you're proud... of American jurisprudence.

6)  "... a Congress that has allowed itself to be lied to, stonewalled, ignored and ridiculed by the administration for six years over issues fundamental to government..."

Pure, adulterated Liberal muckraking opinion.  The President and Conservatives can say the exact same things about Congress and Liberals.  There was not one high crime or misdemeanor committed by Bush, and there was nothing actionable on Gonzales either.  If their was, Congress/Senate would have pounced long ago.  Keep living the lie.

7) "... those eight prosecutors were selected for replacement despite the fact that most of them were Bush appointees who had conducted themselves well as U.S. attorneys."

Where is it a law or even precedent that a president can not remove any US_A that is of the same political party?  And not all the eight US_A were performing well.  This is puffery.

8)  "John McKay, a well respected Republican lawyer ousted as U.S. attorney in Seattle, says he may have been tagged for removal because he fended off unethical demands from Republican leaders to pursue charges of vote fraud against Washington Democrats, even though those charges were groundless." 

There was at least as much a question of fraud in the state of Washington as there was in (Cleveland) Ohio or (Broward County) Florida, both places that had a great deal of media coverage.  Wait a minute!  That's right.  There wasn't any fraud systematically aimed at Democrat voters in those places as determined by exhaustive investigations.  Just unsubstantiated Liberal publicity stunts.

9)  "There was no evidence, and I am not going to drag innocent people in front of a grand jury,'' says McKay, who suggests a special prosecutor may be needed to determine the full extent of this scandal."

Someone forgot to give that memo to Special Counsel Patrick J. Fitzgerald who knew the non-leaking "leaker" of non-covert CIA agent Valerie Plame before calling people in front of the grand jury.  I don't know specifics about McKay's case, but I do find it revealing that the AJC chose this quote.  Opportunistic hypocrites.

10)  David Iglesias has been discussed ad nauseum in this forum.  His ethnicity, telegenic good looks and Bush and Bush Co. bashing proclivities make him the posterboy of the moment for the Liberal elite.  He will be tossed aside when his utility is spent, leaving him to grouse how he got screwed by both parties.  Maybe he can join Cindy Sheehan and go live in a van down by the river.

11)  "The most troubling case may be that of Carol Lam..."

More political puffery, manipulation and agitprop.  The President can push an agenda with the US_A's office.  Bush wanted more focus on illegal immigration.  Several of the replaced US_A were not on board to the satisfaction of the administration.  Lam was one such weak responder.  She had difficulties with superiors months before the out-of-context quotes from emails found in the AJC opinion piece.  See here for the oft referred to but usually not fully quoted emails.  What is clear from the emails is that Lam had been on the DNR list for a while.  In fact, her replacement was considered going back at least to January 2006.  The emails surrounding and including the partial quote from AJC clearly point out that Lam was considered for replacement when her term expired (not fired) and that a long standing issue was her inattention to illegal immigration.  Lam had earlier decided to get into a public pissing contest with Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif. over immigration prosecutions despite telling Associate Deputy Attorney General Ronald Tenpas that she was "sitting quiet rather than attempting to respond publicly by explaining the resource limitations."  Then that same day she fires off a press release to rebutt Issa without discussing it with superiors.  That's the kind of two-faced maneuvering that will get you into hot water with your boss.  There is more to the Lam story, how she butted heads with a variety of officials, which clearly delineates a pattern which lead to her replacement.  And the cases she was working on continued -- no case deemed a political "hot potato" by the Left was dropped or buried in some sort of meniacal Right-Wing conspiracy against truth, justice and the American way.

The AJC obfuscated these pertinent facts when promoting their propaganda since it was not in line with their agenda of humiliating Bush and his administration get a Democrat elected to the presidency.

Try not to use opinion pieces as factual content.  It's so... disingenuous.

Your turn, blaster.

Killing them with kindness isn't working.  Time to get scrappy with the Donkeys.