The guy behind the US attorney firings is a BYU grad

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_Runtu
_Emeritus
Posts: 16721
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 5:06 am

The guy behind the US attorney firings is a BYU grad

Post by _Runtu »

Kyle Sampson, the recently resigned chief of staff for Attorney General Alberto Gonzales was grilled this morning.

Here are a couple of articles from BYU, the first of which was posted on LDS.ORG in its "Church in the News" section:

http://newsnet.byu.edu/story.cfm/39388

http://newsnet.byu.edu/story.cfm/63527 (notice how the title says Sampson was the victim)

What I find fascinating is that if you do a search of Sampson's name on the BYU alumni website, you get two hits, but when you open the link, there's nothing there.
Runtu's Rincón

If you just talk, I find that your mouth comes out with stuff. -- Karl Pilkington
_moksha
_Emeritus
Posts: 22508
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 8:42 pm

Post by _moksha »

BYU students and grads are frequently on the cutting edge of historical action. Remember the BYU poly-sci Ph.D candidate that got an internship with the National Democratic Headquarters so he could help with surveillance? If that student had not so masterfully taped the fire exit doors open at the Watergate Hotel, the security guard would never have noticed it and the police would have never caught those naughty burglars.
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace
_Sethbag
_Emeritus
Posts: 6855
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 10:52 am

Post by _Sethbag »

Wow, that's really funny that the BYU article says Sampson "fell victim" in this scandal. It sounds more to me like he fell on his sword. He wasn't a victim in this, he was a perpetrator.
Mormonism ceased being a compelling topic for me when I finally came to terms with its transformation from a personality cult into a combination of a real estate company, a SuperPac, and Westboro Baptist Church. - Kishkumen
_Alter Idem
_Emeritus
Posts: 784
Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2007 7:24 pm

Post by _Alter Idem »

Well, he would have been a "perpetrator" if there had actually been a crime. Instead it's just another ridiculous witch hunt led by the do-nothing dufuses in the Legislature.
_Sethbag
_Emeritus
Posts: 6855
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 10:52 am

Post by _Sethbag »

Alter Idem, I don't know if a crime was committed or not. Probably not. But Congress has been lied to, and that will piss them off mightily. Plus, we're talking about the justice system here. It's alleged that some of the prosecutors who were fired were fired because Republican party activists and leaders weren't happy that they weren't indicting democrats fastg enough on alleged election crimes. Do you see a problem with Republican party leaders basically threatening federal prosecuters with their jobs if they won't prosecute Democrats as fast as the Republicans want them to? Recall that some of this was in the run-up to the latest election, as well. I personally am disturbed that party leaders of one party will fire federal prosecutors, who are supposed to be neutral in their application of justice, for not prosecuting their political enemies fast enough.

Also, Attorney General Gonzales stood before Congress and lied through his teeth, claiming the prosecutors were fired because of bad performance, when in fact the records show excellent performance reviews by their superiors. Then they fall back to "they serve at the pleasure of the President" and say OK, if it was political, that's fine, because it's the President's right to fire them if he wants. One fired prosecutor said, in an interview, hey, if I'm being fired for political reasons, just say so - at my age, if you say it was for performance reasons, I may well have trouble finding a new job after that.

This wasn't just some random witch hunt. This really was done badly, and then covered up for badly, and the principles at stake here, ie: a fair and neutral justice system, were being put in jeopardy. I have to disagree with you that this is just a stupid dufus witch hunt.
Mormonism ceased being a compelling topic for me when I finally came to terms with its transformation from a personality cult into a combination of a real estate company, a SuperPac, and Westboro Baptist Church. - Kishkumen
_moksha
_Emeritus
Posts: 22508
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 8:42 pm

Post by _moksha »

Is it fair to get fired because your advice lead to your boss's downfall. Well maybe always in the private sector, but here the blame rests solely with those liberal legislators who have nothing better to do than torment Church members.
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace
_Sethbag
_Emeritus
Posts: 6855
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 10:52 am

Post by _Sethbag »

Yeah, because we all know this is really about the persecution of the LDS church. ;-)
Mormonism ceased being a compelling topic for me when I finally came to terms with its transformation from a personality cult into a combination of a real estate company, a SuperPac, and Westboro Baptist Church. - Kishkumen
_Alter Idem
_Emeritus
Posts: 784
Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2007 7:24 pm

Post by _Alter Idem »

I'm sorry Sethbag, but I have to disagree. Pres. Bush should have had his attorney general fire all 93 judges just like Clinton had Janet Reno do. No explanations, just 10 days to clear their desks. Then, he could rehire the ones he wanted. If Pres. Clinton hadn't already shown by his actions that these people's jobs are political-that they do indeed serve at the President's pleasure, then I could see getting upset about this, but it's a no brainer.

The problem is that the nitwits in the Attorney General's office don't know how to circle the wagons and stonewall like the democrats do. They gave explanations for the firings instead of telling the dufuses in the Legislature to "stick it". Now, that they are trying to creat a scandal, there will very likely be some people who can't remember facts and they WILL be charged with perjury, therefore, creating crimes that the dufuses can thump their chests and click their tongues over.

Sorry, but I'm sick of the whole lot of them--The republicans are a bunch of spineless wimps, the democrats are complete hypocrites and the whole lot only care about keeping their seats and enjoying the perks of office.

I always feel better after a good rant.
_Sethbag
_Emeritus
Posts: 6855
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 10:52 am

Post by _Sethbag »

Alter Idem, this was after Bush's *second* term started. The 93 federal attorneys we're talking about were ones Bush hired in the first place. They weren't being replaced because they were Democrats, they were being replaced because they weren't going after Democrats as fiercely as Republican leaders wanted them to. But that's not what they're supposed to do, they're supposed to pursue justice with neutrality and without regard for party affiliation. And when asked why they were fired, the Attorney General turned this into a scandal by not admitting that it was for political reasons, and instead impugning their reputations by saying it was because they were doing a crappy job, when in fact their own performance evaluations said they were doing well. Gonzales apparently felt there was a need to lie and obfuscate about it, and this has blown up in his face. Sometimes the coverup is worse than the crime, remember?

Be that as it may, Congress has a responsibility for government oversight. It's part of their job. And when the White House and the Justice Dept. start to subvert the need for neutral justice and instead demonstrate a desire to use the office of the federal attorneys to go after their political rivals (by firing those who don't go along at the required level of zeal) then that's a problem, and Congress is right to be upset about this.

You must have noticed that it's not only Democrats in Congress who've been upset about this.
Mormonism ceased being a compelling topic for me when I finally came to terms with its transformation from a personality cult into a combination of a real estate company, a SuperPac, and Westboro Baptist Church. - Kishkumen
_Alter Idem
_Emeritus
Posts: 784
Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2007 7:24 pm

Post by _Alter Idem »

So, once he hires them he can't fire them? Or if Pres. Bush had fired them during his first term it would have been okay? That's just the excuse they use to explain why it was okay for Pres. Clinton to do it but not okay for Pres. Bush. The way I see it, the people who are going after Bushs' administration always come up with some explanation for why it's okay for Democrats but not okay for Republicans.

In Washington, it's all politics. If the Pres. has the right to appoint judges, he should have the right to fire them when they don't fit his agenda, which was what Pres. Clinton did. I support Pres. Clinton's actions, he was within the law--and I support Pres. Bush's ability to do the same.
Post Reply