The U.S. Attorney Question Partially Answered

In a meeting last month with the Barack Obama’s transition staff, representatives of the nation’s top prosecutors caught a glimpse of the president-elect’s thinking on the politically fraught issue of what to do with the the current 93 U.S. attorneys.

“[The president-elect] is going to be smart and be cautious. My gut feeling is it won’t be like it was in 1993,” said U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton of Texas’ Western District, a member of the Attorney General’s Advisory Committee of U.S. Attorneys. On Dec. 11, Sutton and 15 other members of the committee met with Obama’s DOJ transition chief, David Ogden, and his staff at the Justice Department to advise them on law enforcement issues and to point out areas the committee believes require special attention.

At the meeting, Ogden briefly discussed the U.S. attorney issue, though he said he had had no role in deciding who stays and who goes, according to one committee member. Ogden, a partner at Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr, is reportedly the leading candidate for the Justice Department's No. 2 spot.

Sutton declined to characterize Ogden’s comments but said he left the meeting with the impression that the president-elect will address the U.S. attorneys individually. “I think they’re going to work on a case-by-case basis,” said Sutton, who as a member of the Bush-Cheney transition took part in similar meetings before he was a committee member.

A Justice Department official declined to discuss the committee's recommendations to the transition staff or Ogden's comments regarding the fate of the current set of U.S. attorneys. "It was a productive, informational meeting," the official said. The transition team also met with members of the civil chiefs working group and members of the criminal chiefs working group, which are extensions of the advisory committee.

The last two administrations suffered political wounds for their handling of U.S. attorneys. The Justice Department is still recovering from the scandal over the firings of nine U.S. attorneys in President George W. Bush’s second term, and President Bill Clinton and Attorney General Janet Reno were panned for sacking 92 of them in 1993, a move critics said disrupted the continuity of leadership in the U.S. attorneys offices during the transition.

At least one U.S. attorney is destined to hold his job well past Jan. 20. Obama has said publicly he will retain Patrick Fitzgerald, of Illinois’ Northern District, who is supervising the criminal case against Gov. Rod Blagojevich.

Comments

[Joenorm]

What do we do if a U.S. Attorney will not follow the law ( 18 USC 3332) and U.S. ATTORNEY CRIMINAL RESOURCE MANUAL 158,9, the the Judge who get assigned the Petition For Writ of Mandamus, Declaratory Judgment is so old (87 ) he can not understand the complaint and just rules for "the government" and admits he has read what he considers "pertinent parts" of the complaint.

[Charlie]

To Samantha in the first comment:

Bush and Co. were not in hot water for firing nine US Attorneys. He was in trouble for WHY he fired those nine US Attorneys, and what he (or Gonzo) had asked them to do in order to keep their jobs.

Maybe you should read up on the situation before posting sadly ignorant and misleading comments.

[Mark]

Am I missing something? Didn't Bush/Rove bring in a whole new set of U.S. Attorneys in 2001? Just like Clinton and pretty much every other administration in the past?

The reason for the trouble with the 9 was because it seemed clear that they were asked to prosecute on the basis of politics and were fired when they refused?

Keeping in many of the attorneys that played by the "political prosecution is OK by us" rules of the Bush administration could wreck havoc in an Obama administration.

I do think Obama needs to focus a little more on cleaning house and less on constantly trying keep the opposition satiated. Sometimes something is just wrong and you have to fix it.

We get it, Obama is a bring 'em together kind of guy. But if you have bad apples, you gotta throw them out -- plain and simple.

[LeeB]

My goodness! I came to this site via a link posted at BuzzFlash and I'm amazed at the misinformation revealed by commenters here.

First, is no one here aware that there is a difference between the political appointees and the career deputy US attorneys?! The 93 appointed U.S. Attorneys are not 'fired', but like those in other appointed positions in the gov't, they EXPECT to be replaced by the incoming new administration with individuals who are generally of the same political party as the new POTUS. (Fitzgerald was different: He was a career asst. US attorney in New York and is politically unaffiliated, NOT a Republican as many have assumed. Google for WaPo article.)

The unqualified deputy U.S. attorneys hired under the Bush regime present a serious problem, as do other unqualified hirelings in other departments of the government who have managed to 'burrow' into the system. Hopefully, with respect to Civil Service laws, they can be legally 'encouraged' to resign so they can be replaced by qualified individuals with appropriate experience and ethics records.

I'm sure the incoming administration is aware of what needs to be done and will take appropriate - and legal - action to accomplish it. President-elect Obama knows what he is doing and will not need anyone to explain the U.S. Constitution to him.

Thank goodness.

I would encourage many here to take a deep breath and do some research into the traditional workings of the Justice Department. So many people now have no idea how it was designed to work (and DID work) because the Bush regime has totally shredded the Constitution and poisoned nearly everything they have touched, especially the Office of the Attorney General. My memory from actively observing the workings of the U.S. attorneys in this country goes back to the Nixon administration. So many people now seem to think the last 16 years is the entirety of the historical traditions. T'ain't so.

[Paul]

It is amazing to me how little people know history. Both Bush and Clinton let most of the AGs go at the beginning of their terms because these were political appointees. "Let Go" not "Fired" because it has been tradition that AGs all tender their resignations in a change of administration (elections have their consequences). Unfortunately Delay and Gingrich convinced everyone that the GOP era would last a 1000 years, so Bush appointees thought they earned or are entitled to their positions. Bush and Nixon are the only administrations that publicly fired more AGs midterm because they were not following their political will.

[Samantha]

Wait...Bush got in trouble for firing NINE when Clinton fired NINETY-TWO???

Why didn't Democrats and Liberals applaud Bush for keeping TEN TIMES as many appointees as did Clitnon?

[Wendy]

I would bring back those who were fired by Bush for political reasons and get rid of those presently holding down their jobs. If they were not completely partisan, they would have been fired long ago.

[Alex]

For sure fire the coward in Boston

[Corey Mondello]

They should be fired at the beginning of the new presidents term, that is what is the "norm".

The reason why Bush was "caught" was he didnt do that.

[Dredd]

The nine who were fired are worth re-hiring, and those who fired them are worth firing first.
.
.

[James Harrison]

The attornies should support the Constitution and be loyal to the United States, not to George Bush.

[susan bisceglia]

why are rules for every except the bonnie and clyed of politicas the clintons they got away with every thing and you whores in the press know it and you let it happen you creeps

[Liam Danhof]

Any of them hired by Bush should be fired and any fired by Bush should be brought back. Then hire the rest new. We have enough lawyers in the country that another 90 or so won't be missed.

[MetryJen]

I think they need to consider keeping Jim Letten, that's done so much for us here in N.O. Yes, there are some political aspects that are unsavory, but we, at least, got a good one.

[susan bisceglia]

what about bill clinton did not he do the same as w bush but more was to go unreal we still give this cad cheater serial rapist sex addict and tratior to this country pimping all around the world with his zipper down and his hand out pimping for money with a few women to boot bashing american and w bush what a real guy he is the bent one and forget the fat slob his wife only on paper hillary clinton

[CurtJ]

Treasoin is Treason! These Neo Con Parasites have fired all the non partisan lawyers, prosecutors, and judges and replaced all by imbedding Neo Con lawyers, judges and prosecutors.. All with the intent of Gutting, Usurping an dCrapping on the United States Constitution.
Treason is Treason.. To let them stay in place is aiding and abetting Treason!!

[madisonhack]

I agree with those that contend that Monica Goodlings appointments need to be pushed out of the DOJ and replaced. She wasn't qualified to have the position she held, so her appointments are at best questionable.

[Iffymens]

I am so sick of that sob Fitzgerald.The man thinks that he knows it all.What exactly did Blagojevich do?Blagojevich is nothing but a loud mouth who wants to hear himself talk.Can somebody tell me the difference between what he was trying to do and what the democrats are trying to do as regards to HRC seat in Newyork?They want Kennedy because she is close to Obama and will help them raise all kinds of money legal and illegal.I am so tired of these politicians dumping on people who dont have Caroline Kennedys's background.I dont see all these outrage when the Bush administration lost 9billion dollars cash in Iraq.Thank God that in America people are inocent until proven guilty.

[Iffymens]

I am so sick of that sob Fitzgerald.The man thinks that he knows it all.What exactly did Blagojevich do?Blagojevich is nothing but a loud mouth who wants to hear himself talk.Can somebody tell me the difference between what he was trying to do and what the democrats are trying to do as regards to HRC seat in Newyork?They want Kennedy because she is close to Obama and will help them raise all kinds of money legal and illegal.I am so tired of these politicians dumping on people who dont have Caroline Kennedys's background.I dont see all these outrage when the Bush administration lost 9billion dollars cash in Iraq.Thank God that in America people are inocent until proven guilty.

[k Hurt]

Johnny Sutton should be FIRST to go!!!! He and Bush(long time pals) are holding Ramos,Compean in jail for shooting a known drug lord.Just two more border patrol agents trying to do their job.Wasting away because of the games this Pres plays w/ people's lives.

[afgail]

All 92 US attorneys should be invited to leave. Only 10% were not willing to bring politically motivated litigation at the behest of Rove. There were the 9 that were fired - all of them Republicans. As a rule of thumb you could deduce that only one in ten Republicans is ethical.

[CurtJ]

Treason is Treason! These Neo Con Parasites have fired all the non partisan lawyers, prosecutors, and judges and replaced all by imbedding Neo Con lawyers, judges and prosecutors.. All with the intent of Gutting, Usurping and Crapping on the United States Constitution.
Treason is Treason.. To let them stay in place is aiding and abetting Treason!!

[morgan]

Barack has betrayed us and is keeping corrupt Bush attorneys that were appointed to erase justice not preserve it. Clinton's appointments were all in the start of his term and not designed for a quid pro quo. Obama is serving he same masters as Bush.

[schatsie]

not Fitzgerald, he will be running for Obama's seat the next time around...And this will give the appearance of approval...Basically he was useless in the Plame situation..

[John]

I think he should fire nearly all of them. Think about it, Bush fired nine prosecutors because they wouldn't play ball. That means the rest all went along with their plans to slant prosecutions. Throw the bums out.