From: Rich Gauszka 

Your adoration of the Patriot Act belies your faith in the overall goodness
of people in the USA.

If you were indeed old fashioned you would take umbrage over all these
incursions on our liberties.

Mark wrote:
> It boils down to this then Rich, I have faith in the overall goodness of
> people in general, those charged with forwarding the goodness of the USA in
> particular.  way it is for me>
>
> "Rich Gauszka"  wrote in message
> news:45ee2e0c$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>> or it's used to coerce and 'sicken' Federal prosecutors as per the Senate
>> testimony
>>
>> Mark wrote:
>>> Look, as I've already said, I have no problem with the loophole being
>>> closed, but it's still just not that big a deal >> from self-serving speeches littered with faux questions by
Levin, Specter
>>> et.al. just before they can't find any reason not to
confirm> 
>>>
>>> "Rich Gauszka" 
wrote in message
>>> news:45ee2a35$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>>>> It's not the hiring and firing that is the problem. It's
the bypassing
>>>> of Senate confirmation in the process due to the Bush
sponsored change
>>>> to the Patriot Act that is the problem - Going from 120 days to
>>>> indefinite. It should not be a partisan issue. I wouldn't
give the Dems
>>>> that power either
>>>>
>>>> Mark wrote:
>>>>> I'm still nonplussed about this whole thing. The
president is empowered
>>>>> to fire and hire them at will, he doesn't need any
well-vetted reasons
>>>>> for it. You're saying he should have not fired them
because some Dems
>>>>> would complain about it? Why?
>>>>>
>>>>> Look, don't get me wrong, it's fine with me if that
loophole is closed,
>>>>> but it's just not a big deal -- it's not like the
appointees don't have
>>>>> to follow the law. If Bush wants, for instance, his attorneys to
>>>>> prosecute Union pension fund corruption as a higher
priority than CEO
>>>>> corruption, that's his perrogative -- they're all
going to get theirs
>>>>> in time anyway.
>>>>>
>>>>> In this example, union guys will be in jail between
now and the Obama
>>>>> presidency, then starting in Feb '09 the CEOs will get
theirs >>>> example actually, since Bush went after the CEO
corruption that was
>>>>> hatched before he was elected>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Rich Gauszka"
 wrote in message
>>>>> news:45ee1cdc$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>>>>>> "Mark"  wrote in message
>>>>>> news:45ee0b2d{at}w3.nls.net...
>>>>>>> "Rich Gauszka"
 wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:45ee007a$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>>>>>>>> Right - bunch of nothing - Just fire those
prosecutors who wouldn't
>>>>>>>> file charges against Democrats before the
election then appoint your
>>>>>>>> own goons without the need for Senate
approval - Hail Caesar!!!
>>>>>>> I simply don't ascribe nefarious motives to
every *single* thing a
>>>>>>> president (any president) does. My
understanding is they were not
>>>>>>> operating with their priorities in alignment
with those of the
>>>>>>> administration. You seem to think his
priorities are filing charges
>>>>>>> against Dems, I disagree. Hell Sandy Berger's
sweetheart deal proves
>>>>>>> that out. 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> My only complaint is I wish he'd fired them
because they wouldn't
>>>>>>> prosecute illegal aliens fast enough, but I
know that's not true.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://kvoa.com/Global/story.asp?S=6188497
>>>>>> What the Justice Department has said about six
U.S. attorneys who were
>>>>>> asked to resign. Under each prosecutor are
comments from previous
>>>>>> department-issued performances reviews and then
statements Tuesday by
>>>>>> William Moschella, an associate deputy attorney
general, about the
>>>>>> reasons given that the prosecutors were asked to
step down. He
>>>>>> testified before a House Judiciary subcommittee.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> CAROL LAM, U.S. attorney in San Diego
>>>>>>
>>>>>> JUSTICE DEPARTMENT TESTIMONY: "Her gun
prosecution numbers are at the
>>>>>> bottom of the list. ... (On immigration cases),
her numbers for a
>>>>>> border district just didn't stack up."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2005 PERFORMANCE REVIEW: "An effective
manager and respected leader
>>>>>> ... respected by the judiciary, law enforcement
agencies, and (U.S.
>>>>>> attorney's office) staff."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ___
>>>>>>
>>>>>> JOHN McKAY, U.S. attorney in Seattle
>>>>>>
>>>>>> JUSTICE DEPARTMENT TESTIMONY: "The department
really had policy
>>>>>> differences and were concerned with the manner in
which he went about
>>>>>> advocating the particular policies ... on
information sharing. He
>>>>>> spent quite a considerable amount of time
advocating for a particular
>>>>>> system."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2006 PERFORMANCE REVIEW: "An effective,
well-regarded and capable
>>>>>> leader ... (who) established strategic goals that
were appropriate to
>>>>>> meet the priorities of the department."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ___
>>>>>>
>>>>>> BUD CUMMINS, U.S. attorney in Little Rock, Ark.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> JUSTICE DEPARTMENT TESTIMONY: "His was not
for performance-based
>>>>>> reasons. ... The administration asked Mr. Cummins
to move on only
>>>>>> after we knew that he had indicated he was not
going to serve out the
>>>>>> remainder of his term."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2006 PERFORMANCE REVIEW: "Very competent and
highly regarded by the
>>>>>> federal judiciary, law enforcement and civil
client agencies. ...
>>>>>> Established strategic goals that were appropriate
to meet the
>>>>>> priorities of the department."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ___
>>>>>>
>>>>>> DANIEL BOGDEN, U.S. attorney for Nevada
>>>>>>
>>>>>> JUSTICE DEPARTMENT TESTIMONY: "There was no
particular deficiency.
>>>>>> There was an interest in seeing renewed energy and
renewed vigor in
>>>>>> that office, really taking it to the next level."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2003 PERFORMANCE REVIEW: "Highly regarded by
the federal judiciary,
>>>>>> the law enforcement and civil client agencies, and
the staff of the
>>>>>> (U.S. attorney's office). He was a capable leader."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ___
>>>>>>
>>>>>> DAVID IGLESIAS, U.S. attorney for New Mexico
>>>>>>
>>>>>> JUSTICE DEPARTMENT TESTIMONY: "The district
was in need of greater
>>>>>> leadership. ... Mr. Iglesias had delegated to his
first assistant the
>>>>>> overall running of his office. U.S. attorneys are
hired to run the
>>>>>> office."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2005 PERFORMANCE REVIEW: "Experienced in
legal, management and
>>>>>> community relations work and was respected by the
judiciary, agencies
>>>>>> and staff. ... Had a well conceived strategic plan
that complied with
>>>>>> department priorities."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ___
>>>>>>
>>>>>> PAUL CHARLTON, U.S. attorney in Arizona
>>>>>>
>>>>>> JUSTICE DEPARTMENT TESTIMONY: "Mr. Charlton
had undertaken in his
>>>>>> district a policy with regard to the taping of FBI
interviews and set
>>>>>> a policy in place there that had national
ramifications. It did not go
>>>>>> through the whole policy process. ... On the death
penalty, we have a
>>>>>> process in the Department of Justice. It is the
one area that is
>>>>>> nondelegable by the attorney general which (Mr.
Charlton), in a
>>>>>> particular case was told and authorized to seek in
a particular case.
>>>>>> He chose instead to continue to litigate after that long and
>>>>>> exhaustive process."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2003 PERFORMANCE REVIEW: "Well respected by
the (U.S. attorney's
>>>>>> office) staff, investigative and civil client
agencies, local law
>>>>>> enforcement community, Native American nations,
and judiciary
>>>>>> regarding his integrity, professionalism and
competence."
>>>>>>
>
>

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5