Home | About | Donate

"You Can't Fire the Rule of Law": Warren Joins Chorus Blasting US Attorney's Firing


#1

"You Can't Fire the Rule of Law": Warren Joins Chorus Blasting US Attorney's Firing

Deirdre Fulton, staff writer

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) was among those raising questions on Sunday over the firing of U.S. attorney Preet Bharara, accusing President Donald Trump of getting rid of Bharara for political reasons and warning him that he won't replace "real prosecutors with cronies without a massive fight."

The senator voiced her objections in a series of tweets Sunday morning:


#2

Do Democrats fight? They seem to lose fights often enough but did they actually fight them before the end? Democrats have grown used to 'almost' fighting the good fight but in the end they hold fast to the moderate/conservative line where they are Dems in name and Repubs during roll call vote.

Now we hear Dems talking the fight of fights and seemingly bulking up. No pillaging says one, the massive fight says another and on and on. It is like the same old Dems have suddenly been reborn as actual Dems that want to oppose the all Repub rule!

Same Dems as lost are the same Dems warning the ruling Repubs that they are getting ready to fight. Same Dems that were powerless against the Repubs back when after Bush/Cheney the country loathed the corrupt Repubs. The same Dems rehabilitated the woefully dishonored Repubs and then let them gain power again just to plaque the Dem president who rehabilitated them!!!!!

These the same Dems as those Dems who let Trump and the Repubs take over rather than support the more popular Dem candidate... these Dems are talking tough now.

Aren't they cute? They are just so adorable when the same old Dems pretend to get 'serious' about playing at being Dems for real.


#3

This article is about Senator Warren's response to the firings. She joined the Senate just 5 years ago and has steadily spoken up since about domestic issues. She was also pretty aggressive in fighting for consumer rights against Wall Street during her time as a professor before she became a Senator.


#4

I hope Senator Warren will take a break from grandstanding, and do something that would matter. For example, submit a companion bill in the Senate for H.R. 676--Expanded & Improved Medicare For All Act, which has been introduced in the House. https://www.healthcare-now.org/legislation/hr-676/

Just kidding. The Democrats in the Senate do not support Medicare for All, they support RomneyCare, aka ObamaCare. Except, of course, for Bernie, who is not a "real" Democrat. And apparently Bernie is not introducing a Medicare for All bill in the Senate this year because doing so would hurt the Democrats' chances in the 2018 election.

Why? Because Medicare for All would become an election issue, and the Democrats don't support single payer. Which we can already see by the low number of cosponsors for H.R. 676 in the House. It's okay, Bernie, we already know that the Democrats don't represent us.


#5

You certainly can fire those who uphold the law and replace them with crooked conservatives, it's what all conservative democrats and conservative republicans do.


#6

Why do you assume that? Has he made any announcement about not putting forward a new single payer option? I haven't heard of any. We are only 7 weeks into the new congress and Bernie has already submitted 4 bills - including a major one on expanding Social Security (as well as the one about importing drugs that has gotten more attention)


#7

Here's why I think that Bernie is not introducing a Medicare for All bill this year: https://blog.nader.org/2017/02/03/an-open-letter-to-senator-bernie-sanders/

From Ralph Nader's recent (Feb. 3) open letter to Bernie:

"Throughout the 2016 campaign, you powerfully made the case all over the country before massive audiences for a more efficient single payer Medicare for All – without deductibles, co-pays, premiums – plus free choice of doctor and hospital.

"But you have reportedly decided not to introduce or push for single payer in the Congress this year.

"Your health policy adviser has privately told some single payer activists you will not introduce a single payer bill into the Senate this year because the Democratic leadership believes that such a bill will get in the way of electing a Democratic Senate in 2018."

On March 12, Bernie tweeted: "Never lose sight of the fact that our ultimate goal is not just playing defense. Our goal is a Medicare-for-all, single payer system." https://twitter.com/SenSanders/status/841016448453611524

So apparently not embarrassing the Senate Dems by calling attention to their lack of support for Medicare for All is part of Bernie's strategy.


#8

Thanks - I hadn't see Ralph's piece. I hope he's wrong, that would be pretty disappointing if true.

I would guess that if Bernie wasn't putting in a Medicare for all bill he would instead be using one of two other tactics:
1) he would introduce a bill similar to the one he had about 8 years ago when he sponsored a bill to facilitate individual states that want to do their own single-payer system(s). That tactic would support folks in California and Vermont and elsewhere that want a state-run single payer and at the same time show the Republican hypocrisy when they call for states to take over everything else from abortion rules to education vouchers to Medicaid programs that don't follow federal rules.

or

2) he would sponsor a Medicare for those over 54 and a public option for others, which is where he got the Democrats to agree to in the 2016 party platform. That tactic would attract lots of other Democrat Senators as co-sponsors and would put a somewhat decent proposal before the public eye.


#9

Hasn't pretty much every President done this to some degree including Clinton and Obama'?

Whats different here is Trump made a commitment to have him stay on and then he reneged and so did not get the resignation forcing him to take the action he did.

But everyone knows you can't trust Trump


#10

Thank you, dpearl, for your defense of Senator Warren. I'm sure that she isn't perfect, but she is better than any Republican that I see, by several orders of magnitude!


#11

Consistent with his pre POTUS M.O., Trump is 86ing anybody who is not a yes man or yes woman.


#12

And I thank you again, dpearl, for standing up for one of the few friends that we have left in national politics!


#13

Thanks for this. Tomorrow morning I'll be calling Bernie Sander's office for an explanation.


#14

Well Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) I guess you figured out that the Obama/Clinton administration had loaded important positions in government with compliant blackmail ready folks to keep the corruption going. Oops guess the DNC will be losing a lot of influence peddlers. Totally standard procedure when taking over a corporation. Drain the swamp. Could be deep.


#15

You are in many ways correct dpearl, you have strong points. But let's look under the hood and directly at Wereflea's rough running engine. I assume he is unhappy the US lost another good judge.

The points made are more than whether Elizabeth Warren has faulty insights about US domestic issues. The idea of rule of law and being a nation of law includes justice but leaves it unspoken. Justice and law are two different subjects. Yes. We are needing laws and a society where not only the 99% must abide by the law or find themselves in deep doo doo. Elizabeth Warren is tops on that.

Wereflea is correct that Elizabeth Warren did not support Bernie when he articulated problems of justice associated with the billionaire class. Even so. Elizabeth Warren is one of the best progressive voices on the internal topics she addresses. Issues like women's rights become conflicted when including US effect on women's rights outside the US and what responsibility women in power have for this problem.

Regrettably, Elizabeth has strayed outside US borders and joined the party-line anti Russia fray. Note that no person has ever found a shred of evidence that Russia thinks it will take over the United States and Europe.

Russia is presented as an aggressor when on closer examination in reality Russia is a worthy chess master forced into a no win nuclear war chess game by US ambitions of world empire.

Take a look at Russian organic farmers now exporting more cash food crops than Russian export of weapons. Exports of wholesome Russian foods are 1/3 the value of exported natural gas. Putin chortles all the way to the bank after the US chased thousands upon tens of thousands of Ukrainian organic farmers from the breadbasket of Europe into the breadbasket of Russia. Those farmers are safely east of Moscow now and they are just getting started.

Putin actually laughed when he pointed out the west can no longer produce wholesome food. GMO is not in Russia. Cuban organic experts are already in the field advisors. Go ahead. Laugh at those who have not been bullied by 55 years of US boycott. Moscow is on a rail line that goes from Beijing to London. Organic fresh food goes east and west from Russia. Europeans compete with Chinese for the freshest Russian veggies.

Organic farmers are stronger than terrorist cowards who threaten all life on Earth with atomic bombs.

Warmongers who do not help create an economy that prospers on less than one Earth of resources and pollution recycling are obsolete. We all know what the democrats did to Honduras. No woman who has helped do what has been done to Afghani, Honduran, Iraqi and Libyan woman has any real association with women's rights.

Be independent. Be an autonomous democrat. Be friendly with Russians and Iranians.

http://www.defenddemocracy.press/putin-taking-bold-step-biotech-giant-monsanto/


#16

Oh, for God's sake. Nearly every president since John Adams has fired all the political appointees immediately upon inauguration. This is not new. This is not novel. This is not sinister. This is normal. Get a grip.


#17

"By tradition, U.S. Attorneys are replaced only at the start of a new White House administration. U.S. Attorneys hold a "political" office, and therefore they are considered to "serve at the pleasure of the President." At the beginning of a new presidential administration, it is traditional for all 93 U.S. Attorneys to submit a letter of resignation. When a new President is from a different political party, almost all of the resignations will be eventually accepted.[11] The attorneys are then replaced by new political appointees, typically from the new President's party"...Wikipedia

I remember my disgust when Obama didn't ask for the resignation of the U. S. Attorney in Alabama who prosecuted former Gov. of Alabama Don Siegelman.


#18

It is true that Russia has built up its organic farming business recently and that has been a bright light in its export profile since the oil market collapsed. Of course their arms sales are also doing fine and they are trying to increase those substantially as well - so don't pretend that Putin's only intent is to give everyone a healthy diet.


#19

No pretense. Free market irony is a closer description as I see it.

It looks like boom-time organic farming is exceeding booming arms sales.

What if the US pulled the plug and unilaterally let off on world tension?


#20

If that happened than Russian arms sales would really sky-rocket because they would no longer have the competition from our arms manufacturers which are generally preferred by those that want to make war.

Keep in mind that Russian wealth inequality is even worse than the pitiful situation in the U.S. Here, the top one tenth of 1% of households (that's about 134,000 households) own over 20% of the nations assets. In Russia the top 110 households (that's just one five-thousandth of 1%) own more than 35% of that nation's wealth. Their billionaire class is as greedy as ours.