Friday, March 30, 2007

Therein lies the rub

This post by Josh Marshall asks the $64k question: why is it that all of the US Attorneys ignominiously fired for "performance reasons" (or whatever the "reason du jour" is) are in swing voting states (plus California...oh wait, that US Attorney was prosecuting the Cunningham bribery case against...wait for it: Republicans)?

Usually one wants to give someone the benefit of the doubt; there must be some other explanation that does not posit ridiculous, corrupt behavior, that is, does not assume that the USAs were fired because they were not prosecuting "voter fraud" cases?

I can post background info on anything above if anyone wants it, but since I am the only one who READS this blog, I do not have the motivation.:-)

1 comment:

  1. I'm not sure I understand whether you are for giving the benefit of the doubt or against it.

    I am against it when patterns emerge and remain unexplained... I think that those threads need to be tugged to see where the end of the thread may hide. Not in some willy-nilly manner of just looking at every detail of those involved, but at least a real ethics debate coupled with an outside investigation.