Bharara Firing Draws Attention of Media - Clinton's 93 Firings Did Not

% of readers think this story is Fact. Add your two cents.

Among those U.S. District Attorneys asked to vacate his position was Preet Bharara, who has been the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York.  Bharara refused to resign, so, he was fired.

“I did not resign. Moments ago I was fired,” Bharara wrote on his verified Twitter account Saturday afternoon. “Being the US Attorney in SDNY will forever be the greatest honor of my professional life.”

“One hallmark of justice is absolute independence, and that was my touchstone every day that I served,” Bharara later said in a statement.

Of course, the liberal media leaped all over the situation, calling it a “stunning standoff.”

Before Trump decided Bharara had to go, back in November he told the attorney he could stay on.  Therefore, the request for his resignation, and subsequent firing, is said to have been a surprise.

Within days or weeks after the election, Trump was not fully aware of all of the intricacies of being President of the United States, nor was he fully aware of how embedded the Obama shadow government truly was.  He had asked Chuck Schumer what he thought of Bharara, at the time, and Schumer predictably gave the attorney a glowing review.  That was before, I think, Trump realized that all Democrats lie all of the time.

Trump, after the passing months revealed more about his opposition, changed his mind about Bharara, realizing he was just another ticking time bomb left behind by Barack Obama.

In a statement Saturday evening, Senate Judiciary member Patrick Leahy said the abrupt firing of the US attorneys, including Bharara, is “another reminder that the independence of the Justice Department is at risk under this administration.”

“The Senate will now have to carefully evaluate the President’s selected replacements,” the Vermont Democrat said.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Massachusetts, posted a series of tweets Sunday morning blasting Trump for firing Bharara and suggesting he did so in part because “Bharara had authority over Trump Tower.”

Were the Democrats, or the media, as appalled in 1993 when President Bill Clinton made the decision to get rid of all 93 U.S. attorneys at the time?

The answer is simple.  They didn’t care.  They did not reveal any angst over the situation, like they have over Trump’s decision.  However, interestingly enough, when George W. Bush took office, and he replaced only 8 of them, they went nuts.

In response to Bush asking for the resignations of only eight U.S. District Attorneys, Anchor Charles Gibson promised that ABC would “look at all the angles tonight,” but he skipped the Clinton comparison. Gibson teased: “New controversy at the White House after a string of U.S. attorneys is fired under questionable circumstances. There are calls for the Attorney General to resign.” CBS’s Katie Couric declared that “the uproar is growing tonight over the firing of eight federal prosecutors by the Justice Department” and fill-in NBC anchor Campbell Brown teased: “The Attorney General and the firestorm tonight over the controversial dismissal of several federal prosecutors. Was it political punishment?” Brown soon asserted that “it’s a story that has been brewing for weeks and it exploded today” — an explosion fueled by the news media.

The problem is, the snowflakes, and uninformed Democrat voters, only go by what the mainstream media tells them today, and are not willing to look deeper into the issue, or admit that there is any hypocrisy.  Besides, I doubt many of them were alive, or paying attention if they were around, when Clinton mowed down the entire Justice Department without even as much as a whimper from the mouths of his allies in the press.

– Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Related: http://politicalpistachio.blogspot.com/2017/03/sessions-requests-draining-judicial.html