If the Times says there is something improper about the firing, then there must be. After all, they are the New York Times!

Congressman Rick Renzi, an Arizona Republican, was locked in a close re-election battle last fall when the local United States attorney, Paul Charlton, was investigating him for corruption. The investigation appears to have been slowed before Election Day, Mr. Renzi retained his seat, and Mr. Charlton ended up out of a job — one of eight prosecutors purged by the White House and the Justice Department.

The Arizona case adds a disturbing new chapter to that scandal. Congress needs to determine whether Mr. Charlton was fired for any reason other than threatening the Republican PartyÂ’s hold on a Congressional seat.

* * *

There is reason to be suspicious about these events. Last week, all Attorney General Alberto Gonzales could offer was weak excuses for the firing — that Mr. Charlton had asked Mr. Gonzales to reconsider a decision to seek the death penalty in a murder case and that he’d started recording interviews with targets of investigations without asking permission from Justice Department bureaucrats.

Now wait -- you've got a US attorney bucking Justice Department policy and rebelling against top-level decisions coming out of Washington. That isn't a weak excuse -- that is a pretty good one, in my book. The guy was out of step with the priorities of the department. Indeed, that would be sufficient to get you or I fired from our jobs, and is legitimate reason for firing this US Attorney.

Now, if there is ANY ACTUAL EVIDENCE that the firing was improper, bring it on and present it -- I'll gladly support the resignation and prosecution of anyone involved in obstruction of justice. But until there is actual evidence of such activities, the only thing dubious is this NY Times editorial -- and the claims of partisan Democrats looking for a scandal.

Posted by: Greg at 10:24 PM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 335 words, total size 2 kb.