The Trump administration, via its attorney general, recently asked for the resignation of all remaining Obama-appointed U.S. attorneys, which is, in fact, a change of personnel in which new administrations routinely engage.
However, the media reporting by the mainstream press and broadcast media has been anything but routine; rather, the coverage has been somewhat hysterical in nature.
“Trump Abruptly Orders 46 Obama-Era Prosecutors to Resign,” the New York Times stated in an overly dramatic headline.
CNN focused on the emotional reaction of Obama appointees with a story titled: “Anger mounts over handling of US attorney firings.”
“Sessions Ousts Nearly Half Of The US Attorneys Across The Country In Friday Order,” BuzzFeed posted in a headline.
Media outlets and social media posts floated the dubious idea that radio and television personality Sean Hannity had somehow influenced the president to facilitate the attorney exits.
The New York Times stated that the request for U.S. attorney resignations “came less than 24 hours after Sean Hannity, the Fox News commentator who often speaks with Mr. Trump, called for a ‘purge’ of Obama appointees at the Justice Department on his show.”
The following Democratic politicians sounded a familiar anti-Trump chord.
California Senator Dianne Feinstein remarked that she was “surprised” and “concerned” by the Justice Department changes.
New York Senator and Minority Leader Charles Schumer issued a statement indicating that the he was “troubled to learn of reports of requests for resignations from the remaining U.S. Attorneys.”
Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren tweeted that the president cannot fire the “rule of law.”
Maryland Congressman Elijah Cummings suggested that the termination of the U.S. attorneys is some kind of cover up.
The Trump administration did indeed ask for the resignation of all remaining Obama-appointed U.S. attorneys; however, such a request in the modern political era is an anticipated and customary action. Moreover, there is an even greater urgency for such action when considering the recent revelations that the Obama Justice Department had been engaging in surveillance of the Trump presidential campaign.
A change of guard of U.S. attorneys has become a conventional manner in which incoming administrations update legal personnel within the Justice Department.
It is completely within the president’s authority to end the employment of U.S. attorneys, and since U.S. Attorneys are political appointees it is understood that the individuals involved will vacate their positions when a new president, who is a member of the opposing political party, assumes office.
In their respective administrations, Presidents Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton, and George W. Bush also discharged the vast majority of U.S. attorneys appointed by previous administrations.
Reagan dismissed 89 U.S. attorneys, Clinton 89, and Bush 88, early in their respective administrations.
In light of the recent revelations that the Obama Justice Department used FISA warrants to intercept digital communications of the Trump campaign, the legal personnel change was an extremely necessary and prudent one.
It is reasonable to draw the inference that the cumulative surveillance reports have merit. The considerable coverage on the subject has been deftly presented by radio talk show host and legal scholar Mark Levin, who, incidentally, has been wrongfully disparaged by the mainstream media.
At a recent press briefing, Sean Spicer, using clear and concise language, shed some light on the reality of the Obama holdovers. The White House Press Secretary made his remarks as part of a response to a question about the existence of the “deep state,” a phrase that refers to non-elected individuals within the bureaucracy who influence and attempt to control the federal government.
“I think that there’s no question when you have eight years of one party in office, there are people who stay in government — and continue to espouse the agenda of the previous administration,” Spicer said. “So I don’t think it should come as any surprise there are people that burrowed into government during eight years of the last administration and may have believed in that agenda and may continue to seek it.”