Top U.S. prosecutor says he is fired by Trump administration

[rooster59]

Top U.S. prosecutor says he is fired by Trump administration

By Andy Sullivan and Mark Hosenball

 

FILE PHOTO: U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York Preet Bharara speaks during a Reuters Newsmaker event in New York City, U.S., July 13, 2016. REUTERS/Brendan McDermid/File photo

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A prominent U.S. prosecutor said he was fired by the Trump administration on Saturday after refusing to step down, adding a discordant note to what is normally a routine changing of top attorneys when a new president takes office.

New York U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara's defiant exit, first announced on Twitter, raised questions about President Donald Trump's ability to fill top jobs throughout his government.

Trump has yet to put forward any candidates to serve as the nation's 93 district attorneys even as his Justice Department asked the 46 who have not yet quit to hand in their resignations on Friday. Key positions at agencies like the State Department and the Defence Department also remain unfilled.

As the federal prosecutor for Manhattan and surrounding areas since 2009, Bharara secured insider-trading settlements from Wall Street firms and won criminal convictions in high-profile corruption and terrorism cases.

He told reporters in November that Trump had asked him to stay in his post, and he refused to resign when asked to do so by the Justice Department on Friday. He said he was fired on Saturday afternoon.

"Serving my country as U.S. Attorney here for the past seven years will forever be the greatest honour of my professional life, no matter what else I do or how long I live," Bharara said in a press statement.

The Justice Department confirmed that Bharara was no longer serving in the position and declined further comment.

Like all U.S. attorneys, Bharara is a political appointee who can be replaced when a new president takes office. Previous presidents have often asked outgoing U.S. attorneys to stay on the job until their replacements win confirmation in the U.S. Senate.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions' decision to replace so many sitting attorneys at once has raised questions about whether the Trump administration's ability to enforce the nation's laws would be hindered.

"President Trump's abrupt and unexplained decision to summarily remove over 40 U.S. attorneys has once again caused chaos in the federal government," New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman said.

Career attorneys will carry on that work until new U.S. attorneys are put in place, the Justice Department said.

Bharara said his deputy, Joon Kim, will serve as his temporary replacement.

Marc Mukasey, a defence lawyer whose father served as attorney general under Republican President George W. Bush, has been mentioned as a possible replacement. He did not respond to a request for comment.

Bharara's office handles some of the most critical business and criminal cases passing through the federal judicial system. He has been overseeing a probe into New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio's fundraising.

Bharara has successfully prosecuted state and local politicians for corruption, including former New York Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver. He won a lifetime sentence against the Times Square bomber, Faisal Shahzad, and a 25-year sentence for international arms dealer Viktor Bout.

He won a $1.8 billion insider-trading settlement against SAC Capital Advisors, the largest in history, which forced the hedge fund to shut down, and he forced JPMorgan Chase to pay $1.7 billion to settle charges related to its role in the Bernie Madoff Ponzi scheme.

"His firing so early in President Trump's tenure is somewhat unexpected, but if you had asked me a few months ago whether I expected Preet to still be in that job in March I would have said no," said Matthew Schwartz, a former prosecutor under Bharara.

Trump has asked two U.S. prosecutors to remain on the job, according to the Justice Department.

U.S. Attorney Rod Rosenstein of Maryland has been asked to stay on as the Senate considers his nomination to serve as the No. 2 Justice Department official, and U.S. Attorney Dana Boente of Virginia, who is temporarily serving in that position, has also been asked to remain.

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-03-12

[boomerangutang]

         Trump has a long and subjective history with attorneys.  He loves them when they rule in his favor, and hates them when they don't.  Trump is going through a sustained anger/lashing out period.  It's expected from a spoiled brat who's never done any real work in his life.  One of more of the conspiracy theory shout-radio hosts probably told him; "if you're dogged by lefties for breaking laws - then simple:  fire all the attorneys and judges."   Never has a career law-breaker been in a position to fire any and all investigators and justice workers who could be involved in busting him.  Al Capone would have loved to have been able to fire attorneys and judges.

 

         Next up:  fire FBI, CIA, NSA and any other officials who could possibly contribute to the legal cases against him and the sheeple he surrounds himself with.

 

 

Edited March 12, 2017 by boomerangutang

[boomerangutang]

To any folks who voted for Trump in November:  Now that some of you are realizing what a disaster Trump is, just know that the following people warned you, but you didn't listen.....

 

>>>  Cruz, Rubio, and all the other Republican contenders except Kasich.   Kasich tried to be a gentleman, but wound up being seen as a pantywaist.   I bet Cruz and Rubio sorely wish they had better staff at the time - who could have dug up some of the piles of dirt on Trump. 

 

>>>  HRC and Sanders and their supporters told you what a dangerous man Trump was, but Trump voters couldn't see beyond the end of their noses.

 

>>>  Progressive and left-leaning journalists were mentioning things, months ago, which are only now becoming headline news.  In other words, the reporting was out there months ago, but Trump supporters, in their bottomless ignorance, didn't want to see or believe any of it. Note;  not even 1/10 of the dirt on Trump and his surrogates has surfaces thus far.  There's a whole lot more ugly swill a-comin' down the tubes.

 

>>>   I and dozens of other Thai Visa posters told anyone who would listen, but Trump fans thought they knew better.   Some are now realizing how wrong they were, but there are still stalwarts who believe a fatally flawed person can successfully head the US government and military.  If they resided in the USSR 70 years ago, they would have been fully behind Stalin.

 

 

 

[Ramen087]

Are you saying Trump supporters would have been Stalīnists?

[Ramen087]

Edited March 12, 2017 by Ramen087

[Andaman Al]

1 hour ago, boomerangutang said:

I and dozens of other Thai Visa posters told anyone who would listen,

Good post, except nobody would listen. 

[Andaman Al]

1 hour ago, Ramen087 said:

Are you saying Trump supporters would have been Stalīnists?

Yes. Why the red card? You fully support someone that is selling his soul to Vladimir Putin. You support someone that allowed an unregistered foreign agent to become NSA which is either inept or treasonous, you pick, but either way he proves himself not fit to be CinC. I think Stalininst is quite a polite term compared to some alternatives that could be used. Trump supporters have all lost their way, they cannot see the wood for the trees, but instead of stopping and turning back they are allowing the pied piper to take them deeper and deeper into the woods. It's a story that won't end well for anyone.

Edited March 12, 2017 by Andaman Al

[darksidedog]

Getting rid of the US Attorneys right now, does dramatically and very conveniently, reduce the number of people who could potentially file against the travel ban.

Or any other breaches of the constitution that come to light, of which I am sure there will be some fairly soon.

[SOUTHERNSTAR]

Some people arent good losers. It is normal practice for politically appointed prosecuters, like this guy to resign when a new administration comes in. This guy refused to follow this widely acceptable practice and got fired. So the snowflake is trying to make a point and is now the hero of all the other snowflakes. The only problem is the majority of the people dont care. But in the interest of free speech and freedom of choice the majority will allow these snowflakes to huddle together and cheer each other. But remember you still lost the election and must wait for the next one to correct the mistakes you have made, thats if you can. 

[Gecko123]

Plans to roll back Dodd-Frank, the appointment of a former Wall Street defense lawyer to head the SEC, the firing of New York US attorney Preet Bharara, and the stocking of Trump's cabinet and advisory staff with Goldman Sach's alumni Steven Manuchin, Gary Cohn, Anthony Scaramucci, and vulture investors like Wilbur Ross. None of these moves signal that Trump has the little guy's interests at heart. Most of the GS appointees helped create and profited greatly from the sub-prime mortgage crisis which did enormous damage to the middle and lower classes in terms of net household wealth and employment. 

 

Trump's mostly white blue-collar supporters had better hold onto their wallets. Their interests are clearly going to get short shrift. Who do you think all the financial, environmental, workplace, food, drug, and small business regulations are designed to protect? You, that's who. Those higher standards, established and maintained through governmental regulations, are in many ways what makes America great.

 

But Trump claims reducing regulations is what will make America great again, right? The problem is that in the process of cutting regulations, guys like you and me may find ourselves poorer, and less healthy and safe when working, eating, drinking, taking medecine, and using consumer products. Get rid of all those pesky regulations, and what will you be left with? Mexico? Panama? China? Thailand? By the way, can anyone name a single regulation that they think is excessively intrusive or does more harm than good? I can't.

 

Drain the swamp? What a sick joke that's turning out to be.

Edited March 12, 2017 by Gecko123

[Andaman Al]

50 minutes ago, SOUTHERNSTAR said:

Some people arent good losers. It is normal practice for politically appointed prosecuters, like this guy to resign when a new administration comes in. This guy refused to follow this widely acceptable practice and got fired. So the snowflake is trying to make a point and is now the hero of all the other snowflakes. The only problem is the majority of the people dont care. But in the interest of free speech and freedom of choice the majority will allow these snowflakes to huddle together and cheer each other. But remember you still lost the election and must wait for the next one to correct the mistakes you have made, thats if you can. 

Us and them? It is pathetic. The election is over, history, water under the bridge. It is NOT normal for resignations to occur like this. Firstly in every other case of mass 'firings' there is ALWAYS another US Attorney appointed first, then the outgoing one resigns. In November both Trump and Sessions said that they wanted Bharara to stay in position, so he accepted, and that is why he did not resign. Normally there would be a 3-4 week transition phase to hand over cases from one Attorney to the next. Not here. Chaos rules yet again. Pathetic.

[mtls2005]

Some people arent good losers. It is normal practice for politically appointed prosecuters, like this guy to resign when a new administration comes in. This guy refused to follow this widely acceptable practice and got fired.

 

Not that facts are important but Trump specifically asked Preet Bharara to stay on with an in-person meeting back in November. 

 

Further, last Thursday Trump supposedly contacted Preet Bharara by phone, a practice which is questionable. In fact, Preet Bharara was required by law to notify his superior (Jeff Sessions) immediately regarding this unusual contact. The call is said to have been prompted by a rumor that Bharara may have been looking in to Trump's violations of the Emoluments Clause? In which case, simply resigning might have been more legally problematic for him than forcing his own firing? (I'm not a lawyer.)

 

I suspect there will be more to this particular aspect in the coming days and weeks.

 

More likey Trump was worried about the continued independence of this office, as they would be the ones sniffing about The Trump Organization. Better to place someone who will look the other way. Marc L. Mukasey (son of Mike Mukasey) is one who is rumored to potentially take this job.

 

 

 

 

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/trump-personally-bharara-stay-fire-article-1.2995281

Edited March 12, 2017 by mtls2005

[craigt3365]

1 hour ago, SOUTHERNSTAR said:

Some people arent good losers. It is normal practice for politically appointed prosecuters, like this guy to resign when a new administration comes in. This guy refused to follow this widely acceptable practice and got fired. So the snowflake is trying to make a point and is now the hero of all the other snowflakes. The only problem is the majority of the people dont care. But in the interest of free speech and freedom of choice the majority will allow these snowflakes to huddle together and cheer each other. But remember you still lost the election and must wait for the next one to correct the mistakes you have made, thats if you can. 

First, enough with the snowflake term.  It's derogatory and this guy doesn't deserve that.  He was asked by Trump to stay, and then was fired unceremoniously. This district is one that going to be at the heart of Trump's relations with Russia.  He might have made himself a very dangerous enemy.

 

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/03/11/opinions/trump-beware-after-firing-bharara-callan/index.html

Quote

 

The investigation of possible ties between members of the Trump campaign team and Russian officials, and the President's claim that he was wiretapped in Trump Tower on orders of President Obama, will all lead back to the Southern District of New York.

...........................

In terminating Bharara, though, the President has created a formidable and charismatic enemy who shares the President's social media skills. Mr. Bharara has now become the first US attorney for the Southern District of New York to announce that he had been fired via Twitter. POTUS beware.

 

[ilostmypassword]

2 hours ago, SOUTHERNSTAR said:

Some people arent good losers. It is normal practice for politically appointed prosecuters, like this guy to resign when a new administration comes in. This guy refused to follow this widely acceptable practice and got fired. So the snowflake is trying to make a point and is now the hero of all the other snowflakes. The only problem is the majority of the people dont care. But in the interest of free speech and freedom of choice the majority will allow these snowflakes to huddle together and cheer each other. But remember you still lost the election and must wait for the next one to correct the mistakes you have made, thats if you can. 

Now that you've posted your opinion, why don't you try to actually read the article. Sessions and Trump had a meeting with Bharara and asked him to stay on.  Now they've reneged.

[Srikcir]

4 hours ago, darksidedog said:

reduce the number of people who could potentially file against the travel ban.

No, it doesn't. It is and has been the State Attorney Generals (ie., Washington, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts) bringing lawsuits against Trump's travel bans. It is the US Department of Justice who is the defendant in such cases and represented by its now depleted federal attorney general staffs.

[Ahab]

3 hours ago, ilostmypassword said:

Now that you've posted your opinion, why don't you try to actually read the article. Sessions and Trump had a meeting with Bharara and asked him to stay on.  Now they've reneged.

Which is perfectly within their power to do. These AG's serve "at the pleasure of the President". He can fire them any time, for any (or no) reason.

[ilostmypassword]

22 minutes ago, Ahab said:

Which is perfectly within their power to do. These AG's serve "at the pleasure of the President". He can fire them any time, for any (or no) reason.

I don't deny that it's his right. It's just sleazy. Especially, given Trump's obvious deep affection for Wall Street.

Edited March 12, 2017 by ilostmypassword

[new2here]

He may be a good or even great Assistant AG, but at the end of the day he, like most all top-level agency employees, largely serve at the discretion of the current president..  therefore, as much as he may have done good work, this is a pen inherent risk of being in a politically-appointed position -- like US Ambassadors accredited to key foreign countries... you serve at the discretion of the president.. and it is well known that when administrations do change, there is some measure of risk as the new administration may choose to have a different person in that position and you'll largely be expected to resign to facilitate that change.

 

Regardless if I like Trump, Obama or Bush (example) I recognize and accept that this is how positions of this nature and level are handeled.

Edited March 12, 2017 by new2here

[ilostmypassword]

1 minute ago, new2here said:

He may be a good or even great Assistant AG, but at the end of the day he, like most all top-level agency employees, largely serve at the discretion of the current president..  therefore, as much as he may have done good work, this is a pen inherent risk of being in a politically-appointed position -- like US Ambassadors accredited to key foreign countries... you serve at the discretion of the president.. and it is well known that when administrations do change, there is some measure of risk as the new administration may choose to have a different person in that position and you'll largely be expected to resign to facilitate that change.

Except that Trump and Sessions specifically asked him to stay.

[new2here]

Except that Trump and Sessions specifically asked him to stay.

Fair enough and largely true... but that then does not say that the President can't, at some later date, choose to make such change.

I think in the "normal" work world this kind is of job action/security would be unsettling at minimum for the employees and even disruptive to the organization.. but IMHO, it is a risk that one must recognize and accept when taking any politically appointed position.


Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect

[elgordo38]

9 hours ago, rooster59 said:

A prominent U.S. prosecutor said he was fired by the Trump administration on Saturday after refusing to step down,

A habit left over from his Apprenticeship days. 

[elgordo38]

2 hours ago, nervona81732 said:

I take the stance of ( wait and see )

I think we are well past this point with Trump. A real draw and quarter speech for sure. I would sure hate to walk in your bitter shoes.

[Andaman Al]

Trump realises the error he has made in calling for investigations. He now needs 93 loyal US Attorneys to minimise the chance that any will cause him legal problems/challenges. He also needs as many of the outstanding law suits against him dropping.

Edited March 12, 2017 by Andaman Al

[sirineou]

11 hours ago, darksidedog said:

Getting rid of the US Attorneys right now, does dramatically and very conveniently, reduce the number of people who could potentially file against the travel ban.

Or any other breaches of the constitution that come to light, of which I am sure there will be some fairly soon.

I think you are confusing US attorneys who work for the US AG with state AG which every state has. The travel Ban will be opposed by the State AG who will attempt to demonstrate that the executive  order damages the state . Any US attorney that publicly opposes the executive order  regardless of their political affiliation would be immediately fired by their boss  the US AG  Sessions.

At least that's my understanding, anyone with better info please correct me. 

[ilostmypassword]

2 hours ago, Grubster said:

Maybe you will be right, and if you are I will be man enough to admit it, but I am sure hoping you are wrong as I sure saw no indication that any of the last few presidents were doing any good overall.

20 million people who were uninsured before now have health insurance. What's sad is that a lot of these people supported Trump because they believed him when he said he was going to make health insurance better for them. Yet it's overwhelmingly Trump supporters who are going to suffer if Trumpcare gets enacted.

[hawker9000]

'Nothing but another wingnut boohoo moment.  Incoming presidents always reshuffle at least to some extent.  The wonderfully inept Janet Reno famously fired all U.S. attorneys after Clinton took office, one of whom was engaged at the time in an investigation of Clinton ally Dan Rostenkowski, a particularly powerful Democratic congressman (who later went to prison).  <yawn>

 

[kamahele]

While it is normal practice to remove political appointees after an election win, normally it is done after replacements have been hired and not in such a rushed fashion as this. Also, if draining the swamp is what Trump would like to do, this particular prosecutor, Bharara, was actually doing just that. 

[Ahab]

9 hours ago, boomerangutang said:

               Trump has not killed people.  He's only 6 weeks into his term.  He's already gearing up for wars predicated on flawed info, and fueled by his hot headed, quick-to-blame, quick-recriminations, and easily-bruised ego.  If a shouting right-winger screams something ridiculous, Trump will likely believe it and take it as a signal to go to war.  War kills people.   Note:  The personal secretary to Trump's #1 adviser, Bannon, was asked to describe Bannon.  Without hesitating, she said he's fixated on war and war-strategies. 

 

             Firing so many judges is unprecedented.  It's yet another way, among many, in which Trump and his defective people are trying to avoid getting found guilty of illegal activity.  

What judges? A district attorney general is not in any way a judge.

[mtls2005]

I guess he was also investigating multiple cases in the whole Fox News payoff/harassment/sexual assault fiasco, and the Ailes/O'Reilly settlement payments.

 

https://mediamatters.org/research/2017/03/12/us-attorney-preet-bharara-was-investigating-fox-news-when-trump-fired-him/215644

 

Probably just a coincidence? I'm sure it will have no affect on these investigations. /justkidding

 

 

[Grubster]

15 hours ago, ilostmypassword said:

20 million people who were uninsured before now have health insurance. What's sad is that a lot of these people supported Trump because they believed him when he said he was going to make health insurance better for them. Yet it's overwhelmingly Trump supporters who are going to suffer if Trumpcare gets enacted.

The subject is about a two bit lawyer getting fired, but since you bring it up any thing short of getting the insurance lobby and the bar association out of our health care system is an absolute joke anyway. Just another smoke screen issue while the bigs on both sides of the isle rob you blind. I had expensive health insurance in a group plan it payed 70% of what was covered [ which takes up more time of your nurse to find out which procedure or medicine you do or don't qualify for ], after my yearly $2,000 deductible. All this a bargain at $12,000 per year. Do you think Obama really did anything for the working class on this issue? I don't think Trump or anybody else can or will take on the Bar association, insurance lobby, big Pharma, etc.. If he brings jobs back and slows immigration down to those we want and need it will a big step in the right direction.