Well that’s positive at least.
I’ll leave that for someone else to tell because I don’t know this guy or anything about his work.
But, wouldn’t this be the person who would be investigating Trump himself, his campaign, his business dealings? He gets to keep his job because he has been hitting the Democratic Party, but it is awfully hard not to think about the US Attorney firings under the Bush administration.
Probably not. Down the road, there will be some vague ethics complaint about the NY AG who has been a thorn in Trump’s side over Trump U. scam and the illegal acts of the Trump Foundation. Sessions will refer the case to Bharara, who will pursue it noisily and publically, however slim the underlying evidence.
The short answer is yes, he would be investigating improprieties of the Trump Organization, or his charity if they are investigated for violating Federal law. If the investigation is of Trump himself, that would likely turn into a special prosecutor deal.
I think a meeting in person between a president and professional prosecutor–even political appointees-- is not great optics unless they release a transcript of the meeting. He could have asked him to stay on in a letter. If Trump says I’d like you to stay in your job, and who knows, play your cards right and you might be atty general one day. That would not be kosher.
Sorry, but I don’t trust that there’s a moral or decent motive for anything the Trump administration might do. I’m sure there must be plenty of self-serving reasons for retaining this attorney.
Sadly, this seems most likely
It doesn’t seem appropriate that a President Elect would be asking an US Attorney to stay on. Should it have been done by the new AG once he is confirmed?
I think this may come back to bite Trump big time. Bharara is a very smart, hard-working guy with a record of integrity and professionalism - so just the sort of person Trump should fear. I’m sure Sessions knows this, and is probably p—ed off that Trump asked Bharara to stay.
Indeed. And there is also the matter of the tradition of how the US Attorneys in NYC have been chosen, usually by suggestion of the Senators from NY. For example, the corrupt and awful Alphonse D’Amato was responsible for selecting Rudy Giuliani to be the US Attorney in Bharara’s present position, from which Giuliani launched what he aspired to be a national political carreer. Since both Senators are Democrats, it is a strange situation, but I am sure it has happened before. The other tradition I remember hearing about, when there was a Democrat and a Republican Senator from NY, the one from the party in the White House would get to nominate 2 federal court judges to the opposition Senator’s 1. But that was before all the obstruction and refusal to confirm Obama judges. .
One similar move Trump needs to do once he is sworn in is to immediately re-nominate Merrick Garland for the Supreme Court.
You are dreaming. Okay
And that’s possible, but it’s better than Jeff Sessions being the Attorney General or John Bolton being Secretary of State.
Deciding so many appointments through a sequence of visible meetings is not good optics, period.
Presumably that’s how Bharara got there in the first place. From what I’ve seen of him he seems to be a good guy, though of course Trump may be wanting to twist his arm. Keep in mind, Sheldon Silver was no politically motivated prosecution - he was a cancer on the NY Democratic Party, cutting corrupt deals with the Republican Senate leader, Joe Bruno, to subvert the Democratic agenda. I only wish he had met his fall 20 years ago, when his slime was already obvious.
You are DELUSIONAL lol
Yes, Silver was corrupt and arrogant. I dont think anyone thought that prosecution was politically motivated. Except maybe Silver himself. Now that term limits in NY have given the Republicans an entree they never used to have, there will be plenty of Republicans in the City prosecuted for corruption as well.
I didn’t realize that US attorneys serve at the pleasure of the king, er I mean president?
I can’t think of a reason why there should be a personal, and therefore essentially private meeting between the (incoming) head of the government and a prosecutor. That this prosecutor oversees the jurisdiction in which the (incoming) head of the government’s financial interests are concentrated makes it even more unusual.
I would say, yes, this should be done by the AG.After the inauguration.
Of course the Orange Wonder’s going to ask some of Obama’s nominees to stay. Who else is going to put the kibosh on Trump Foundation inquiries? Or kick start show trials on the Clinton Foundation? 