What is wrong with the AG firing US attorneys?

There isn't anything wrong with it. Removing of officials happens all the time in the executive branch. I did read somewhere though that those eight attorneys had been investigating charges of corruption, if that is why they were fired, then that is upsetting and probably should be investigated, if not, than this is just more meaningless partisan bickering.

Why was it not right? US Attorneys serve at the pleasure of the President. In essence--they are AT WILL employees. I am curious as to why you find it disgusting. It has been done before by previous presidents and will be done by future presidents. US Attorneys know the 'rules' before accepting the appointments and know that when the administration changes (or not) they can be terminated at any time for ANY reason.

The fact that there is an 'investigation' is what I find appalling!

Nope. It ability he's ill & fed up in listening to Democrat Lies on a daily basis. Clinton had ninety 3 US legal experts fired, and no person cared. between the legal experts from Little Rock grow to be making plans on putting bill & Hillary in penal complex for Corruption. (He grow to be fortunate that he basically have been given fired, instead of ending up like Vince Foster and approximately 50 others.)

No one ( Democrats) remember that Clinton fired as many attorneys as Bush. granted he fired them at the beginning of his term. But a funny thing about the firing.Clinton fired over 90 attorneys to get one. He wanted the attorney from Arkansas because he was looking into White water . he was replaced by a attorney that was a personnel friend of the Clinton family. The liberals seem to have forgotten that. How conveniant.//

I am still checking it all out, but I think it has something to do with congress extending the Patriot Act, but the language was changed, so that instead of US attorneys having to be approved by congress, they can now be appointed by the AG or whoever, with no questions asked. The problem with it is that it was so obviously a move to "stack the deck" while they can. The Republican party is getting scared!

You don't think it is wrong because the Democrats never have a problem with letting dead weight hang around. Why did Janet Reno fire 93 U.S. Attorneys in 1993 ? Now that is an outrage. Why is it the Liberals motto to "Create a Scandal A Day until 2008"? Your Silly !!!

Inhernetly, nothing.

However, the AG is required by his oath of office to seek justice and work in the best interests of the nation. And he is required by his oath as an attorney to obey the codes of ethics.

It is POSSIBLE that he violated either or both of these oaths, depending upon the REASON the US Attorneys were fired.

That's what the hearings are supposed to determine.

What they did wrong was to lie about the firings. They tried at first to say it was because of poor performance. This caused the fired attorneys to fire back and question these allegations.

It is just another example of the lies of the Bush administration.

So was it ok for for Clinton to fire 93 us attorneys in March 1993?

Read a book.

Well, I sort of agree with you. They are there as presidential appointees. However, the issue is that they were "possibly" fired because they were pursuing cases that were considered as perhaps favorable to the democrats, or unfavorable to the republicans (such as political corruption).

That is the problem.