Slashdot Mirror


U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft Resigns

andyring writes "In a move that will undoubtedly make many /. readers jump for joy (although perhaps not myself), Attorney General John Ashcroft announced he will resign, according to multiple news sources. While many here dislike him, others have more favorable opinions of him. He became the point man on the USA Patriot Act, which typically ignites harsh opinions on both sides of the aisle." Reader cnsc1rtr , referring to the AP's version of the story, writes "He gave Bush a five-page, handwritten letter in which he stated, 'The objective of securing the safety of Americans from crime and terror has been achieved.'"

12 of 1,275 comments (clear)

  1. Re:I Don't follow politics much .. by MadMorf · · Score: 0, Troll

    He resigned because of health problems and exhaustion. Apparently he has been having various medical difficulties over the past year or so.

    Too bad he wasn't sick enough to just DIE ALREADY!

    There were predictions even before the election that he would be asked to resign. Apparently he was too much of a lightning rod, even for this administration.

  2. Re:Today Ashcroft by UltraSkuzzi · · Score: 0, Troll

    You sound like the person who doesn't want to live here, why don't you move out. To Sealand or somewhere. I'll even buy you a ticket. :)

    --

    ~UltraSkuzzi
    This comment is liscensed by SCO.
  3. Re:Poor Mr. Ashcroft by jpetts · · Score: 0, Troll

    "He gave Bush a five-page, handwritten letter in which he stated"

    Actually, that's a typo: it should read "five-letter, handwritten page"

    --
    Call me old fashioned, but I like a dump to be as memorable as it is devastating - Bender
  4. Re:Today Ashcroft by idiotnot · · Score: 0, Troll

    Ah, just like a socialist.....spread the misery equally.

    One of the reasons I voted for Bush is I knew that Ashcroft wouldn't be back. Janet Reno was pretty bad on civil liberties, too, and she wasn't fighting an international terror threat.

    John Kerry's senate record isn't sparkling when it comes to liberty, either.

    Whoever modded this interesting is a fool. But, as this election cycle has shown, there's lots of those around.

  5. Re:Ashcroft by the_2nd_coming · · Score: 0, Troll

    the fact that your major green house gas problem is sheep flatulence might indicate to terrorists that you really have nothing they want, symbolically or otherwise.

    --



    I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
  6. Re:SAFE! by kfg · · Score: 0, Troll

    Or even a pipe maker's right to have a long-term vacation to Huntsville?

    Screw Kevin Mitnick. Nothing against the man, per se, but he actually did shit that was a Bad Thing.

    Free Tommy Chong.

    KFG

  7. Re:Misson Accomplished!! by GSloop · · Score: 1, Troll

    Oh, and if they had decided to put up a banner saying "Welcome home Barney" the Whitehouse wouldn't have objected?

    Sheesh.

    Not to mention that the Whitehouse actually got the banner for them.

    Plausable deniability. Veneer thin, but plausable - to a dolt.

    Just like - The *British* have learned that Saddam attempted to obtain uranium from Niger. (Sure we knew it was a crock, but the Brit's told us, so we can't be held responsible...)

    Cheers,
    Greg

  8. tinfoil hat by siskbc · · Score: 0, Troll
    not to be a killjoy, but has it occurred to anyone that ashcroft is resigning as attorney general so as to prepare himself for a nomination to the supreme court?

    So Ashcorft resigns and you tinfoil hat nuts automatically assume he's gunning for the supreme court? Maybe the man needs a vacation. And look, this has nothing - nothing! - to do with Rehnquist's poor health. Really. I swear.

    Shit. Marge, get a case of beer and my tinfoil hat. Gonna be a long couple of decades.

    --

    -Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat

  9. Re:SAFE! by DarkOx · · Score: 0, Troll

    Who will dilligently protect the Americans who would be murdered otherwise? Don't think unborn children are lives; then I guess a misscarriage would be a noneven in your family?

    Who will protect a terminally-ill patient who really wants to live out their remaining days from being pressered into giving them up by greedy relatives or physicians with a social agenda?

    Is it your suposition that Atheist students are so unsure of their quote faith that whitnessing others expressing this will shake it. Its it bad for someone born to an Atheist family to whitness others practing perhaps enjoinging their faith thus provinging opertunity to understand and perhaps decide personally if it might be for them?

    Even those in Camp X-ray are being given due process which since they are not citizens IMHO gives them no right to even that. The Constitution starts out "We the people of the United States ... secure the blessings of Liberty to Ourselves and our posterity" Yes its nice to give those rights to other and we should do that when we can but our founding document certainly does not demand it and instead says "secure to ourselves" I and most would take that to mean us first then everyone else.

    I don't even know where your going with that last one.

    We were lucky to have Ascroft, when you consider the stupid curpt bitch he replaced.

    --
    Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
  10. Re:SAFE! by Valegor · · Score: 0, Troll

    AWESOME.

    So, can I have my rights back, now?


    Sure, if you can name one right that has been taken away from YOU.

  11. This would be better if- by hardburlyboogerman · · Score: 0, Troll

    Bush and his entire Criminal gang would do likewise.

    --
    Geek Hillbilly
  12. Re:SAFE! by Valegor · · Score: 0, Troll

    Right to counsel. Right to trial. Right to confront witnesses against me. Protection against cruel and unusual punishment. Protection against unwarranted searches.

    How that got modded insightful I will never know. Again I asked what rights YOU have lost. I'm better you personally have not been affected at all by anything Ashcroft has done. As for the unwarranted searches, they still have to have approval by a judge before they can do any kind o search. It may not be an actual warrant, but they still have to show a cause before any judge would approve it. Try reading the Patriot Act before just throwing out the standard propaganda against it.

    Right to confront witnesses against you? Since when has that been a right? I don't see that in the Bill of rights anywhere.

    Face it you have not been effected one bit by anything Ashcroft has done.