I'm confused by the tone of the Collegian's editorial yesterday. President Bush firing eight federal prosecutors is an example of the president putting politics above everything else, but Clinton firing every single federal prosecutor in the nation is not? President Clinton's dismissals were unprecedented. Previous presidents, including Ronald Reagan and Jimmy Carter, had both retained holdovers from the previous administration and only replaced them gradually as their tenures expired. This allowed continuity of leadership within the U.S. attorney offices during the transition. At the time, Jay Stephens, then U.S. attorney in the District of Columbia, was investigating then Ways and Means Chairman Dan Rostenkowski, (D-IL) and was "within 30 days" of making a decision on an indictment. Mr. Rostenkowski, who was shepherding the Clinton's economic program through Congress, eventually went to jail on mail fraud charges and was later pardoned by Mr. Clinton. If firing 93 federal prosecutors to protect one member of Congress isn't playing politics, how is it possible that firing eight of them for failing to pursue allegations of voter fraud is?