Anonymous wrote:More fake news intended to rile up the low information types. Every time AGs or DAs turn over there are staff changes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh and they've been let go without health insurance or severance. Poor babies. ACA closes today! I'd get on that.

Do you understand what it means to have summarily fired the entire civil rights division.

He could have left them on the health insurance for 90 days. Same with severance. Too bad.

No, step back from what happens to the individual former employees for a moment. Do you understand what the civil rights division does, and the significance of firing everyone despite the current case load? Please explain your understanding of the implication of that, if you can.

Oh that? Yeah you can discuss the implications. Pretty terrible. Too bad 45% of Loudoun voters didn't think of the consequences on November 2nd.

But they were MAD! And they wanted everyone to see their tantrum. How dare, during a pandemic,you expect me to be responsible for my OWN KIDS?!?!?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is this legal under federal law? I’ve never heard of such an extreme action.

The GOP is an extremist authoritarian movement that seeks to destroy America as we know it and turn us into Franco's Spain.

(Franco's Spain had a brutal secret police that went after liberals and intellectuals.)

We have about 9 months to turn this around, break through the lies, and expose the GOP for what it is, or your kids will be living under an autocratic Christian regime that aims to help billionaires and harm every one of us on DCUM.

This is serious. The American experiment is at stake in the next 9 months.

Anonymous wrote:So, the new Atty. General is restructuring the office - like EVERY SINGLE ATTY GENERAL BEFORE HIM? Honestly, you people are such hysterics. From the OP’s article:

“Just because personnel changes have been made does not mean their work will not be picked up. As the Attorney General-elect has said, when he gets into his office he and his team will look at every lawsuit, investigation and opinion with a fresh perspective.”

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh and they've been let go without health insurance or severance. Poor babies. ACA closes today! I'd get on that.

Do you understand what it means to have summarily fired the entire civil rights division.

He could have left them on the health insurance for 90 days. Same with severance. Too bad.

No, step back from what happens to the individual former employees for a moment. Do you understand what the civil rights division does, and the significance of firing everyone despite the current case load? Please explain your understanding of the implication of that, if you can.

Oh that? Yeah you can discuss the implications. Pretty terrible. Too bad 45% of Loudoun voters didn't think of the consequences on November 2nd.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is this legal under federal law? I’ve never heard of such an extreme action.

The GOP is an extremist authoritarian movement that seeks to destroy America as we know it and turn us into Franco's Spain.

(Franco's Spain had a brutal secret police that went after liberals and intellectuals.)

We have about 9 months to turn this around, break through the lies, and expose the GOP for what it is, or your kids will be living under an autocratic Christian regime that aims to help billionaires and harm every one of us on DCUM.

This is serious. The American experiment is at stake in the next 9 months.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you don’t have a problem with this, you are by definition a racist, and probably a misogynist as well.

Here comes the name calling, right on schedule.

Facts are facts. Own it.

So the facts seem to be that Miyares terminated 30 people across divisions among the 649 persons reporting to him as Attorney General.

It's no surprise that the Democrats would exaggerate the extent of the firings or that some of the terminated employees would suggest citizens are utterly without protection without their continued employment.

However, they serve at the discretion of the Attorney General, and he is making changes. You do know that Biden terminated scores of Trump appointees and that their replacements in turn, push out career employees perceived to have been close to the prior appointees.

It's how executive agencies operate. Believe it or not, neither the Constitution nor state law establishes them as an independent fourth branch of government.

30 across exactly HOW MANY DIVISIONS? If its 3 and 1 of them get 16 of the cuts - that equals the entire CR division. Feel free to list names and divisions though.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you don’t have a problem with this, you are by definition a racist, and probably a misogynist as well.

Here comes the name calling, right on schedule.

Facts are facts. Own it.

So the facts seem to be that Miyares terminated 30 people across divisions among the 649 persons reporting to him as Attorney General.

It's no surprise that the Democrats would exaggerate the extent of the firings or that some of the terminated employees would suggest citizens are utterly without protection without their continued employment.

However, they serve at the discretion of the Attorney General, and he is making changes. You do know that Biden terminated scores of Trump appointees and that their replacements in turn, push out career employees perceived to have been close to the prior appointees.

It's how executive agencies operate. Believe it or not, neither the Constitution nor state law establishes them as an independent fourth branch of government.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you don’t have a problem with this, you are by definition a racist, and probably a misogynist as well.

Here comes the name calling, right on schedule.

Facts are facts. Own it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is this legal under federal law? I’ve never heard of such an extreme action.

I don't know for sure, but I had a family member who was an assistant AG in another state, and while he was not a political person, it was considered a political appointment.
I just googled Ms Hardiman. She has a very large BLM banner at the top of her Linkedin page. So, it would seem that she is quite political. (I've never seen anything like that on a Linkedin page.)

BLM is not a political movement, it's a human rights movement. Thank you for demonstrating that Republicans don't give a crap about basic human rights.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is this legal under federal law? I’ve never heard of such an extreme action.

I don't know for sure, but I had a family member who was an assistant AG in another state, and while he was not a political person, it was considered a political appointment.
I just googled Ms Hardiman. She has a very large BLM banner at the top of her Linkedin page. So, it would seem that she is quite political. (I've never seen anything like that on a Linkedin page.)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More fake news intended to rile up the low information types. Every time AGs or DAs turn over there are staff changes.

+100
The knee-jerk reaction here without even checking facts is hysterically funny and at the same time sad.
It's like a 2022 version of the game Telephone.

I work for an AG and the staff changes generally are only the higher ups and political appointees, not entire divisions.

Miyares is now walking back his plans to gut the office. Probably thought it would get buried in weekend news and didn’t realize it would get reported so quickly.