TexasCHLforum.com

Why would she "not invite them back"?

Abraham wrote:Why would she "not invite them back"?

Reason #1: If you're not going to put criminals in jail, you wouldn't want to deal with 37 frustrated professionals.

Reason #2: Gotta make room for your buddies.

My brother and his wife live down in that area. I posted your link to his FB page and advised him to start looking for new employment and living accommodations elsewhere in the state. I feel for those of you who live and work there. It may be close to a flat pancake where I live up here, and we sure could use more trees, but then again, I like my part of Texas a lot better when I read stories like that one.

Although this action by the new DA might not fit a lot of our notions of what is right, I offer the following as an example that all is not as it seems:


http://www.operationrescue.org/archives ... d-cronies/

I am not in total agreement that the outgoing DA was good people and will be missed. The law must protect the most vulnerable and the outgoing DA failed miserably.

I live in Harris County and I am very upset about her winning the AG election. Perhaps I should get the self-defense insurance!

Maybe I'm missing something, or maybe I just don't know how it all works, but according to the report, her team has reviewed the personnel files of all of the employees, and determined to get rid of these 37.

Are the personnel files available to her team before she takes office? Sounds more to me like the decision was made as soon as she was announced the winner. If not, that is a very short amount of time to determine who should go. I guess all of the ongoing investigations, and court cases, will just be put on hold, until replacements can get up to speed?

The Annoyed Man wrote:

WildBill wrote:

sbrawley wrote:Can she do that if she hasn't taken office yet?

As I understand it she hasn't actually gotten rid of anyone. She offered these employees the opportunity to
resign and said that they would be "let go" when she takes office.

At a late afternoon news conference on Friday, Ogg said her transition team had reviewed hundreds
of personnel files since the November election. Today, she notified 37 veteran prosecutors they "will not be
invited back" when she takes office. Each was offered the chance to resign today.

Is there any practical difference between the thread's title, and the "terminal ballistics" of her assuming the office?

The flip side of this is that I wouldn't complain too much if the federal Justice Dept had a good house-cleaning under Trump.

The main difference is that some people would rather resign a job than be terminated.
Being terminated from a job ends up being on your permanent record.

Another issue to consider re quitting or getting fired for political purposes is unemployment benefits.

It is my understanding if you voluntarily quit you are not eligible for unemployment benefits however if you are fired for obviously political reasons then...

Isn't this more akin to a layoff, than being fired? These employees are not being terminated for cause.

Jusme wrote:I guess all of the ongoing investigations, and court cases, will just be put on hold, until replacements can get up to speed?

Not really. Ongoing federal investigations and cases won't be put on hold when Trump replaces Loretta Lynch. As far as I can tell, most of the 37 are managers and administrators, not front line investigators and prosecutors. I think the cases affected will be politically motivated or have a lot of prosecutorial discretion.

Devon Anderson was no friend of gun owners.

https://www.hccla.org/open-carry-not-papers-please/