The Scandalous Attorneys
THE REPRESENTATIVES AND SENATORS of the States are professing themselves shocked, shocked, at the replacement of a handful of U.S. attorneys in several States. However, they are straining at the gnat after swallowing the camel.

Presidents graciously extend “senatorial courtesy” to senators of their own party, giving them a veto on appointments within their own State. But how, and why, does the president have power to appoint any officer to any one, or any part, of the States? The officers he is allowed to appoint are ambassadors and consuls – both of whom, plainly, act equally for all of the States. The only crimes Congress is authorized to prosecute are treason, piracy, and counterfeiting the current coin – “current” meaning, obviously, circulating in all the States. And Congress is required to try the case in the State where the crime was committed – again obviously, meaning that the trial is to be in a State court. The United States are united, as far as Congress and the president are concerned; any and every officer must act for all or for none of the States. (Unless the legislature, or in its absence the governor, of a State ask for U. S. troops to put down domestic violence: so far, domestic violence has usually been occasioned by the enforcement of crimes-without-victims by unelected officers.)

This should have been obvious from day one. But if not, it should have been made obvious by the flagrant lawlessness of the U.S. attorneys and district courts, which delight in accusing and trying citizens of the States. Everyone knows that one can be convicted of a crime only if the case is proved, beyond a reasonable doubt, to twelve of your equals. If the prosecutor has a case that is good beyond a reasonable doubt after the defense has had an opportunity to cross-examine the prosecution witnesses and call its own witnesses, then it must sound good beyond any doubt whatsoever to the grand jury, who do not hear the defense at all, Why, then, should the U. S. grand juries have more than twelve members? The U. S. attorneys are deliberately indicting citizens whom they CANNOT prove guilty!

Why? Because the U. S. sets out to attack any citizen who is successful. The U.S. prosecutes, for instance, the Aluminum Company of America; only two centuries ago, Napoleon III was proud to have an aluminum dinner service ¬– now, we throw away aluminum cans. The U.S. prosecutes General Electric, the most efficient engineering company in the world; I.B.M., which brought us into the era of electric charges in place of paper and cards; Microsoft, which produces valuable, indeed indispensable, goods without consuming any raw materials at all; Michael Milken of Drexel, Burnham, Lambert (not one of whose bond issues ever failed!) Any other nation would make heroes, instead of rogues, out of figures such as these.