Interestingly, this strategy of pointing the finger at Clinton's firing of U.S. attorneys to justify governmental firings has a very specific origin, and that is the George W. Bush Justice Department. In 2006, they wanted to get rid of eight U.S. attorneys who they didn't like. And to deflect criticism, the talking point they deployed was to say that Clinton broke with tradition and fired all the U.S. attorneys when he took office. This is disingenuous and also not true. From the Bush administration? Right. For one, it was Reagan who began the practice of replacing attorneys back in 1981 when he replaced 71 out of the 93 U.S. attorneys that were in place. The 2006 firings were a bit of a different situation, though, because they weren't being done as part of a transition. Since you might recall, Bush was initially, he took office in 2001. This was very out of the ordinary. And the Inspector General ended up releasing a report of an investigation that found that the firings were politically motivated, which was still frowned upon back then. A whole mingling of the Justice Department and partisan politics. Oh, we were all so young. Yeah. So in order to deflect from what ended up being a pretty big scandal for Bush, they used the talking point that Clinton fired all the attorneys when he took office. And since then, it's just been repeated ad nauseum in right-wing media whenever they need to justify a politically motivated firing.