ubertuber

I don't know how to phrase this exactly, but I've got a question about Gonzales.

I'd appreciate an explanation of what the job standard for US Attorneys which allowed them to be fired was relative to the job standard for the Attorney General which would allow him to keep his job and enjoy the full confidence of the President and Vice President, who evidently regard this incident to be no more than a communications error.

I'm aware that US Attorneys serve "at the pleasure of the President", but there's got to be some job description and evaluation that allows them to plan to do a good job. There has to be a way for them to know what to do if they want to keep their jobs. I'd like to know what their understanding of that something is, and how this is communicated to them.

Similarly, I'd like to know what Alberto Gonzales's understanding of that something is in relation to his own job - what he is expected to do in order to be understood as having done a good job and what he would to to keep or lose that position. Most of all, I'd like to know how these things were communicatedto him.

__________________
Cogito ergo spud -- I think, therefore I yam