As an attorney who practices (at least partially) in the area of criminal defense, the US attorney purge is a very scary story! Virtually every prosecutor I've dealt with (admission: almost 100% of who work for the state of Connecticut) are good people, who work very hard at their jobs. That said, believe me there is a significant difference in the way they view a particular set of facts and the way a typical defense attorney views the same facts. Moreover, I can't think of any of them who wouldn't push back very hard on anyone trying to dictate how they do their jobs! (though this is likely to be driven by the only lightly political way in which state's attorneys in CT are appointed)

Nothing is scarier to a defense attorney, or for that matter a defendant, than a prosecutor who is allowing politics to creap into their decisions. Its difficult enough to work within the system as it is designed to work. To convince a prosecutor that facts don't mean what they appear to mean is hard enough. It is impossible to conceive of how this could possibly be achieved if there is political pressure being used to drive the prosector. Especially because this pressure is, virtually, always secret. (or if not actually secret, then its at a level that is so sotto voce that it can't be addressed directly).

As a Connecticut attorney (and Democrat) I am very concerned with the new appointment of Kevin O'Connor to be Gonzalez chief of staff. O'Connor was a rising star in the state Republican party - he was the 1998 sacrificial lamb against Congressman John Larsen (CT-01).

Political appointment or not, I've met Attorney O'Connor and heard him speak at a local bar meeting. He's pleasant, he's articulate, bright and seems to be capable of doing the job. His office has even prosecuted high profile Republicans, i.e. John Rowland, Paul Sylvester etc.

We've had scandals applenty here. Due to Rowland being on the take, we've had campaign finance reform (though badly flawed) and state contractor reform. We've had a former state supreme court justice hauled before the legislature because he held back a controversial decisions so that another member of the majority on that decision could be appointed chief justice.

The last thing we need is another connnection to scandal. Nor do we need an absentee United States Attorney. (this is by no means a criticism of the other attorneys who, in my limited experience, are always professional). I agree with Chris Dodd - congratulations on the promotion - but if its going through we need another US Attorney for this district. Not just because the appointment means the US attorney won't be here, but also because we don't need any more controvery within the Connecticut political or legal systems.