From the moment that President Elect Barack Obama announced his appointment of Eric Holder to be Attorney General, there has been a flurry of dissent about the former Clinton appointee, and the controversies that have dogged him since the Clinton administration. As his confirmation hearings begin today before the Senate Judiciary Committee, his confirmation may not be off track completely, but the Republicans, and some Democrats, are not going to give Holder an easy ride through the process.
Holder’s involvement in key problems in the Attorney General’s office during the Clinton era include:
- The controversial pardon of fugitive financier Mark Rich, and questionable contributions from Rich’s ex-wife.
- The pardons of the FLNA and some of the Weather Underground (the same group that Bill Ayers was involved with)
- the decision to seize 6-year old Cuban refugee Elian Gonzalez at gunpoint from his uncle’s Miami home to return him to his father in Cuba
- ties to embattled Gov. Rod Blagojevich
Judicial Watch has actively campaigned against the confirmation of Eric Holder, contacting the Senators, and taking out a full page advertisement to urge the same.
In his opening remarks, Eric Holder used the story of Governor George Wallace’s refusal to permit Holder’s late sister-in-law admittance to college in Alabama during the civil rights movement, and then her actual admission to the University of Alabama. (If we are to rejoice in the election of Obama as a biracial President, is it not time that we cease using past history that will continue to create racial division). As the statements and the questioning has started, Holder has acknowledged some of his Clinton actions as possible mistakes, and he has also defined waterboarding as torture. (The Obama administration needs to tread lightly in that area, because our national security can be undermined with the utterance of a few misguided words).
Sen. Arlen Specter, the ranking Republican on the committee, criticized both Holder and Sen. Leahy in his opening remarks, and basically guaranteed that this process was not going to be an easy one. Quipped one member of the Obama transition team “Hope you brought your dinner!!”
Related stories: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/14/AR2009011403112.html?hpid=topnews
3 comments
Comments feed for this article
January 15, 2009 at 2:28 pm
Interested Bystander
JAMES,
I am wondering here, but maybe this is a “pay back” to Oprah.
Does this man look like Steadman(sic?) or what?
I watched a little of the confirmation hearing this morning, and hopefully at some point they will stat asking pertinent questions.
One Senator had the audacity to use his time to ask Holder if he could beat Obama on a one on one game of basketball.
The man represented Chicquita Banana in a lwasuit where the President of the company escaped prosecution, and a small fine of 25 million was assesed against the company.
This man also does not know how terrorism is defined.
And this man wants to be the Attorney General?
I’d love to hear what he would define as torture if say, his family was taken captive, and a member of the group was arrested. I suppose he would wine and dine him, ask him nicely where his family was, and if the man didn’t give any information, thank him for his time, and send him back to his cell.
Geesh people, put yourselves in this position, and then ask yourself how far you’d want the authorities to go to get the information from the man arrested. This is the only reasonable way to think about it.
Six, and I will state this again, six people were waterboarded at Gitmo. None died, and all are safe and well. Information that saved your children was attained using this method of interrogation. Bush made the decision after consulting with his advisors.
Holder recommended many people, including Ayers’ group Weather Underground members, be pardoned in the last days of Clinton’s Presidency.
It honestly disgusts me that a man who is going to be head of the Justice Department doesn’t know how terrorism is defined.
January 15, 2009 at 2:46 pm
Interested Bystander
JAMES,
I seen a Col. Hunt on O’Reilly last night, and he stated that he used “torture” twice while in theater, and that both instances were beneficial in attaining information that saved American lives.
Asked if he would do it again, he said “You betcha”.
He said that he turned himself in, and although they didn’t talk about what disciplinary action was taken against him, I’m hoping nothing was done.
I’d have no problem using whatever method in getting information from certain captured personel.
People need to realize, war is not fun. It’s not something that you take as a game, with rules that apply to you, and not to me.
I always tell folks, in a joking manner of course, that in a fight, you have two groups, the winner, and the loser. Do whatever it takes to be the winner. Of course you do not target civilians, but if the enemy is using civilians as shields, then it is on them if something happens to them.
It reminds me of all the people judging Israel for all of the civilian casualties in Gaza. They don’t report how many were being used by Hamas as shields, or how the Israeli’s give warning to them by dropping leaflets, or that Hamas uses shool roofs and hospital roofs to fire the rockets in to Israel, only that Israel “targeted” the school or hospital. Of course they did, they have no choice.
It’s tough to win when the media doesn’t report fairly. That’s why I stated above, by whatever means necessary. Get the job done as humanely as possible, but get the job done.
January 15, 2009 at 3:40 pm
JAMES
I saw him as well, and he said that in a time of war, to keep us safe, he’d do it again