Holder’s Seven Omissions
[Guest post by DRJ]
It appears Attorney General Eric Holder wasn’t truthful and forthcoming in his Senate confirmation hearings:
“Attorney General Eric Holder failed to tell the Senate about seven legal briefs he signed when lawmakers considered his nomination to his current job, according to a letter released on Friday.”
The briefs were not disclosed in Holder’s disclosure document submitted in connection with his Senate confirmation hearing. At least one brief involved Jose Padilla who was held as an enemy combatant for 3 years before being tried and convicted in federal court. The linked article states the “other six briefs related to issues such as race discrimination and a challenge to a prison sentence.” Assistant Attorney General Ronald Weich said in a letter to the Senate: “We regret the omission.”
Republican Senators plan aggressive questioning of Holder about these matters at an oversight hearing scheduled for March 23. One topic for questioning will undoubtedly be Holder’s statements in a 2004 Padilla amicus brief that civil liberties protections could hamper terror investigations:
“Bill Burck and Dana Perino have written a piece for National Review that unearths a 2004 amicus brief signed by Attorney General Eric Holder that states that civil liberties protections “might impede the investigation of a terrorist offense in some circumstances.”
They contrast that claim with President Obama’s words that American should reject “the false choice between our security and our ideals” and make a case that Holder is being disingenuous by claiming that trying alleged terrorists in civilian courts won’t harm national security.
“It is conceivable that, in some hypothetical situation, despite the array of powers described above, the government might be unable to detain a dangerous terrorist or to interrogate him or her effectively,” the 2004 brief states. “But this is an inherent consequence of the limitation of Executive power. No doubt many other steps could be taken that would increase our security, and could enable us to prevent terrorist attacks that might otherwise occur. But our Nation has always been prepared to accept some risk as the price of guaranteeing that the Executive does not have arbitrary power to imprison citizens.”
The brief in question discusses, in reference to the Jose Padilla case, whether the president has the legal authority to hold without charges a U.S. citizen captured on American soil, in the manor of an enemy combatant. “It may be true that in some instances the government will not be able to obtain information from citizens who are informed of their right to counsel, or that obtaining that information may be delayed,” it states.
“Back then,” Burck and Perino write, [Holder] understood that Mirandizing terrorists, to choose one example, is not without risk to our national security.”
They really are making this up as they go along.
— DRJ
“It appears Attorney General Eric Holder wasn’t truthful and forthcoming in his Senate confirmation hearings”
DRJ – Aw, give the man a break. Maybe Holder didn’t really contribute to the briefs at all but some buddies decided to add his name to them for resume enhancement purposes. That way they really could have slipped his mind since he wouldn’t have put any work into them, but we’d be talking about some other problems.
Just sayin’.
daleyrocks (718861) — 3/12/2010 @ 10:28 pmMaybe so. Then again, the last report says he signed the Padilla brief.
(And I know you were being sarcastic.)
DRJ (daa62a) — 3/12/2010 @ 10:33 pmWhy have confirmation hearings if people can just leave big holes like this and then later just claim they forgot?
And who were the GOP staffers that failed to discover what Holder did? Was Spector involved before he decided to become a Democrat again?
MU789 (a05870) — 3/12/2010 @ 10:44 pmDRJ – It was a theory at least.
daleyrocks (718861) — 3/12/2010 @ 10:57 pmSilly DRJ – first you pass the bill or confirm a nomination, then you find out what you’ve got. Didn’t you see our august Speaker explain this to us all just this week?
Ed from SFV (f6a87d) — 3/12/2010 @ 11:43 pm[Smacking palm of hand to forehead:] You’re right, Ed. How could I have forgotten?
DRJ (daa62a) — 3/12/2010 @ 11:47 pmLet me give y’all a pro-tip.
You’re dealing with my family and their proxies. Not joking one bit if you understand Chicago.
The normal political rules do not apply.
There’s one goal. Money. Money = Power.
They are very rational, not irrational. They want that money. It’s crazy if you view this through the normal prisms of politics. They want the money. They care about nothing else. Not a second term or longevity of political office.
Think Blago. Money.
Hard to fight unless you realize that. Once you orient your minds around that they can be defeated… But, not about politics. About money. I’m going to cry in the corner if you don’t figure this out.
Jeff Barea (eff5e1) — 3/12/2010 @ 11:53 pm“The brief in question discusses, in reference to the Jose Padilla case, whether the president has the legal authority to hold without charges a U.S. citizen captured on American soil, in the manor of an enemy combatant.”
I guess you think he does. So when the govt comes for you, don’t bitch about it.
JEA (fb671a) — 3/13/2010 @ 4:47 amRemember… Victoria Toensing and Joseph DiGenova gave Holder their stamp of approval after the election.
Poor judgment.
GeneralMalaise (d63092) — 3/13/2010 @ 6:13 amI don’t understand why anyone would be surprised that these briefs just happened to slip Holder’s mind. What did the Judicial committee think they were getting? Did they not know that Holder’s own law firm, Burling and Covington, was representing at least 18 of the Gitmo detainees at the time of Holder’s nomination? Since Holder was a full partner, did the Judicial committee think that representation was done without Holder’s knowledge or approval?
Now everyone is acting all surprised that Holder would want to keep certain briefs out of his files. But it certainly explains why he chose at least 7 others to work at Justice that have represented terrorists.
Holder is just another Chicago sleeze. End of story. And while he seems to have no problem Marandizing the Christmas bomber within the hour of capture, DoJ has ceased the investigation into ACORN, just as it did with the New Black Panthers.
But hey, look at the bright side; I am sure Holder has hired lawyers who represented the KKK to work in the Civil Rights division, right? (laughting to myself).
retire05 (1e885c) — 3/13/2010 @ 6:17 amDRJ, you are absolutely right that “[t]hey really are making this up as they go along.” And they’re so convinced of their intrinsic superiority to govern that it has never occurred to them that there’s any other way.
Beldar (a0d43a) — 3/13/2010 @ 7:16 amThe first comment makes a good point.
It may well be that Holder didn’t work on
the briefs, just signed his name.
Uh, isn’t that in violation of legal
Jack (e383ed) — 3/13/2010 @ 7:19 amethics or something?
A rattlesnake is a rattlesnake, a scorpion is a scorpion, and Weather Underground sympathizers want to undermine the United States as we know it, as retire05 comments.
And I agree with you GeneralMalaise, what was Toensig thinking? Wouldn’t be surprised if they threatened her with a perjury before Congress charge instead of Plame.
MD in Philly (70a1ba) — 3/13/2010 @ 7:49 am“[N]ot without” risk?
The not unblack dog chased the not unsmall rabbit across the not ungreen field. –George Orwell.
Alan (07ccb5) — 3/13/2010 @ 7:50 amRE: 13
…and paranoia is paranoia
JEA (fb671a) — 3/13/2010 @ 7:54 amHolder arranged the pardon and release of unrepentant terrorists from prison for the political benefit of his patrons the last time he worked for the government. Why is anyone surprised at this?
Have Blue (854a6e) — 3/13/2010 @ 8:28 amIn the spirit of the Scooter Libby/Karl Rove witch hunt, what did Holder know and when did he know it?
GeneralMalaise (d63092) — 3/13/2010 @ 8:36 amEric Holder was an appalling choice for Obama’s Attorney General. Holder’s part in the Marc Rich bribery scandal under Bill Clinton should have disqualified him for any public office, let alone as head of the Department of Justice. Obama’s selection of Holder, and the subsequent Senate approval both, constitute a mockery of Justice itself.
Holder mocked Justice as he made or approved decisions to provide terrorists with propaganda platforms in the form of a trial in NY City for KSM and Miranda Rights for the Underpants Bomber. And Holder continues to mock Justice by refusing to identify DOJ lawyers who defended terrorists.
Eric Holder is not a man who serves the interests of either Justice or the American people. He should be removed from office and prevented from doing further harm to our nation.
ropelight (0c4e92) — 3/13/2010 @ 8:38 amRe #15
Would you like to elaborate on that? Did you understand the references?
MD in Philly (70a1ba) — 3/13/2010 @ 8:40 amBut .. imdw assured me that no lawyer would take a government job where he’d be in a position to affect policy affecting his former clients! It would be a violation of lawyers ethics, he said. I’m just so disillusioned to discover that imdw was full of crap.
Subotai (421374) — 3/13/2010 @ 10:26 amIs this Eric Holder any relation to the one who expressed the opinion to (former) Illinois Gov Blago clearing any conflict of interest in the lottery?
corwin (eab206) — 3/13/2010 @ 12:16 pmSHOCKA!!!
Holder forgets about the seven briefs…
Holder can’t remember the names of seven attorneys…
Are we seeing a pattern here???
Wasn’t there also some legal work he did in Chicago that he conveniently mis-remembered?
When he endorses his paycheck, is he committing perjury, or just fraud?
AD - RtR/OS! (32a2d3) — 3/13/2010 @ 1:49 pmThe Bush administration is looking pretty good in comparison to both its predecessor and its successor in terms of competence and integrity. Damn good.
SPQR (26be8b) — 3/13/2010 @ 5:08 pmYeah, SPQR, that’s right. No one can hold a candle to Alberto Gonzales, a man of great intellect, integrity and independence. Bush Administration is looking damn good. Dunno why Bush has kinda put Alberto off at arm’s length. Must be some Harvard thing between the two of ’em. Great minds, ya know.
larry reilly (fadcab) — 3/13/2010 @ 6:06 pmlarry, you’ve still got nothing. Certainly no one here believes you have any integrity at all, much less any to be criticizing anyone from the Bush administration.
And you’ve demonstrated that you can’t think of any a lame troll to defend Holder with.
Epic troll fail, larry. Epic fail.
SPQR (26be8b) — 3/13/2010 @ 6:09 pmIf mary didn’t have failure, she wouldn’t have anything at all.
AD - RtR/OS! (8e34ef) — 3/13/2010 @ 6:52 pmYah, but that was more pathetic than even larry’s usual lame act.
SPQR (26be8b) — 3/13/2010 @ 6:54 pmWell, it’s late on a Saturday and she’s alone.
AD - RtR/OS! (8e34ef) — 3/13/2010 @ 7:01 pmI would be make some sarcastic comment about our dear leader, "The Won," providing an object lesson in finding out what you bought after you get it home.
But really, it's the media that is inflicting this idea upon us. I highly recommend you search for The New Republic article on the Obama camapaign, "The End Of The Affair."
The tone is set by this reporter quoted in the article: “The whole Obama narrative is built around this narrative that Obama and David Axelrod built, and, like all stories, it’s not entirely true. So they have to be protective of the crown jewels.”
Essentially, the main thrust of the article is this: The Obama campaign was built around lies. The reporters knew it, but were willing to carry the campaign's water as long as they were treated with enough deferance. They Obama campaign treated them so badly, the media was riled enough to be almost willing to dig past the paper-thin veneer of a story the Axelrod-Obama campaign was trying to sell the public and expose the truth.
Whew! Well, I’m sure we can all be grateful it didn’t come to that. Thankfully, the press never got treated so badly it had to actually resort to digging for the truth. The affair never ended. But it was close. The press talked about it!
It seems the affair never really ends between the dems and the media.
Steve (d06736) — 3/13/2010 @ 8:39 pmHolder’s lawyers were a part of the following:
The Gitmo Bar — in gross violation of the conditions of access to the enemy combatants — provided al Qaeda detainees with a propaganda brochure that instructed them on how falsely to claim that they had been tortured and abused. As the Gitmo commander put it, “The very nature of this document gives tremendous moral support to those who would strike out against our country…. It is not a factual report. Instead it is filled with second and third hand accounts, photos of protests that were staged, inflammatory photos from Iraq and provocative story captions.”
The Gitmo Bar fomented a detainee hunger strike that disrupted security at the camp and set the stage for fabricated reports that the detainees were being tortured and force-fed.
The Gitmo Bar provided the detainees with virulently anti-American rhetoric that compared military physicians to Nazi Josef Mengele, labeled DOJ lawyers “desk torturers,” and informed the detainees about the Abu Ghraib abuses and the potential for framing President Bush as a war criminal.
The Gitmo Bar provided the enemy combatant terrorists with a hand-drawn map of the detention camp’s lay-out, including guard towers.
The Gitmo Bar incited the detainees against the military guards.
The Gitmo Bar posted photos of Guantanamo security badges on the Internet in a transparent effort to identify U.S. security personnel.
The Gitmo Bar facilitated enemy combatants in communicating messages and interviews to their confederates and the outside world.
The Gitmo Bar provided a detainee with a list identifying all the other detainees in custody.
The Gitmo Bar provided the detainees with news accounts about the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, including reports that U.S. forces were sustaining devastating casualities from IED attacks. (Again, it was a court-ordered condition of the lawyers’ access to these war prisoners that they not be given information relating to military operations, intelligence, arrests, political news and current events, and the names of U.S. government personnel.)
The Gitmo Bar provided KSM and the 9/11 plotters — i.e., the murderers of 3000 Americans — with photographs of covert CIA officers in an effort to identify them as interrogators. (Leftist lawyers are attempting to have these interrogators indicted for torture and war crimes.)
The Gitmo Bar brags about its role in the release of enemy combatants who have returned to the jihad against American troops and the American people.
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YjdlMzE0NGIxMzY0ODI3OTNiNTdhYTdlYjljNWQ0ZWU=
GeneralMalaise (d63092) — 3/14/2010 @ 6:16 pm