Attorney General Eric Holder, Team Obama’s
                           Dirty Dozen (get your trading cards here)


Eric Holder’s Hidden Agenda
The investigation isn’t about torture, but about transnationalism.

By Andrew C. McCarthy

‘This is an administration that is determined to conduct itself by the rule of law.
And to the extent that we receive lawful requests from an appropriately created
court, we would obviously respond to it.”

It was springtime in Berlin and Eric Holder, a well-known “rule of law” devotee,
was speaking to the German press. He’d been asked if his Justice Department
would cooperate with efforts by foreign or international tribunals to prosecute U.
S. government officials who carried out the Bush administration’s post-9/11
counterterrorism policies. The attorney general assured listeners that he was
certainly open to being helpful. “Obviously,” he said, “we would look at any
request that would come from a court in any country and see how and whether
we should comply with it.”

As the Associated Press reported at the time, Holder was “pressed on whether
that meant the United States would cooperate with a foreign court prosecuting
Bush administration officials.” He skirted the question in a way Americans
ought to find alarming. The attorney general indicated that he was speaking only
about “evidentiary requests.” Translation: The Obama administration will not
make arrests and hand current or former American government officials over
for foreign trials, but if the Europeans or U.N. functionaries (at the nudging of,
say, the Organization of the Islamic Conference) want Justice’s help gathering
evidence in order to build triable cases — count us in.

Hue and cry followed Holder’s decision this week to have a prosecutor
investigate CIA interrogators and contractors. The probe is a nakedly political,
banana republic-style criminalizing of policy differences and political rivalry.
The abuse allegations said to have stunned the attorney general into acting are
outlined in a stale CIA inspector general’s report. Though only released this
week — a disclosure timed to divert attention from reports that showed the CIA’
s efforts yielded life-saving intelligence — the IG report is actually five years
old. Its allegations not only have been long known to the leaders of both parties
in Congress, they were thoroughly investigated by professional prosecutors —
not political appointees. Those prosecutors decided not to file charges, except
in one case that ended in an acquittal. As I outline here, the abuse in question
falls woefully short of torture crimes under federal law.

Americans are scratching their heads: Why would Holder retrace this well-worn
ground when intimidating our intelligence-gatherers so obviously damages
national security? The political fallout, too, is palpable. Leon Panetta, the
outraged CIA director, is reportedly pondering resignation. President Obama,
laying low in the tall grass on his Martha’s Vineyard vacation, is having staffers
try to put distance between himself and his attorney general. It is unlikely that
many will be fooled: Both Obama and Holder promised their antiwar base just
this sort of “reckoning” during the 2008 campaign. But the question remains,
Why is Holder (or, rather, why are Holder and the White House) instigating this
controversy?

I believe the explanation lies in the Obama administration’s fondness for
transnationalism, a doctrine of post-sovereign globalism in which America is
seen as owing its principal allegiance to the international legal order rather than
to our own Constitution and national interests.

Recall that the president chose to install former Yale Law School dean Harold
Koh as his State Department’s legal adviser. Koh is the country’s leading
proponent of transnationalism. He is now a major player in the administration’s
deliberations over international law and cooperation. Naturally, membership in
the International Criminal Court, which the United States has resisted joining, is
high on Koh’s agenda. The ICC claims worldwide jurisdiction, even over nations
that do not ratify its enabling treaty, notwithstanding that sovereign consent to
jurisdiction is a bedrock principle of international law.

As a result, there have always been serious concerns that the ICC could
investigate and try to indict American political, military, and intelligence officials
for actions taken in defense of our country. Here it’s crucial to bear in mind that
the United States (or at least the pre-Obama United States) has not seen eye-to-
eye with Europe on significant national-security matters. European nations, for
example, have accepted the 1977 Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions, while
the United States has rejected it. Protocol I extends protections to terrorists and
imposes an exacting legal regime on combat operations, relying on such
concepts as “proportional” use of force and rigorous distinction between
military and civilian targets. That is, Protocol I potentially converts traditional
combat operations into war crimes. Similarly, though the U.S. accepted the
torture provisions of the U.N. Convention Against Torture (UNCAT), our nation
rejected the UNCAT’s placing of “cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment” on a
par with torture. By contrast, Europe generally accepts the UNCAT in toto.

#pageAs long as we haven’t ratified a couple of bad human-rights treaties, why
should we care that Europe considers them binding? Because of the
monstrosity known as “customary international law,” of which Koh is a major
proponent. This theory holds that once new legal principles gain broad
acceptance among nations and international organizations, they somehow
transmogrify into binding law, even for nations that haven’t agreed to them.
That is, the judgment of the “international community” (meaning, the judgment
of left-wing academics and human-rights activists who hold sway at the U.N.
and the European Union) supersedes the standards our citizens have adopted
democratically. It is standard fare among transnational progressives to claim
that Protocol I is now binding on the United States and that what they define as
cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment is “tantamount to torture.”

And the transnational Left has still another treat in store: its notion of “universal
jurisdiction.” This theory holds that individual nations have the power to
prosecute actions that occur in other countries, even when they have no impact
on the prosecuting nation. The idea is that some offenses — such as torture and
war crimes — so offend the purported consensus of humanity (i.e., so offend
left-wing sensibilities) that they may be prosecuted by any country that cares to
take the initiative. In fact, many countries (the United States included) open their
justice systems to civil suits against government officials — again, even if the
country where the suit is filed has nothing to do with the alleged offenses.

#ad#So we come back to Holder in Berlin. Two months before the attorney
general’s visit, the U.N.’s “special rapporteur on torture” told German television
that the Obama administration had “a clear obligation” under the UNCAT to file
torture charges against former president George W. Bush and former defense
secretary Donald Rumsfeld. The rapporteur was relying on documents
produced because of American investigations — including a nakedly partisan
report by the Democrat-controlled Senate Armed Services Committee.

Meanwhile, as I detailed here in March, Spain’s universal-justice crusader
Baltasar Garzón is pursuing his own torture case against Bush administration
lawyers who weighed in on interrogation policy. Garzón is the Spanish
investigating magistrate who, with the help of a terrorist turned human-rights
lawyer, had Chilean strongman Augusto Pinochet arrested in England for crimes
against humanity. The same terrorist-lawyer, Gonzalo Boye, is helping Garzón
on the Bush case. The Brits, by the way, eventually decided not to send
Pinochet to Spain, but not before the law lords ruled that they could, a decision
enthusiastically hailed at the time by U.N. High Commissioner on Human Rights
Mary Robinson, the former president of Ireland. That would be the same Mary
Robinson of Durban infamy — the one President Obama just honored with the
Medal of Freedom.

And then there is the Center for Constitutional Rights, a Marxist organization
that for years has coordinated legal representation for terrorists detained at
Guantanamo Bay. The CCR has been attempting to convince Germany, France,
Spain, and other countries to file war-crime indictments against former Bush
administration officials, including President Bush, Vice President Cheney, and
Secretary Rumsfeld. In representing America’s enemies, CCR has collaborated
with many private lawyers, who also volunteered their services — several of
whom are now working in the Obama Justice Department. Indeed, Holder’s
former firm boasts that it still represents 16 Gitmo detainees (the number was
previously higher). And, for help shaping detainee policy, Holder recently hired
Jennifer Daskal for DOJ’s National Security Division — a lawyer from Human
Rights Watch with no prior prosecutorial experience, whose main qualification
seems to be the startling advocacy she has done for enemy combatants.

Put it all together and it’s really not that hard to figure out what is going on here.

Transnationalists from outside and, now, inside our government have been
ardent supporters of prosecutions against American officials who designed and
carried out the Bush counterterrorism policies that kept this country safe after
9/11. The U.N.’s top torture monitor is demanding legal action, almost certainly
as a prelude to calling for action by an international tribunal — such as the ICC
— if the Justice Department fails to indict. Meantime, law-enforcement
authorities in Spain and elsewhere are weighing charges against the same U.S.
officials, spurred on by the CCR and human-rights groups that now have friends
in high American places. In foreign and international courts, the terrorist-friendly
legal standards preferred by Europe and the U.N. would make convictions
easier to obtain and civil suits easier to win.

Obama and Holder were principal advocates for a “reckoning” against Bush
officials during the 2008 campaign. They realize, though, that their
administration would be mortally wounded if Justice were actually to file formal
charges — this week’s announcement of an investigation against the CIA
provoked howls, but that’s nothing compared to the public reaction indictments
would cause. Nevertheless, Obama and Holder are under intense pressure from
the hard Left, to which they made reckless promises, and from the international
community they embrace.

The way out of this dilemma is clear. Though it won’t file indictments against
the CIA agents and Bush officials it is probing, the Justice Department will
continue conducting investigations and releasing reports containing new
disclosures of information. The churn of new disclosures will be used by
lawyers for the detainees to continue pressing the U.N. and the Europeans to
file charges. The European nations and/or international tribunals will make
formal requests to the Obama administration to have the Justice Department
assist them in securing evidence. Holder will piously announce that the “rule of
law” requires him to cooperate with these “lawful requests” from “appropriately
created courts.” Finally, the international and/or foreign courts will file criminal
charges against American officials.

Foreign charges would result in the issuance of international arrest warrants.
They won’t be executed in the United States — even this administration is
probably not brazen enough to try that. But the warrants will go out to police
agencies all over the world. If the indicted American officials want to travel
outside the U.S., they will need to worry about the possibility of arrest,
detention, and transfer to third countries for prosecution. Have a look at this
2007 interview of CCR president Michael Ratner. See how he brags that his
European gambit is “making the world smaller” for Rumsfeld — creating a
hostile legal climate in which a former U.S. defense secretary may have to
avoid, for instance, attending conferences in NATO countries.

The Left will get its reckoning. Obama and Holder will be able to take credit with
their supporters for making it happen. But because the administration’s allies in
the antiwar bar and the international Left will do the dirty work of getting
charges filed, the American media will help Obama avoid domestic political
accountability. Meanwhile, Americans who sought to protect our nation from
barbarians will be harassed and framed as war criminals. And protecting the
United States will have become an actionable violation of international law.
I’m betting that’s the plan.

While promising Hope and Change, Obama's real promise is clearly being
translated as Hopeless Corruption. The pick of Clinton Administration figure Eric
Holder who was criticized in a Congressional report for ethical violations
involving the infamous pardon of fugitive criminal Marc Rich, followed by the
appointment of corrupt Clinton Administration figure and Freddie Mac board
member, Rahm Emanuel.

There were figures in the Clinton Administration who were dirtier than Eric
Holder, but not many and Eric Holder's career both before and after his time in
the Clinton Administration is a very ugly one.

Let's begin with Pardongate, when Eric Holder was involved in
giving his nod to
the pardon of fugitive tax cheat Marc Rich and in withholding information from
the Justice Department. A Justice Department that he will now ironically head
as Attorney General.


"A forthcoming Congressional report on the last-minute pardons by President
Bill Clinton says Deputy Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. was a "willing
participant in the plan to keep the Justice Department from knowing about and
opposing" a pardon for Marc Rich, the financier.

The 476-page report, a copy of which was obtained by The New York Times,
harshly criticizes the Clinton White House for its handling of the 177 pardons
and commutations granted on its last day.

The most controversial pardon went to Mr. Rich, a commodities trader who fled
the country in 1983 rather than face trial on charges of tax evasion, racketeering
and trading with the enemy. The report says that Mr. Rich's lawyers tried to
circumvent prosecutors, who would oppose the pardon, and take their case
straight to the White House.

Mr. Holder, the report says, played a major role, steering Mr. Rich's lawyers
toward Jack Quinn, a former White House counsel. Mr. Rich hired Mr. Quinn,
whose Washington contacts and ability to lobby the president made the
difference, according to the report. It says that Mr. Holder's support for the
pardon and his failure to alert prosecutors of a pending pardon were just as
crucial.

The panel criticized Mr. Holder's conduct as unconscionable and cited several
problems. It cited his admission last year that he had hoped Mr. Quinn would
support his becoming attorney general in a Gore administration.


It's 8 years later but the Crook Fairy finally granted Eric Holder his wish to
become Attorney General. And Obama has an Attorney General who conspired
in the illegal pardon of a fugitive criminal in the hopes of making himself
Attorney General.

Criminal doesn't even begin to describe this. Eric Holder belongs in a jail cell on
charges of conspiracy, instead of being put in charge of the same Justice
Department he tried to sideline to serve his own political ambitions.

Of course Eric Holder's slime trial doesn't end there. Pardongate also involved
the pardons handed out to Weather Underground terrorists Linda Evans and
Susan Rosenberg who were transporting 740 pounds of explosives for use in
bombings.

Here is what those 740 pounds of explosives were intended to do.


On May 11, 1985, she was arrested again, charged and then convicted of
acquiring weapons, fake IDs and safe houses, and of terrorist actions. Her
targets included the U.S. Capitol Building, the National War College, the Navy
Yard Computer Center, the Navy Yard Officers Club, Israeli Aircraft Industries,
the FBI and the New York Patrolman's Benevolent Association. In her
possession were 740 pounds of dynamite. Evans was sentenced to 40 years in
prison.


Certainly targets Al Queda itself would have approved of. And now Obama has
an Attorney General that Bill Ayers and Marc Rich have thoroughly vetted.

But that's just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to Eric Holder and terrorists.
Eric
Holder also backed clemency for 16 FALN terrorists, withholding
information from Congress and even Attorney General Janet Reno and
overriding the FBI's own opposition to clemency for the FALN terrorists who
were part of a terrorist campaign that included a wave of terror carrying out 130
bombings over nearly a decade.


"Holder, a Barbadian immigrant's son who grew up in Queens and received his
law degree from Columbia, has played major roles in the probe of Democratic
funny-money in the 1996 elections, the Sexgate scandal and the
recommendation to President Clinton on whether to free FALN terrorists from
jail. A list of FALN documents withheld from Congress shows that many memos
on the FALN clemency decision went directly to Holder, while Reno's role was
minimal."

(Brian Blomquist, "Ailing Reno Yielding Reins Of Justice," New York Post,
12/15/99)


This allowed Eric Holder to sideline his own boss and the Attorney General and
playing the key role in freeing the FALN terrorists. Which proved to be a
convenient way of blocking and dead ending the objections of the FBI and just
about everyone involved in the case.


Although The FBI Opposed Clemency, Holder Supported Clemency For The
FALN Members. "Although The New York Times reported that the FBI, Bureau of
Prisons and U.S. state attorneys opposed clemency, Deputy Attorney General
Eric Holder, the Justice Department official most involved with this issue,
reportedly supported clemency. 'Eric Holder told me he was recommending
that,' a high-ranking official said. Ruff also supported clemency, sources
said. Holder declined to comment."

(Edward Lewine, "How Bill Chose Clemency," [New York] Daily News, 9/5/99)


Nor was Eric Holder simply approving request pardons. Instead he was working
on freeing the FALN terrorists, even though they had not made any such
request... and was actually passing messages along to them to make a show of
remorse in order to move the process along.


In 1997, Holder Met With Three Members Of Congress And Made
Recommendations To Them About How The FALN Members Could More Easily
Be Granted Clemency. "The committee's documents show that Mr. Adams and
Eric Holder, the Deputy Attorney General, met on Nov. 5, 1997, with
Representative Luis V. Gutierrez, Democrat of Illinois, and Representatives
Jose E. Serrano of the Bronx and Nydia M. Velazquez of Brooklyn, both
Democrats, to discuss the case of the Puerto Rican inmates.

According to Mr. Adams's notes, Mr. Holder told the members of Congress that
because the prisoners had not applied themselves for clemency this could be
taken that they were not repentant, and he suggested that a statement
expressing some remorse might help. In their testimony today, both Mr. Adams
and Mr. Holder declined to answer several questions about how the clemency
decision was reached, citing executive privilege. Both said, however, that the
Justice Department had acted appropriately throughout the process."

(Neil A. Lewis, "Records Show Puerto Ricans Got U.S. Help With Clemency,"
The New York Times, 10/21/99)


Clearly Eric Holder was fixated on freeing the FALN terrorists. So fixated that he
was willing to sideline procedures, behave unethically and possibly even
illegally. Arguably after this, Eric Holder should not be able to hold any position
in the government, let alone that of Attorney General.

How wrong were Eric Holder's actions? So wrong that FALN afterward was
identified as a National Security Threat.


A Subsequent Clinton Administration Justice Department Report Identified The
Group As An "Ongoing Threat." "The Puerto Rican nationalist group FALN, 16 of
whose members were pardoned by President Clinton in August, poses an
'ongoing threat' to national security, according to a September report by
Attorney General Janet Reno released yesterday during a combative Senate
hearing on the clemency decision."

(David A. Vise and Lorraine Adams, "FALN A Threat, Reno Says," The
Washington Post, 10/21/99)


Eric Holder's work on behalf of FALN resulted in a special congressional
measure to
reform the process.

And this is the carnage that Eric Holder's FALN buddies inflicted on the people
of New York and the NYPD.

The editorial is written by the Director of the World Trade Center Memorial
Foundation and the sister of one of the pilots who died on 9/11.


It was nearly 10 p.m. on New Year's Eve, 1982. Two officers on New York Police
Department's elite bomb squad rushed to headquarters at One Police Plaza,
where minutes earlier an explosion had destroyed the entrance to the building.
Lying amid the carnage was Police Officer Rocco Pascarella, his lower leg
blasted off.

"He was ripped up like someone took a box cutter and shredded his face,"
remembered Detective Anthony Senft, one of the bomb-squad officers who
answered the call 25 years ago. "We really didn't even know that he was a
uniformed man until we found his weapon, that's how badly he was injured."

About 20 minutes later, Mr. Senft and his partner, Richard Pastorella, were
blown 15 feet in the air as they knelt in protective gear to defuse another bomb.
Detective Senft was blinded in one eye, his facial bones shattered, his hip
severely fractured. Mr. Pastorella was blinded in both eyes and lost all the
fingers of his right hand. A total of four bombs exploded in a single hour on that
night, including at FBI headquarters in Manhattan and the federal courthouse in
Brooklyn.

The prisoners were convicted on a variety of charges that included conspiracy,
sedition, violation of the Hobbes Act (extortion by force, violence or fear),
armed robbery and illegal possession of weapons and explosives -- including
large quantities of C-4 plastic explosive, dynamite and huge caches of
ammunition. Mr. Clinton's action was opposed by the FBI, the Bureau of Prisons,
the U.S. attorney offices that prosecuted the cases and the victims whose lives
had been shattered. In contravention of standard procedures, none of these
agencies, victims or families of victims were consulted or notified prior to the
president's announcement.

"I know the chilling evidence that convicted the petitioners," wrote Deborah
Devaney, one of the federal prosecutors who spent years on the cases. "The
conspirators made every effort to murder and maim. . . . A few dedicated federal
agents are the only people who stood in their way."


A few dedicated Federal agents stood in their way... and future Attorney
General Eric Holder stood in the way of the dedicated Federal agents.


Twenty-four hours before a scheduled Senate committee hearing, the DOJ
withheld the FBI's written statement about the history of the FALN and an
assessment of its current terrorist capability. "They pulled the plug on us," said
an unnamed FBI official in a news report, referring to the Justice Department
decision to prevent FBI testimony


We can only imagine what Eric Holder will perpetrate as Attorney General, what
crimes he will cover up, what terrorists he will aid and loose on the American
public. He has proven himself all too well in the Clinton Administration as the
best friend that terrorists and criminals with political influence could ever hope
to have.

For Joe Connor, whose father was murdered by FALN terrorists in a bombing
only blocks away from the World Trade Center, Eric Holder's corrupt actions on
behalf of the FALN terrorists carries a great personal price.















During the 1970s and '80s, the FALN waged a war against the people of the
United States that included 130 plus bombings. Their most heinous attack was
the January 1975 lunchtime bombing of Fraunces Tavern here in New York City.
It killed four people, including my father, Frank Connor, 33.

Until then, President Clinton had denied clemency in 3,039 out of 3,042 cases.
It's also worth noting that the Clinton administration consulted with
representatives of the terrorists - but ignored the families of their victims.

I was trying to make the point that the release of the FALN killers would send a
frightening invitation to other would-be terrorists. Little did I know that more
anguish was yet to come.

Almost two years to the day after my Senate testimony, my father's god son,
our cousin Steve Schlag, was killed on 9/11. My brother and I watched in
helpless horror from our downtown offices, ironically only blocks from Fraunces
Tavern.















The 9/11 connection is not accidental. Freeing terrorists sends a signal of
weakness to other terrorists.
Eric Holder's work on behalf of the FALN terrorists
2 years before 9/11 amounted to demonstrating that you can brutally participate
in murder of NYPD officers and New Yorkers and walk away from it with the
Federal Government on your side.

But Eric Holder's terrorist ties don't end there. Once out of the White House and
working as a lawyer at Covington and Burling, Eric Holder represented Chiquita
when the Justice Department charged the company with engaging in
transactions with terrorists for the millions of dollars in protection money that
Chiquita paid to Columbia Narcoterrorists.

And then of course back in the Clinton Administration days, Eric Holder was a
big fan of using force... not against terrorists, but against a 6 year old boy and
his unarmed family.

Eric Holder played a key role in the armed abduction of Elian Gonzalez by an
army of border patrol agents with automatic weapons pointed at his head.


Holder Also Defended The Use Of Guns In The Raid. "Mr. Holder said his
agents were heavily armed when they entered the house because they had
'intelligence that the possibility existed there were guns in the house. We
had to make sure our people were protected and they were in a position to
protect people within the house. I don't know if there were any guns in the
house. I don't know if they found any guns. We had to deal, however, with the
intelligence we had that we got from local sources and make sure everybody
was
adequately protected.' Apparently no guns were found."

(Jerry Seper and Clarence Williams, "Holder Defends Sudden Raid For Elian,"
The Washington Times, 4/24/00)


Just to clarify this, ruthless force had to be used because there was supposedly
intelligence that there were guns in the house, though Eric Holder has no idea if
there were any guns in the house or whether any guns were found in the house.

As Debbie Schlussel points out, Eric Holder's appointment along with Greg
Craig reunites 2/3rds of the Elian Gonzalez kidnapping team. We can only look
forward to the kind of gruesome abuses of the justice system these two will
perpetrate on behalf of Barack Hussein Obama.

Of course Eric Holder was not too fussy to get involved in corporate crime
either. And I don't mean on the prosecuting side.
















Eric Holder lobbied on behalf of Global Crossing, one of the 10 largest corporate
bankruptcies since 1980, on a level with Enron and WorldCom. It was the 7th
largest filing in American history. While Global Crossing was accumulating debt
like mad, its executives were spending like mad, taking tens of millions in
personal loans from the company, operating corporate jets, and selling as much
inside stock as Enron.

Meanwhile Global Crossing executives were covering their asses with a million
dollar donation to Bill Clinton's library. The same bribe route used by Marc Rich,
another Eric Holder beneficiary.

Now guess who the auditor for Global Crossing was? Arthur Andersen, made
infamous by its ties to Enron. And guess who was its lobbyist, Eric Holder.

And just in case you think that the Eric Holder Scandal Train stops there, it's
only the beginning of a long route which we, and probably in a few years,
Federal investigators will be tracing in great detail.

Unless Congressional Republicans and the few honest Democrats do their job
and vet Eric Holder. We know the media won't do it, it will just keep on repeating
the fluff about Eric Holder's historic appointment as the first Black Attorney
General, as if that's supposed to make us forget FALN, Elian, Global Crossing,
the Weathermen pardons and Marc Rich.

It's time for Congress to take a stand against Eric Holder and for integrity in the
Justice Department.



Attorney General Eric Holder, Team Obama’s Dirty Dozen (get your trading
cards here) I’ve been pounding on corruptocrat Attorney General Eric Holder’s
brazen conflicts of interests and terror-friendly law firm work. Now, the
Washington Times has the exclusive on a DOJ recusal list that looks to be the
tip of the iceberg:

The Obama Justice Department is having problems prosecuting terrorist cases
because top department attorneys have conflicts of interest.

According to documents obtained exclusively by The Washington Times,
Associate Attorney General Thomas J. Perrelli, No. 3 official in the Justice
Department, had to recuse himself on at least 13 active detainee cases and at
least 26 cases listed as either closed or mooted.

Sen. Charles E. Grassley, Iowa Republican, made waves Nov. 18 when he
demanded that Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. provide a list of all the
suspected-terrorist detainee cases from which current Justice Department
political appointees have had to recuse themselves. The extent of the conflicts
at the department is still unclear.

Mr. Perrelli’s recusals presumably stem from the work that either he or his
former firm, Jenner & Block LLP, did on behalf of detainees while Mr. Perrelli
served on the firm’s management committee and on its appellate and Supreme
Court practice groups. And Mr. Perrelli is just one official; a number of other
Justice Department officials apparently did private-sector work on detainee
cases.

This is an important topic. Even if each official who did prior work on detainee
cases has indeed properly recused himself from those cases while at the
Justice Department, there could be such a large number of affected officials that
the department’s prevailing ethos could be tilted strongly in the detainees’
favor. Mr. Grassley’s inquiry is pressing because it could ferret out any instance
in which a department official should have been recused but wasn’t…

….ile the rest of the list of recusals has yet to be provided to the senator, The
Washington Times secured the Perrelli recusal list, which previously had been
distributed widely within the Justice Department. Herewith, consider this list of
names of detainees whose cases are listed as “active” on the Perrelli recusal
list:

Saad Al Qahtani. Mohammed Zahrani. Achraf Salim (”Sultan”) Abdessalam.
Abdul Rahman Abdul Abu Ghityh Sulayman. Musaab Omar Al Madhwani. Jawad
Jabbar Sadkhan (Al Sahlani). Majid Khan.

Also listed as active are the cases of Anam v. Bush, Jabbarov v. Bush, Bronte v.
Department of Defense, Al Odah et. al. v. USA, Boumediene v. Bush, and
Rumsfeld v. Padilla.

None of this is to say that Mr. Perrelli did anything wrong. His recusals are
proper, but the extent of the recusals raises questions about whether the
attorney general has enough unbiased advisers around him to have made good
judgments about how to try Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and other detainees.Eric
Holder, radical Forget about Obama’s nomination of Hillary Clinton to be
Secretary of State. That has enough of a comic dimension to render its
absurdity entertaining. What you should be concerned about–well, one of the
things you should be concerned about–is his nomination of Eric Holder to be
Attorney General.

Eric who? I didn’t know, either. NRO has the scoop in a must-read editorial:

Holder was the Clinton administration’s last deputy attorney general,
succeeding Jamie Gorelick in 1997 under Janet Reno. That appointment marked
the final elevation in a series of Clinton-era promotions that punctuate his
rèsumè. Holder’s rise, like Obama’s own, is of symbolic significance, as he now
has been nominated to be the nation’s first black attorney general. Symbolism,
however, cannot camouflage the fact that Holder is a conventional, check-the-
boxes creature of the Left.

He is convinced justice in America needs to be “established” rather than
enforced; he’s excited about hate crimes and enthusiastic about the
constitutionally dubious Violence Against Women Act; he’s a supporter of
affirmative action and a practitioner of the statistical voodoo that makes it
possible to burden police departments with accusations of racial profiling and
the states with charges of racially skewed death-penalty enforcement; he’s
more likely to be animated by a touchy-feely Reno-esque agenda than
traditional enforcement against crimes; he’s in favor of ending the detentions of
enemy combatants at Guantanamo Bay and favors income redistribution to
address the supposed root causes of crime.

Remember those last-minute Clinton pardons and commutations? Holder was
there, helping to bring them about.

Much has been made, and appropriately so, of Holder’s untoward performance
in the final corrupt act of the Clinton administration: the pardons issued in the
departing president’s final hours. Of these, most notorious is the case of Marc
Rich, an unrepentant fugitive wanted on extensive fraud, racketeering, and
trading-with-the-enemy charges – but granted a pardon nonetheless thanks to
the intercession of his ex-wife, a generous donor to Clinton’s library and legal-
defense fund.

Holder’s role was aptly described as “unconscionable” by a congressional
committee. He steered Rich’s allies to retain the influential former White House
counsel Jack Quinn (Holder later conceded he hoped Quinn would help him
become attorney general in a Gore administration); he helped Quinn directly
lobby Clinton, doing an end-run around the standard pardon process (including
DOJ’s pardon attorney); and he kept the deliberations hidden from the district U.
S. attorney and investigative agencies prosecuting Rich so they couldn’t learn
about the pardon application and register their objections. . . .

Equally noxious were the stealthy pardons of Susan Rosenberg and Linda
Evans – Weather Underground terrorists associated with Obama’s friends Bill
Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn – issued on the same day as the Rich pardon.
Rosenberg and Evans had been serving decades-long sentences for bombings
targeting American government facilities. With Holder again helping to
circumvent the pardon process and to evade objections from prosecutors, the
terrorists’ jail terms were commuted just weeks after the bombing of the U.S.S.
Cole.

Bottom line? “Holder is a terrible selection. If there’s any Obama cabinet
nomination that Republicans feel moved to oppose, this should be it.”


More Links To Holder's Crimes Against America:

Obama Administration Seeks To Block Wiretap Suit
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/31/obama-administration-
seek_0_n_340842.html


Obama Administration embraces Bush Position On Warrantless Wiretapping and
Secrecy
http://unspy.wordpress.com/2009/04/07/obama-administration-embraces-bush-
position-on-warrantless-wiretapping-and-secrecy