What happens when the people of the United States have little or no faith in the competency and independence of the nation’s top law enforcement officer, the Attorney General of the United States. 

Clinton had Janet Reno …

In the case of Bill Clinton’s Attorney General, Janet Reno, we say a politicalized Justice Department which was run mostly from the White House. Political considerations trumped both fairness and justice. Although the democrats promised the most ethical Administration in the history of the United States, it appears in retrospect to be among the most self-serving and corrupt – and that’s not even considering President Clinton’s outrageous behavior in the Oval Office.

“In March 1995, U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno secured the appointment of an Independent Counsel, David Barrett to investigate allegations that Cisneros had lied to FBI investigators during background checks prior to being named Secretary of HUD. He had been asked about payments that he had made to former mistress Linda Medlar, also known as Linda Jones. The affair had been 'public knowledge' for a number of years - during the 1992 presidential campaign, George H. W. Bush's Treasurer Catalina Vasquez Villalpando (R) publicly referred to Cisneros and candidate Clinton as "two skirt-chasers." Cisneros lied about the amount of money he had paid to Medlar. The investigation continued for three and a half years.”

“In December, 1997, Cisneros was indicted on 18 counts of conspiracy, giving false statements and obstruction of Justice. Medlar used some of the Cisneros hush money to purchase a house and entered into a bank fraud scheme with her sister and brother-in-law to conceal the source of the money. In January, 1998, Medlar pleaded guilty to 28 charges of bank fraud, conspiracy to commit bank fraud and obstruction of justice.”

“In September, 1999, Cisneros negotiated a plea agreement, under which he pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor count of lying to the FBI, and was fined $10,000. He did not receive jail-time or probation. He was pardoned by President Bill Clinton in January 2001.”

It was stated by Independent Counsel Barrett that the Clinton’s succeeded in one of the most successful cover-ups in history and that had he been allowed to continue with his inquiry he would have been able to prove the allegations that federal agencies were approached by the White House to aid the cover-up of Cisneros' activities. As a side note, Henry Cisneros went forward to serve on the Board of Countrywide Financial Corporation.

Bush had Alberto Gonzales …

In the case of George Bush, we have Bush crony Alberto Gonzales who not only further politicized the Department of Justice, but introduced an element of gross incompetency and overall stupidity. The botched prosecution of Scooter Libby for a non-crime, the dismissal of U.S. Attorneys, and various human rights issued marked the tenure of the hyper-political Gonzales who was finally forced to resign the office.

And now Obama wants to give us Eric Holder …

In my opinion, Holder has three major flaws:

One, he does not understand the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution which implicitly guarantees an individual’s right to self-defense as well as the right to keep and bear arms. Holder has done much to prevail upon the Supreme Court to rule that the Second Amendment is a “collective” right and not an “individual” right. The court did rule that the matter was an individual right and that the good, law-abiding citizens of Washington D.C. did have the right to keep weapons in their homes for the purposes of self-protection as per the Second Amendment.

Two, he appears to be complicit in arranging inappropriate pardons for political purposes. Two of the more egregious which were the pardoning of known terrorists and the pardoning of Marc Rich and his partner Pincus Green who not only traded oil with Iran while they were holding American hostages, but also evaded millions of dollars in taxes. Both pardons involved special influence, alleged payments to various parties and the circumventing of the professional staff of the Department of Justice.

And three, I am not sure that Eric Holder will be a bulwark against terrorism. Supporting the far left liberal position that terrorists should not be tried in a military tribunal as enemy combatants, but should receive justice in a federal court under the same Constitutional standards as those provided to citizens of the United States.

This marks Eric Holder as a man who cannot be trusted with high office and someone who is ideologically blind to the sanctity of the United States Constitution. I question both his judgment and his ability to be a fair and impartial Attorney General.

According to the Washington Post, I am not alone in my opinion and criticism of Eric Holder …

“Obama's Attorney General Pick Faces Growing Criticism”

“Eric H. Holder Jr. is facing increasing resistance to his bid to become the next attorney general, emerging from President-elect Barack Obama's Cabinet nominees as the prime target of Senate Republicans, both because of troubling episodes during his service in the Clinton administration and because of the sensitivity of the post overseeing the Justice Department.”

Comparison to hyper-partisan Alberto Gonzales …

[Republican Senator Arlen] “Specter previewed the main line of attack in a floor speech this week, asserting that, in Holder's years as President Bill Clinton's deputy attorney general, he at times ‘appeared to be serving the interest of his superiors’ rather than heeding recommendations from career Justice Department lawyers.”

“The argument echoed criticism that former attorney general Alberto R. Gonzales, who resigned in 2007, had acted to please his friend President Bush rather than to uphold the principles of justice.”

Blagojevich connection?

“In a pointed effort to scrub Holder's past, Sen. Charles E. Grassley (Iowa) and two other leading GOP Judiciary Committee members submitted a public records request this week to Illinois officials, seeking information on a thwarted $300,000 legal services contract that Holder won from now-disgraced Gov. Rod Blagojevich (D).

“The [nominee’s] questionnaire emerged as an issue after the Chicago Sun-Times asked why Holder did not include the contract with Blagojevich's office. The 2004 deal called for Holder and his law firm, working at a reduced rate, to investigate the award of a gambling casino in Rosemont, Ill. No irregularities have been alleged about the arrangement.”

“Prosecutors have accused Blagojevich of engaging in pay-to-play schemes in which state jobs and contracts were auctioned off for the governor's personal gain.”

Second Amendment issues …

“Senate researchers also are probing Holder's record on gun control -- an issue that could bring strong opposition from gun rights groups, many Republicans and some conservative Democrats.”

“Last year, Holder and other former Justice Department officials from Democratic administrations filed a friend of the court brief in a landmark D.C. gun ownership case, arguing that the Second Amendment gives citizens a ‘collective right’ to bear arms rather than individual ownership rights. The Supreme Court last year ruled in the case, in favor of individual rights.”

“Holder's views are relevant because the court's ruling probably will lead to challenges of other gun control laws in which the Justice Department will have an interest.”

National security issues …

“Republicans may try to point out inconsistencies in Holder's approach to national security. In the immediate aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, he gave interviews in which he appeared to leave room for extended detention of terrorism suspects without charging them with crimes.”

“But in recent years, Holder has been more critical of Bush administration policies on detention and interrogation, saying the government's tactics have harmed international relations and violated civil liberties.”

His views on international relations are irrelevant as he is charged with supporting and defending the United States Constitution from its enemies, both foreign and domestic. Whether we are liked or disliked in a world filled with envious and/or hostile nations pursuing their own self-interested agenda should have absolutely no bearing on the cases he handles as a member of the Department of Justice.

Leniency for proven terrorists; or was Holder doing a political favor for a candidate who needed votes?

“Senate staff members said the hearings could include potentially hostile witnesses, including victims of bombings carried out by the FALN, a Puerto Rican nationalist group. Members of the group won clemency in 1999 while Holder held a top Justice Department post overseeing the pardon process under Clinton.”

Even the Senate, including the democrats, were outraged …

“The Senate passed a bipartisan resolution that year saying Clinton should not have granted clemency, which prosecutors and the FBI opposed. This week, two former Justice Department pardon lawyers told the Los Angeles Times that Holder had pressed them to change their recommendations and support the clemency bid, even after one of them says he warned Holder and his top aide that the move would backfire politically.”

Mea Culpa: after the fact apology …

“Holder has previously apologized for not paying sufficient attention to a request to pardon fugitive financier Marc Rich in early 2001, and for telling White House officials that he was ‘neutral leaning toward favorable’ on the idea. The last-minute presidential pardon touched off investigations by federal prosecutors in New York and congressional inquiries into contacts between Holder and Jack Quinn, a Clinton White House lawyer working for Rich. Bipartisan committee reports later described the incident as ‘bad judgment’ by Holder.”

Obama’s task …

Obama’s major task is restoring the people’s confidence in the government and, in particular, the Department of Justice and other high-profile agencies. This is a matter which cannot be taken lightly – especially when one considers the cesspool of corruption in which Obama functioned and the number of dubious characters in this past associations.

A current example of why the integrity of the Attorney General is important …

From the Washington Post …

“Reagan-era White House budget chief David A. Stockman told everybody who would listen that he was innocent of fraud charges after he was indicted in New York nearly two years ago.”

“Yesterday, after a behind-the-scenes lobbying campaign, the boy wonder of 1980s Washington convinced the only audience that mattered: prosecutors and a federal judge, who disposed of the criminal case against him with the stroke of a pen.”

“In a move that longtime securities lawyers called next to unprecedented, the acting U.S. attorney concluded that prosecuting Stockman and three other men who worked under him at the defunct Michigan auto parts maker Collins & Aikman ‘would not be in the interests of justice.’"

“Veterans of the federal courthouse in Manhattan could not remember another case against such a high-profile defendant that fell by the wayside. The closest that New York lawyers could come was the dropped prosecution of Richard Wigton, who was hauled out of his Wall Street office in handcuffs by then U.S. Attorney Rudolph Giuliani in 1987.”

I have absolutely no idea whether Stockman is guilty or the pro or con merits of the case which faces him and the others involved. What I can tell from the article is that a former top-level Republican appointee received, what some are calling, unusual treatment by the Department of Justice. 

This is exactly why we need a man of integrity on the side of the people of the United States rather than a hyper-partisan doing the political bidding of the White House when it comes to their special interest friends. Especially in a time when a number of high-profile, politically-connected financiers may be facing action for defrauding the investing public.

As one who has lost a substantial portion of the value in his retirement fund, I can assure you that I do not care if they were Republican crooks or democrat crooks – I want them prosecuted in a fair and impartial way. Considering the political contributions of those who are now facing inquiry, I do not want to hear that they used their money to purchase a favorable government outcome – even if they offer to re-build the Taj Mahal as the new Obama Presidential Library.

What can YOU do?

Call your Senator and urge a “no vote” on the confirmation of Eric Holder for the position of United States Attorney General. Explain that this position should be given to a person with a proven judicial track records, untainted by politics or the appearance of past impropriety.

Engage in the political debate. It’s your country too – and from all appearances, it is being sold piece-by-piece by the politicians and their special interests to the highest bidder. Your birthrights are being severely eroded and your Constitutional rights are being extended to those illegal aliens and others who not only do not respect our Constitution, our laws and our customs – but do not wish us well as the pursue their own agenda.

Stand up and be counted. Patriotism is not an empty label that someone applies to your lapel at a political rally – it is an every hour of every day support of our Constitution, our Country and our Troops and others who make this country great.

-- steve

Quote of the Day: “A thing is not necessarily false because badly uttered, nor true because spoken magnificently. -- with apologies to Saint Augustine

A reminder from OneCitizenSpeaking.com: a large improvement can result from a small change…

The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane. -- Marcus Aurelius

Reference Links:

Obama Attorney General Pick Eric Holder Facing Increasing Criticism|Washington Post

Federal Charges Dropped Against Stockman|Washington Post