Posted on 01/23/2010 2:03:22 PM PST by opentalk
You may remember that more than two months ago, amid the controversy over the Obama administration's decision to grant full American constitutional rights to, and hold a civilian trial for, accused 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheik Mohammed, Republican Sen. Charles Grassley asked Attorney General Eric Holder about Justice Department lawyers who before joining the Obama/Holder team had represented Guantanamo detainees or worked for groups representing them. Grassley pointed to one high-ranking Obama Justice official who formerly represented Osama bin Laden's driver and another who works on detainee issues despite previous advocacy for detainees.
"This prior representation, I think, creates a conflict of interest problem for these individuals," Grassley said, adding, "I want to know more about who is advising you on these decisions." Grassley asked Holder to give the committee "the names of political appointees in your department who represent detainees or who work for organizations advocating on their behalf…the cases or projects that these appointees work with respect to detainee prior to joining the Justice Department…and the cases or projects relating to detainees that have worked on since joining the Justice Department."
Holder was noncommittal. "I will certainly consider that request," he said. When Grassley pressed, Holder stood firm. "I will consider that request," he repeated. Later in the hearing, Holder revisited the subject, saying he "didn't mean to be flip" in responding to Grassley but that he wanted to consider possible ethical concerns about attorney-client privilege before agreeing to Grassley's request. Holder never said he would provide the information. A few days later, on November 24, Grassley and the other Republican members of the Judiciary Committee sent a letter to Holder citing his "less than encouraging" response and pressing the request for information on the detainee conflicts inside the Department.
Now, two months have passed and the senators have heard nothing. "Sen. Grassley does not have an answer yet," says a Grassley spokesman. "The Justice Department says it's 'in process.'" The Justice Department did not respond to an inquiry about the matter Friday, and it is not clear when the Department will answer Grassley's questions.
In the meantime, committee Republicans are starting to wait for Holder's response to another letter, sent yesterday, asking for an explanation of the decision to hold accused al Qaeda Detroit bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab in the civilian justice system instead of as an enemy combatant. Taken together, the inquiries show Republicans growing increasingly assertive about questioning the Obama administration's actions and resolve in fighting what the GOP still calls the War on Terror. Unless Holder can offer convincing explanations for the Department's recent decisions, the questions will keep coming.
Holder, a terrorist’s best friend.
AG Eric Holder's Law Firm Represented 18 Gitmo Detainees After Volunteering to Give Them Free Legal Assistance, Filed Endless Lawsuits in US Courts...
These lawsuits filed against the American people led to the delay of Bush's military-trials, accounting for the "eight years of delay" the Obama administration has used as justification for the 9/11 plotters being tried in civilian court....... (
He wouldn’t dare - it would violate Obama’s non-transparent transparency...
Not sure how they get rid of him. Think he is doing exactly what Obama (soros) wanted him to do. The conflict of interest was known before he was confirmed. Senate vote was 75-21.
Maybe the refusal to answer subpoenas in Black panther case? I'm not in the legal field. There must be some process to remove him.
Hey Eric (the Red), while you’re at it could you also answer Senator McConnell’s request to identify who at the Justice Department ordered that Abdulmutallab be “mirandized”.
While she was merely a deluded, clueless, hopelessly ignorant, moonbat, Holder is of the same Far Left, arrogant, narcissistic, pseudo-intellectual, Fascist, class as his Dear Leader; he is a "Clear and Present Danger" to our Security and the sooner he is gone, the better it will be for our Safety and Security!
WHY, I ask (rhetorically, cuz I know; they left their gonads at home when they came to DC) is there not ONE Republitard, calling for his head (figuratively, of course)?
They could hold him in contempt, but don't hold your breath that ONE Demo-Rat (or even ONE Republitard, such as they are all wuss, eunuchs) voting for same!
He is one conceited, self-deluded, arrogant, PRI*K, (who after 5 minutes alone with this 66 year old vet, he would no doubt have an epiphany and be "convinced" to see the "error of his ways" lol) but then again, aren't most Demo-Rats?
While she was merely a deluded, clueless, hopelessly ignorant, moonbat, Holder is of the same Far Left, arrogant, narcissistic, pseudo-intellectual, Fascist, class as his Dear Leader; he is a "Clear and Present Danger" to our Security and the sooner he is gone, the better it will be for our Safety and Security!
WHY, I ask (rhetorically, cuz I know; they left their gonads at home when they came to DC) is there not ONE Republitard, calling for his head (figuratively, of course)?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.