February 15, 2010
— Ace They don't say that of course -- they describe it in a much nicer way. The administration is merely seeking to improve Holder's "political ear," they tell us.
You tell me how this isn't "politicizing Justice," as the Democrats charged Bush in 2004, 2006, and 2008.
After 9/11 Trial Plan, Holder Hones Political EarLast winter, when Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. called the United States a “nation of cowards” for avoiding frank conversations on race, President Obama mildly rebuked him in public.
Out of view, Mr. Obama’s aides did far more. Rahm Emanuel and Jim Messina, the White House chief and deputy chief of staff, proposed installing a minder alongside Mr. Holder to prevent further gaffes — someone with better “political antennae,” as one administration official put it.
When he heard of the proposal at a White House meeting, Mr. Holder fumed; soon after, he confronted his deputy, David W. Ogden, who knew of the plan but had not alerted his boss, according to several officials. Mr. Holder fought off the proposal, signaling that his job was about the law, not political messaging.
A year later, he is no longer so certain.
...
Now Mr. Holder has switched from resisting what he had considered encroachment by White House political officials to seeking their guidance. Two weeks ago, he met with advisers there to discuss how to unite against common foes. They agreed to allow Mr. Holder, who has not appeared on a Sunday talk show since entering office, to speak out more; he agreed to let them help hone his message.
The political attacks over terrorism cases were “starting to constrain my ability to function as attorney general,” he said in an interview last week. “I have to do a better job in explaining the decisions that I have made,” Mr. Holder also said, adding, “I have to be more forceful in advocating for why I believe these are trials that should be held on the civilian side.”
But now Mr. Holder is in the awkward position of pushing for an approach that he acknowledges he would accept defeat on. The administration hopes to announce a new venue for the Sept. 11 trial within three weeks, he said last Tuesday. But Congress could pass legislation requiring that Mr. Mohammed be tried by a military commission, or Mr. Obama himself could change direction.
“You always have to be flexible,” Mr. Holder said, allowing that justice could be served in a commission trial, too, and praising generals who “adapt their game plans” as the situation changes.
The NYT is striving mightily to portray this merely as a matter of political messaging. That is, they are trying to pretend that only Holder's words will change, not his policy.
But right there -- even as they try to sell you on this -- they acknowledge that Holder has changed his policy on KSM's trial.
That's pretty obvious. So obvious that even the NYT seems to notice. But instead of noting that and asking Holder about it, they just whine that he's in a "tough spot" where he supposedly has to explain his policy better and more "forcefully" even when he's already announced the likelihood that policy will change.
Um, NYT? That's not about "messaging." That's about Justice Department policy being changed by Rahm Emanuel and the political team for the sake of politics and polls.
Of course I approve of this change in policy -- but even the NYT should be able to figure out that this change has occurred not due to principled belief, but due to poll numbers. And they should be able to figure out that a major change in policy is going on here, not a mere change in the "mere words" used to justify it.
Posted by: Ace at
08:58 AM
| Comments (63)
Post contains 642 words, total size 4 kb.
Posted by: James T. Kirk at February 15, 2010 09:01 AM (5I0Yr)
Posted by: jimmuy at February 15, 2010 09:02 AM (/rb2j)
praising generals who “adapt their game plans”
They aren't playing games, Holder, you dickslap; they're fighting a war.
Posted by: Dang Straights at February 15, 2010 09:02 AM (fx8sm)
Simple, Holder and Obama are Democrats Bush was a Republican.
It's really not rocket science.
Posted by: DrewM. at February 15, 2010 09:02 AM (9B5OK)
Posted by: Darth Nihilus69 at February 15, 2010 09:03 AM (GfYt/)
Who are their common foes? Us?
Posted by: Dr. Spank at February 15, 2010 09:03 AM (muUqs)
Posted by: nikkolai at February 15, 2010 09:04 AM (i4ujc)
WTF! It's getting rather dangerous at this point.
Posted by: WTFCI at February 15, 2010 09:04 AM (EbpbH)
this "bold" stuff is too easy. It is beneath us. Or at least next to us.
Or superadjacent.
lesbian porn
Posted by: BumperStickerist at February 15, 2010 09:04 AM (ruzrP)
Posted by: Countrysquire at February 15, 2010 09:05 AM (rDvlp)
no executive experience....
no military experience.....
no legislative experience.....
no business experience.....
I see a trend here.
Posted by: fixerupper at February 15, 2010 09:10 AM (J5Hcw)
Posted by: maddogg at February 15, 2010 09:12 AM (OlN4e)
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at February 15, 2010 09:12 AM (r1h5M)
Posted by: Wyatt Earp at February 15, 2010 09:14 AM (zgZzy)
I click links to see the who's doing the publishing. If it is the NYT, I don't read the article, I just click back. When you read the NYT, it leaves you less informed.
Posted by: Jack at February 15, 2010 09:14 AM (bvDV5)
Posted by: Jerry Seinfeld at February 15, 2010 09:15 AM (rf1Kd)
Of course I approve of this change in policy -- but even the NYT should be able to figure out that this change has occurred not due to principled belief, but due to poll numbers.
Principled belief, REALLY? And the NYT would recognize that HOW? Obama's administration is one big love-ball of principle?
I'm fine with them governing through poll. It's far far far less dangerous than their governing by their "principles" which are marxist and anti-american. The people will at least show some evidence of principle even if it is the "don't kill me now" principle.
Posted by: dagny at February 15, 2010 09:15 AM (RhHtU)
The political attacks over terrorism cases were “starting to constrain my ability to function as attorney general,” he said in an interview last week. “
"They caused me to go back in time and drop any consideration of charges against the Black Panthers who intimidated voters," he added.
Posted by: rdbrewer at February 15, 2010 09:16 AM (kH3Jl)
I missed the bold, but stayed for the snark.
It's sad though. Really. This administration is taking on more water than the Titanic. The rats are starting to see teh wheels of the bus inch closer, and they (Holder now) are realizing that none of them are above getting fired.
Holder is an idiot, and is going to get canned in the near duture. Once the "messaging" excuses fall flat, and BO realizes that his days of even 50% approval are never to return, heads will start to roll. The KSM trial is a good hook to nail Holder b/c he's made the administration look inept with it (not that it needed help). They Black Panther case will peek in at the edges, but that's too "racial" to gain a lot of traction against the lib-guilt press.
Posted by: s'moron at February 15, 2010 09:17 AM (p1s9n)
Posted by: lorien1973 at February 15, 2010 09:19 AM (IhQuA)
Speaking of the NYSlimes, they've been caught plagiarizing (again).
When Holder gets the bus tires will he be shouting "RACISM!" ?
Posted by: Dang Straights at February 15, 2010 09:23 AM (fx8sm)
Posted by: The Mega Independent at February 15, 2010 01:04 PM (5I0Yr)
And Leon's getting laaaarger.
Posted by: Johnny at February 15, 2010 09:23 AM (T0NGe)
The NYT might want to review every baseless claim made against the Boooosh administration, and see who in Barry's Brigade is doing it on steroids right now...
Posted by: phreshone at February 15, 2010 09:26 AM (1AnxB)
They should just can Holder.
Here's an interesting thought: It's not that Justice is being politicized, it's being re-politicized. Holder's most jackassed decisions have been rooted in his own bullshit politics, not the law.
Posted by: rdbrewer at February 15, 2010 09:27 AM (kH3Jl)
Yes. US, USA, whatever.
12 Two weeks ago, he met with advisers there to discuss how to unite against common foes.
Who are their common foes? Us?
Posted by: skye at February 15, 2010 09:29 AM (HwMXR)
Pay no attention to the man of color who held the seat between Ashcroft and Holder! Everyone knows Republicans never let people of color do anything!
Posted by: Racial Bean Counter at February 15, 2010 09:30 AM (mR7mk)
Yeah, like they ever factcheck'd themselves before going to print.
Posted by: HeatherRadish at February 15, 2010 09:31 AM (mR7mk)
Posted by: Matt Damon at February 15, 2010 09:32 AM (LdYLm)
Posted by: Charlie Gibson at February 15, 2010 09:33 AM (HwMXR)
one interesting fact - Holder accepted his fellow formerly Gitmo prisoner defending lawyers plan over the "bush" military lawyers plan re KSM - i want to see those military lawyers' plan and ex-gitmo prisoners lawyers plan, and whether they listed all the downsides of the civilian plan that have come to fruition.
After his family goes to bed, Mr. Holder often stays up past midnight at a round kitchen table in his Northwest Washington home, reading briefing material on death penalty cases or, last autumn, files related to his most important issue, the Sept. 11 trial venue. He studied two proposals: one by military lawyers who handled the case under the Bush administration, the other a new strategy from civilian prosecutors.
Posted by: Anti-Harkonnen Freedom Fighter at February 15, 2010 09:34 AM (5r0Tz)
Anyone here an echo in here? Or is my empty skull just resonating?
Posted by: Joe "The Sheriff" Biden at February 15, 2010 09:34 AM (LdYLm)
proposed installing a minder alongside Mr. Holder to prevent further gaffes — someone with better “political antennae,” as one administration official put it.
Ah, political officers. Every comrade needs one.
Posted by: Johnny at February 15, 2010 09:35 AM (T0NGe)
Posted by: nevergiveup at February 15, 2010 09:36 AM (ekqTc)
Posted by: Eric Holder at February 15, 2010 09:36 AM (LdYLm)
Seriously, http://tiny.cc/JmVT1 bring a baseball bat, guess what we'll bring?
Posted by: SoSickOfChicagoPoliticsAtNationalLevel at February 15, 2010 09:38 AM (HwMXR)
3000 x 300 an hour (probably much higher if you include partners) = $900,000.00 in free legal work for Al-Queda on ONE YEAR by Holder's law firm. That means it was certainly multiple millions of free legal representation provided by Holder's firm alone. Where is our media on this?
From McCarthy in Nov 2009 NRO:
Of all the infuriating aspects of the decision to transfer five 9/11 war criminals to civilian federal court, the one that grates most is the contention that the Obama administration is finally moving forward after “eight years of delay” — as Attorney General Eric Holder put it at his Friday press conference — during which the Bush administration managed to complete only three military-commission trials.
This is chutzpah writ large. The principal reason there were so few military trials is the tireless campaign conducted by leftist lawyers to derail military tribunals by challenging them in the courts. Many of those lawyers are now working for the Obama Justice Department. That includes Holder, whose firm, Covington & Burling, volunteered its services to at least 18 of AmericaÂ’s enemies in lawsuits they brought against the American people. (During 2007 alone, Covington contributed more than 3,000 hours of free, top-flight legal assistance to our enemy detainees.)
From Holder's Website in Jan 2009 - subsequently pulled but cached by MM site:The firm represents 17 Yemeni nationals and one Pakistani citizen held at Guantánamo Bay. The Supreme Court will soon review the D.C. Circuit’s ruling that ordered the dismissal of a number of habeas petitions filed by Guantánamo detainees; some of our clients are petitioners in the Supreme Court case. We expect to play a substantial role in the briefing. We also plan to petition the Supreme Court to hear our Pakistani client’s appeal from the D.C. Circuit’s order dismissing his case. Further, we are pursuing relief in the D.C. Circuit under the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005 for all of our clients. On a separate front, we filed amicus briefs and coordinated the amicus effort in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld in which the Supreme Court in the summer of 2006 invalidated President Bush’s military commissions and in which we have obtained favorable rulings that our clients have rights under the Fifth Amendment and the Geneva Conventions.
Posted by: Anti-Harkonnen Freedom Fighter at February 15, 2010 09:38 AM (5r0Tz)
Posted by: Joe "The Sheriff" Biden at February 15, 2010 09:40 AM (LdYLm)
Occasionally a Zampolit needs to slip on his tea.
Posted by: Marko Ramius at February 15, 2010 09:45 AM (DTffv)
Posted by: Purple Avenger at February 15, 2010 09:53 AM (gLeEi)
Posted by: Purple Avenger
What do you say to before the end of this year?
Posted by: arhooley at February 15, 2010 09:56 AM (C8MG0)
agreed - if the political attacks continue (i.e. the GOP continues to show a semblence of balls), holder gone before nov 2010
his entire left wing, al queda lawyer centric terrorism agenda has been repudiated, as the NYT admits at the very end of the article:
Asked whether Mr. Obama remains committed to a civilian trial, a White House official began to say yes, but halted for fear of later recanting.
Some administration officials spoke in despair about the apparent freefall of the effort to restore what they see as a rule-of-law approach to combating terrorism. They worry that the administration will be pushed into trying all foreign terrorism suspects in military commissions -- a far more sweeping approach than even President Bush advocated.
Asked if he would still want his job if that happened, Mr. Holder quickly said yes. “There are a whole variety of reasons I want to be attorney general,” he said, “a whole variety of things that I do as attorney general that go beyond national security.”
Posted by: AHFF Geoff at February 15, 2010 09:56 AM (5r0Tz)
Some graybeard or student of recent history please help me out. What happened to Carter's appointees after he skulked out of the White House? I want to dream about Holder, Obama, Gibbs, Jarrett et. al. living in ignominy and irrelevance after January 2013.
Posted by: arhooley at February 15, 2010 10:06 AM (C8MG0)
Posted by: Fresh Air at February 15, 2010 10:07 AM (pxNOm)
More lies from whitey.
And fuck off, abdulaziz. The NBP got here to ace's before the Nation of Islam. Bow tie fucker.
Posted by: the new black panthers at February 15, 2010 10:32 AM (2qU2d)
Yes, this seems to be Obama's perception of America's rejection of his ideas as well - they just aren't explaining it well enough.
Posted by: Robin at February 15, 2010 10:38 AM (6uXZa)
The political attacks over terrorism cases were “starting to constrain my ability to function as attorney general,” he said in an interview last week.
Ha...the only folks who are unambiguously "political" in all this are the administration's critics, according to the Times.
Posted by: CJ at February 15, 2010 10:39 AM (JQtNT)
Posted by: TheQuietMan at February 15, 2010 11:16 AM (1Jaio)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.2242 seconds, 191 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
Posted by: MunDane at February 15, 2010 09:00 AM (dlS06)