Darcy Burner sends a Direct Message to Eric Holder (video)

Darcy Burner, with video (00:26)-"Prosecute the bankers who illegally foreclosed on military households":

Darcy's response to the news that major banks illegally foreclosed on 5,000 homes of members of our military serving overseas.

Eric Holder: "Hope. Change. Reality."

Wil S. Hylton (GQ):

A few days after Rahm Emanuel resigned as White House chief of staff in October, I stopped by the Justice Department to see Eric Holder. I had been meeting with the attorney general periodically for about a year (since he was named one of GQ's Men of the Year last December), and I knew from our conversations, as well as from Holder's friends and family, that the last few months had been a bumpy ride. But I also knew that many of Holder's frustrations on the job could be linked to his thorny relationship with Emanuel. I wondered if things were looking up. MORE...

"The Problem with Holder's Partial Torture Prosecutor"

Ari Melber:

President Obama wanted this to be a quiet news week. "I have specific instructions from the President for the press corps -- he wants you to relax and have a good time," spokesman Bill Burton told reporters on Sunday. "Nobody is looking to make any news," he added, referencing the slow vacation schedule at Martha's Vineyard. Back in Washington, however, Attorney General Eric Holder was poised to appoint a prosecutor to investigate alleged torture during the Bush administration.

The Washington Post reports that Holder will appoint prosecutor John Durham to "examine nearly a dozen cases in which CIA interrogators and contractors may have violated anti-torture laws," a possibility that Newsweek first discussed in July. Accounts from both publications, however, predict a very narrow inquiry. The mandate, according to the new Post article, is only "to look at whether there is enough evidence to launch a full-scale criminal investigation of current and former CIA personnel who may have broken the law in their dealings with detainees."

In his official statement, Holder said he felt compelled to respond to a newly completed, internal Justice Department report on "so-called enhanced interrogation techniques" by ordering the review:

I have concluded that the information known to me warrants opening a preliminary review into whether federal laws were violated in connection with the interrogation of specific detainees at overseas locations. The Department regularly uses preliminary reviews to gather information to determine whether there is sufficient predication to warrant a full investigation of a matter. I want to emphasize that neither the opening of a preliminary review nor, if evidence warrants it, the commencement of a full investigation, means that charges will necessarily follow.

Several human rights groups immediately said Holder's approach falls fatally short, since it does not address the range of alleged counter-terror abuse and seems to foreclose accountability up the chain of command.

"An examination of a dozen cases will not bring the full scope of U.S. policies to light," said Virginia Sloan, president of the Constitution Project, in response to Monday's news. "A bipartisan commission is still needed to provide a comprehensive understanding of past deviations from the rule of law."

The Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR), which filed the first habeas cases for Guantanamo detainees, criticized the new inquiry's presumed targets. "Responsibility for the torture program cannot be laid at the feet of a few low-level operatives," read the Center's official statement on Monday. "Some agents in the field may have gone further than the limits so ghoulishly laid out by the lawyers who twisted the law to create legal cover for the program, but it is the lawyers and the officials who oversaw and approved the program who must be investigated." (Disclosure: I once worked at CCR.)

The ACLU, which successfully sued for the release of several torture-related documents, also offered a mixed assessment of the decision. "While this is a welcome first step, we are disappointed that Attorney General Holder still appears unwilling to conduct a full investigation and to prosecute any crimes that are uncovered," said executive director Anthony D. Romero. "A preliminary investigation absent a commitment to prosecute violations of the law is simply anemic. How much evidence of wrongdoing and violations of law is necessary before the attorney general commits to launching a full investigation?," he added.

MoveOn.org, which had joined efforts by netroots activists and progressive bloggers calling on Obama to appoint a special prosecutor with a wide latitude to investigate torture, said on Monday that while it "applaud[ed]" Holder's move, it was not enough. "The Department of Justice must not only investigate the CIA, but also those who ordered, approved and sanctioned the torture," said Justin Ruben, the group's Executive Director. "We need to make sure those all the way up the chain of command are held responsible for their actions."

It is hard to reach any concrete conclusions based on Holder's short statement. It is possible, for example, that a narrow "preliminary review" could still open the door to confronting the possibility of holding lawyers and policymakers accountable for knowingly constructing an illegal torture regime. However, if this inquiry is limited to a few contractors and junior personnel, it runs the risk of repeating the mistakes of Abu Ghraib, when the U.S. government blamed its policies on a few "bad apples" and further undermined the rule of law with selective prosecution.

Howie P.S.: Ben Smith says "Cheney seems almost to be daring prosecutors to go after him."

Charlie Rose Show: Obama, Holder, Cheney and CIA Torture and Spying (video)

Charlie Rose, video (26:28):

A conversation about the Bush Administration's Intelligence Programs with Scott Shane of "The New York Times" and Jane Mayer of "The New Yorker."

Barack Obama

"AP source: Holder considering torture probe"

AP (Nedra Pickler):

Contrary to White House wishes, Attorney General Eric Holder may push forward with a criminal investigation into the Bush administration's harsh interrogation practices used on suspected terrorists.

Holder is considering whether to appoint a prosecutor and will make a final decision within the next few weeks, a Justice Department official told The Associated Press. The official spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak on a pending matter.

A move to appoint a criminal prosecutor is certain to stir partisan bickering that could create a distraction to President Barack Obama's efforts to push ambitious health care and energy reform.

Obama has repeatedly expressed reluctance to having a probe into alleged Bush-era abuses and resisted an effort by congressional Democrats to establish a "truth commission," saying the nation should be "looking forward and not backwards."

Justice Department spokesman Matt Miller said Holder planned to "follow the facts and the law."

"We have made no decisions on investigations or prosecutions, including whether to appoint a prosecutor to conduct further inquiry," he told the AP on Saturday. "As the attorney general has made clear, it would be unfair to prosecute any official who acted in good faith based on legal guidance from the Justice Department."

Newsweek magazine, which first reported the development, said Holder was aware of the political implications of having a probe and preferred not to create unnecessary trouble for the White House. Still, the attorney general was troubled by what he learned in reports about the treatment of prisoners at the CIA's "black sites."

The probe would focus in part on whether CIA personnel tortured terrorism suspects after Sept. 11, 2001. Holder has said those who acted within the government's legal guidance will not be prosecuted, but has left open the possibility of pursuing those who went beyond the guidance and broke the law.

Holder has discussed with his staff the possibility of a prosecutor, saying he needed someone with "gravitas and grit," the magazine reported. In the end, the attorney general asked for a list of 10 candidates, five from within the Justice Department and five from outside.

"I hope that whatever decision I make would not have a negative impact on the president's agenda," Holder told Newsweek. "But that can't be a part of my decision."

Howie P.S.: Empty Wheel points the finger at Rhambo as the point person behind White House reluctance to support this investigation. Add Dick Durbin to the list of people who want a probe into CIA programs that were withheld from Congress.

Barack Obama

Andrew Sullivan: "In The Wake Of War Crimes"

Andrew Sullivan:

The blogosphere reacts. Glenn Greenwald:

Obama did the right thing by releasing these memos, providing all the information and impetus the citizenry should need to demand investigations and prosecutions. But it is up to citizens to demand that the rule of law be applied.

Digby:

I would have hoped the president would use some of his political capital to prove that the United States is a country of laws not men.However, I have to wonder if by releasing the memos they aren't at least obliquely asking for the public to "make" them do it. They could have kept them secret, after all. If there were significant public pressure as well as pressure from congress, they would have enough cover to launch an investigation with the assurance they aren't going to go the Bad Apple route.

Reynolds uses the release to attack Pelosi while Hugh Hewitt manages to blame Congress, and only Congress:

As the commentators show their feathers to each other, see if any of them cite a single vote by the Senate or the House to define waterboarding as torture throughout the years when the Congress was fully aware of the practice. The DOJ legal analysis was the best effort of front-line lawyers in the aftermath of a massive attack on the United States. Their Congressional critics of today who did not demand a defining vote on what constituted torture are the worst sort of hypocrites. They are the lawmakers, and chose --even when House and Senate were controlled by Democrats from January 2007 to the present-- to avoid passing a law bringing clarity to the very gray areas of the law of interrogation.

Spencer Ackerman:

Most of this story -- the torture techniques (except for the insects); the OLC blessings and reblessings -- has been thoroughly reported already. What the memos leave unclear is how much the CIA jumped into the torture game and how much the Bush administration pushed it. The memos are written to be responsive to the CIA lawyer -- the malefactor going to the priest to give his work absolution. They're written to guide the interrogators. But they leave unclear -- as does most of the narrative so far -- who's compelling Rizzo in the CIA counsel's office to keep pushing for more.

Kori Schake, a former national security adviser on defense issues to President George W. Bush:

What struck me most about the memos was that as late as August 2002, C.I.A. officials believed they were hearing “chatter” of the level and kind that proceeded the September 11th attacks. At that time, the country was still reeling from those attacks. The agency believed it had in custody enemies planning catastrophic terrorist attacks against our country and were urgently seeking information. The C.I.A. sought legal counsel and complied with the advice. Subjecting people to prosecution under those circumstances would be a dangerous politicization of difficult choices made by those serving our country.

Drum:

Reading the OLC torture memos is enough to make you ill. The techniques in question are plainly and instinctively abhorrent by any common sense definition, and the authors of the memos obviously know it. But somehow they have to conclude otherwise, so they write page after mind-numbing page of sterile legal language designed to justify authorizing it anyway. It's not torture if the victim survives it intact. It's not against the law if it takes place outside the United States. Waterboarding is OK as long as it isn't performed more than twice in a 24-hour period. Sleep deprivation of shackled prisoners for seven days at a time is permissible as long as the victim's diaper is changed frequently. And on and on and on.

Do they know this is torture? Of course they do.

Mike Dunford:

Reading these memos, it's very clear that there are quite a few CIA employees who are allegedly medical professionals. Those people need to find new professions. I would strongly suggest that you take a few minutes - particularly if you're a doctor or a psychologist - to suggest to your colleagues at the American Medical Association and the American Psychological Association that it might be good to take some formal steps along those lines.

Alex Koppelman:

As it stands now, the words "good faith" might be the most important factors not just for CIA officers involved in torture but for the coming decisions about memo authors such as Jay Bybee and John Yoo. Justice Department officials declined to comment to Salon, but it's likely the administration will make those decisions after an ongoing review by the DOJ's Office of Professional Responsibility into the attorney's actions is complete. According to a letter Sens. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., and Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., sent to the OPR head in February of this year, the review hinges on whether the legal advice people like Bybee and Yoo provided "was consistent with the professional standards that apply to Department of Justice Attorneys."

Larry Johnson:

Unfortunately, Barack “Mr. Constitutional Scholar” Obama left the door for future abuses? Why? No one who worked for the CIA will be punished for carrying out these actions.

Ironically the U.S. Department of Justice this week was allowing a former Nazi death camp guard to be deported back to Poland to face possible charges for abuses he committed while carrying out the orders of superiors. Hell, while we are giving everyone a pass for illegal, immoral activity carried out for what the leaders considered to be a good purpose, let’s let Demanjuk go. At least we would be consistent.

Rule of law my ass.

Andy McCarthy:

A terrible decision, pushed for aggressively by AG Eric Holder.

Jeff Emmanuel at Redstate:

Co-opting the word “torture” to include methods far less offensive than the majority of interrogation techniques I underwent in military SERE training isn’t a victory for moralists and humanitarians in any form; rather, it’s an Orwellian perversion of a word that once had meaning by those who have spent the last eight years on constant lookout for some greviance to hold against a president whose mere existence they resented.

The sad fact is, by co-opting the word “torture” and using it to describe activities going on at Gitmo, Bagram, and elsewhere, these faux-humanitarians have left us with no word to use to describe those activities which used to be classified as torture, like beheading captives on video, hanging people from meat hooks, drilling out eyeballs, using electric current to cause severe pain and physical damage, and cutting off limbs.

E.D. Kain responds to Jeff:

Damn co-opters! First you co-opt the word “marriage” and now the word “torture!” By the way, is “beheading captives on video” really considered torture? I thought that was murder…

It’s interesting that Jeff thinks the only forms of torture that ought to be called that are the sort that essentially just almost instantly kill the victims. Been watching too many Saw movies there Jeff?

Kevin Jon Heller:

...the OLC acknowledges that it cannot be confident that the enhanced interrogation techniques are legal, but expresses its opinion that the judiciary is unlikely to address the issue. Is that the kind of advice that justifies not prosecuting CIA interrogators for engaging in conduct that even one of the highest-ranking members of the OLD admits is “patently illegal”?

I think the question answers itself.

Anonymous Liberal:

...the entire Bybee memo (which was likely written by John Yoo) is shockingly conclusory in its reasoning. One obvious torture technique after the next is quickly dismissed as not generating a sufficient level of suffering to constitute torture. But there's no attempt to back these conclusions up or explain away possible objections to them. No attempt to address the wide array of contrary precedent. And there's virtually no evidence that the author of the memo even spent much time imagining what it might actually be like to be subjected to some of these techniques.

As I've said many times here before, the most culpable parties in this whole disgusting affair are the lawyers. Their job was to stand up for the rule of law, to tell the Dick Cheneys of the world that what they wanted to do was clearly illegal. They didn't do that. Indeed, they went to elaborate lengths to give their legal blessing to conduct they had to have known was illegal.

John Schwenkler:

Let the record show that I was secretly rooting, at least some of the time, that Obama would keep the memos secret or at least heavily redact them, so that then I’d be able to call him a bastard. And let it also show that I’m really much happier to have the truth out there than to be able to score some cheap points, and that on the whole I’m pretty damn impressed. This I can believe in, Mr. President.

Barack Obama

Saturday Obama Roundup (excerpts with video)

Despite Gitmo Closure and Torture Ban, Obama Admin Converges with Several Bush Policies in So-Called “War on Terror” (Democracy Now with video):

After a month in office, the Obama administration has surprised many of its supporters by embracing or appearing receptive to key parts of the Bush administration’s counterterrorism strategy, from indefinite detention, to kidnapping and rendition, to invoking “state secrets” privileges. Salon.com blogger Glenn Greenwald joins The New Yorker’s Jane Mayer to discuss. [includes rush transcript]

Will Obama back 'truth commission' to probe Bush practices? (McClatchy):

President Barack Obama and Congress are locked in a stare-down over how much to expose or punish Bush administration employees for any abuses they committed in waging the war on terrorism.

Obama, after critical rhetoric on the campaign trail, has sent mixed signals about how far he's willing to go. His concerns are grounded in pragmatism and politics.

Politically, pursuing Bush administration abuses could bog Obama down in partisan warfare with Republicans over the past, endangering his agenda for the future. Pragmatically, intelligence agency veterans have warned the new administration that investigations into the Bush administration's practices of interrogation, rendition and surveillance could damage U.S. intelligence efforts, lower morale in the intelligence community and expose the nation to greater danger.

At the same time, some Democrats in Congress are calling for a "truth commission" to expose such practices, one that might offer immunity in exchange for testimony. Others want criminal prosecutions.

Eric Holder The Nation’s First Black Attorney-General, A Profile (NY Carib News):

As Eric Holder, the nation’s first Black Attorney-General, arrived at the U.S. Justice Department to be sworn in by Vice President Joseph Biden, the welcoming crowd inside the building and the smiling faces spelt relief from eight years of what many of the professionals and others saw was the tragic politicization of the world’s largest law firm, as the Department is often called. “It certainly gave us a warm feeling,” Miriam Holder, the mother of the Attorney-General, said afterwards. “Many of those present remembered what a pleasure it was to work with him when he was there in the 1990s and recalled the positive atmosphere that was ever-present back then.

Obama’s First Month In Office, By The Numbers (CBS News):

To many White House staffers it seems closer to a year, but it was just a month ago today that Barack Obama began his presidency.

He’s still new on the job and getting a feel for its perks and peculiarities. He now knows he’s not supposed to stop and shake the hand of the U.S. Marine corporal saluting him at the steps of Marine One. But Mr. Obama also knows that as Commander-in-Chief, no one can tell him not to do it.

There are many ways to assess his first month in office. And here are some numbers – in no particular order - from the CBS News database.

Michael Eric Dyson and Pat Buchanan discuss Eric Holders' comment that in racial matters "we are a nation of cowards" ("Hardball"-MSNBC, video-09:08).

Barack Obama

BREAKING: "Holder assures GOP on interrogation prosecution" (Updated)

UPDATE: Aide--"Holder Has Made No Decisions On Prosecuting Bush Officials."

Washington Times:

President Obama's choice to run the Justice Department has assured senior Republican senators that he won't prosecute intelligence officers or political appointees who were involved in the Bush administration's policy of "enhanced interrogations."

Sen. Christopher "Kit" Bond, a Republican from Missouri and the vice chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, said in an interview with The Washington Times that he will support Eric H. Holder Jr.'s nomination for Attorney General because Mr. Holder assured him privately that Mr. Obama's Justice Department will not prosecute former Bush officials involved in the interrogations program.

Mr. Holder's promise apparently was key to moving his nomination forward. Today, the Senate Judiciary Committee voted 17-2 to favorably recommend Holder for the post. He is likely to be confirmed by the Senate soon.

Sen. Bond also said that Mr. Holder told him in a private meeting Tuesday that he will not strip the telecommunications companies that cooperated with the National Security Agency after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks of retroactive legal immunity from civil lawsuits--removing another potential sticking point among GOP senators.

In the interview Wednesday, Mr. Bond said, "I made it clear that trying to prosecute political leaders would generate a political firestorm the Obama administration doesn't need."

He added, "I was concerned about previous statements he made and others had made. He gave me assurances that he would not take those steps that would cause major disruptions in our intelligence system or cause political warfare. We don't need that kind of political warfare. He gave me assurances he is looking forward."

Mr. Bond also said, "I believe he will look forward to keep the nation safe and not look backwards to prosecute intelligence operators who were fighting terror and kept our country safe since 9-11."

Mr. Holder made a similar point to senators last week in a little-noticed written response to questions from Republican senators Jon Kyl of Arizona and John Cornyn of Texas. Mr. Holder indicated that he would not prosecute any intelligence officers who participated in the interrogation program and who had followed Justice Department guidance.

Prosecutorial and investigative judgments must depend on the facts and no one is above the law, Mr. Holder wrote. But where it is clear that a government agent has acted in 'reasonable and good faith reliance on Justice Department legal opinions' authoritatively permitting his conduct, I would find it difficult to justify commencing a full blown criminal investigation, let alone a prosecution.

The legislative director for the American Civil Liberties Union, Caroline Fredrickson, said Wednesday that she was alarmed by Mr. Bond's statements and was hoping, Kit Bond is not stating this in the way that Mr. Holder stated it to him. She added, We are hoping there will be a clarification. It would be extraordinary if our top prosecutor, before taking office, would have predetermined whether or not to pursue certain cases because of political pressure.

Mr. Holder testified for nearly eight hours during a confirmation hearing last week, but Republicans said they were still unsure about whether Mr. Holder would seek to prosecute soldiers and intelligence officials who were involved in so-called "enhanced interrogation techniques" that some consider torture.

Mr. Holder received an important boost Tuesday when Sen. Arlen Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican and ranking member of the judiciary committee, announced he would support the nomination.

Mr. Specter called "satisfactory" Mr. Holder's statements that interrogation techniques authorized by legal opinions would provide a strong cover from prosecutions. According to Mr. Specter, Mr. Holder could not make any more explicit statements without knowing the facts of specific cases.

Mr. Holder's quest to become the first African-American attorney general took a significant step Wednesday with the Judiciary Committee voting to send his nomination to the full senate.

The committee recommended President Obama's nomination for the nation's top law enforcement officer by a 17-2 vote. Only Republican senators John Cornyn of Texas and Tom Coburn of Oklahoma opposed the nomination; the committee's six other Republicans supported Mr. Holder.

Mr. Holder, 58, is all but certain to be confirmed by the Democrat-controlled senate and would become the first black person to lead the Justice Department. A vote on his nomination has not been scheduled, though a spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat, said they are working to line up a vote for Thursday.

Howie P.S.: I remain hopeful that this is not the "final answer" on this issue. I see no reference to other instances of possible illegality, not involving "interrogation," by officials of the Bush administration.

Barack Obama

"Republican Senators resort to extortion on Holder nomination"

Ken Camp (NPI Advocate):

In an effort to derail the nomination of Attorney General-designate Eric Holder, it seems Senate Republicans are now resorting to extortion. They'll confirm Holder if he promises not to prosecute any Bush Administration officials for any involvement in acts of torture, according to Senator Sheldon Whitehouse(D-RI).

Republicans on the Judiciary Committee have asked Eric Holder to make a commitment, before he is even confirmed, that he will not prosecute any Bush Administration officials for their involvement in acts of torture during the last administration.

Anyone familiar with the criminal justice system - especially those with experience as prosecutors or judges - should know that a prosecutor should make no determination about who to prosecute before he or she has all the facts, and particularly not in response to legislative pressure.

Senator Whitehouse makes a good point about the separation of powers. It isn't for the legislative branch to hold up executive branch appointments, in order to extract promises from those appointees, especially with regard to potential future prosecutions. But it's much more than that.

I understand that President Obama wants to get beyond the partisan divisions and rancor and look to America's future. That's all good and well, but the United States was founded on the rule of law. You often hear that "we are a nation of laws, not men." If the rule of law were not important, what would separate our nation from countries like Myanmar (Burma) or North Korea?

If Eric Holder, or any other Obama appointee subject to confirmation by the Senate, were to agree not to investigate alleged wrongdoing Bush Administration officials and forward alleged crimes for potential prosecution, it would be an egregious abdication of responsibility, not to mention an act of questionable legal ethics. It would say to future generations that at a time when the Bush Administration felt it was above the law, Democrats did nothing but stand idly by and let it happen.

And then we'd be no different than them.

Howie P.S.: I'm sure the GOP senators would say this isn't "extortion," just the usual negotiation that goes in politics--just like Blago! Jeepers, maybe they are afraid there is some real evidence of criminal wrongdoing!

Barack Obama

About Holder: "It's not the crime, it's the cover-up."

MSNBC, video (06:02).

Howie P.S: Bill Clinton's shadow falls on Holder. Tweety leads the pundit chat.

Barack Obama

"Holder testifies for Senate confirmation" (live video)

MSNBC: live video here.

Howie P.S.: "Holder facing Senate, admits past errors," indicates the generally favorable climate this nomination enjoys in the mainstream, in spite of Spector's remarks or the predictable noise from Rove. Another nominee, Tim Geithner, may also be on his way to approval, according to this NY Times story: "Geithner’s Skill May Trump Tax Issue."

Barack Obama

Sen. Spector: "Obama chose not to seek my advice on Holder" (video)

MSNBC, video (04:14).

Howie P.S.: Listening to Spector bluster about "independence" is laughable. "Morning" Joe and Pat Buchanan pile on, helpfully.

Barack Obama

"Trickle-up culpability: 'Tortured Response'--what did he know and when did he know it?" (video)

MSNBC, video (08:49). Keith Olbermann talks with Professor Jonathan Turley, constitutional law scholar (George Washington University).

Barack Obama

"Eric Holder, American Constitution Society June 13, 2008 Speech" (video)

Docudharma.com, video (Pt. 1 of 3).

Howie P.S.: Parts 2 and 3, as well more commentary here at Docudharma.com. H/t to Sharon Lynch.

Barack Obama

GOP Gunning for Eric Holder

"Senate panel wants testimony about Eric Holder" (LA Times):

Holder, a highly regarded former prosecutor who served as Clinton's deputy attorney general, is likely to be confirmed easily in the Democratic-controlled Senate.

But some Republicans, including the ranking GOP member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, are intent on grilling the former deputy attorney general on his role in three Clinton-era controversies, including the clemency granted to 16 members of the FALN (the Spanish acronym for Armed Forces of National Liberation) or the splinter group Los Macheteros. They had been convicted in Chicago and Hartford, Conn., variously of bank robbery, possession of explosives and participating in a seditious conspiracy. Most had already served lengthy prison terms.
(snip)
In a conference call with reporters Friday evening, Specter reiterated his interest in questioning Holder about the clemency case, the pardon of fugitive financier Marc Rich, and Holder's decision not to appoint a special counsel to investigate allegations of fundraising irregularities involving former Vice President Al Gore.

"Nominee Holder to Face Critics on Hill" (Wall Street Journal):

Republicans say they will challenge Eric Holder over Clinton-era pardons, national-security law and his work as a corporate lawyer, but those questions at his confirmation hearings this week aren't likely to derail President-elect Barack Obama's nominee for attorney general.
(snip)
The controversy over Mr. Gonzales and criticism that he too readily acceded to the White House are fueling some of the scrutiny of Mr. Holder's record. Most controversial is Mr. Holder's failure to say "no" to the Clinton White House in the pardons for Mr. Rich and for 16 members of a Puerto Rican nationalist group that was labeled a terrorist organization by U.S. officials.

Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter, the top Republican on the Senate Judiciary panel, said he is awaiting Mr. Holder's responses at the hearing before deciding on his vote on confirmation. In a Senate speech last week on Mr. Holder's nomination, he said, "Sometimes it is more important for the attorney general to have the stature and courage to say 'no' than to say 'yes.' "
(snip)
Other issues likely to be raised at the hearings include Mr. Holder's work as a lawyer since leaving the Justice Department. In response to the Judiciary panel's questionnaire, Mr. Holder lists several major corporate clients he has represented in private practice including UBS Financial Services Inc. in an alleged discrimination case, and Merck & Co. in a matter related to the company's drug pricing and sales practices and Chiquita Brands International Inc. in a plea deal arising from a ubsidiary's payments to Colombian paramilitary groups.

Howie P.S.: It is so heartening to see members of the minority party becoming interested in developing character traits like "stature and courage." Surely this will carry over to an interest in exploring other instances where these admirable qualities were noticeably absent, particularly in the Bush Justice Department. Meanwhile, and perhaps not uncoincidentally, Bob Fertik (Democrats.com) has organized: "Sign a Petition to Attorney General-Designate, Eric Holder: "Special Prosecutor for Bush War Crimes." Due to the extremely large number of signatures that have already been forwarded to Holder, he has already responded:

"Enough folks. I hear you."

And the organizers have now responded to this message from Holder:

"So out of respect we stopped forwarding each signature individually and will instead give him the list in full before the Senate confirmation hearings."

Barack Obama