Liberal Law Professor Says Eric Holder Should Be Fired

Writing in USA Today, liberal George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley argues that Eric Holder has committed misdeeds “that should be fatal for any attorney general” and deserves to be fired:

Recently, Attorney General Eric Holder appeared before the House Judiciary Committee to answer questions about the administration's sweeping surveillance of journalists with the Associated Press. In the greatest attack on the free press in decades, the Justice Department seized phone records for reporters and editors in at least three AP offices as well as its office in the House of Representatives. Holder, however, proceeded to claim absolute and blissful ignorance of the investigation, even failing to recall when or how he recused himself.

Yet, this was only the latest attack on the news media under Holder's leadership. Despite his record, he expressed surprise at the hearing that the head of the Republican National Committee had called for his resignation. After all, Holder pointed out, he did nothing. That is, of course, precisely the point. Unlike the head of the RNC, I am neither a Republican nor conservative, and I believe Holder should be fired.

Read the rest here.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Sevo||

    I certainly hope Mr. Turley has competent legal assistance regarding his tax liabilities.

  • John||

    If anyone remembers, Turley went after Clinton in the 1990s. So I think that got him kicked out of the liberal club.

  • entropy_factor||

    "I know nothing!" /obamatard

  • Bee Tagger||

    Remove all obstacles to loving Obama fully again!

  • Sevo||

    Serve the people!

  • WTF||

    Serve the people!

    It's a COOKBOOK!

  • Bee Tagger||

    Apologies to Turley if he's fair-minded. My general point is that at some point it's going to be the more palatable choice to purge the elements of the Obama administration that make it difficult to embrace it fully.

  • John||

    You would think that. But I honestly don't see Obama doing it.

  • T||

    Obama won't resign no matter how nicely we ask, Bee.

  • Spartacus||

    Well, there is this:

    "Rather, Holder has supervised a comprehensive erosion of privacy rights, press freedom and due process. This ignoble legacy was made possible by Democrats who would look at their shoes whenever the Obama administration was accused of constitutional abuses. "

  • Barry Zuckerkorn||

    Remove all obstacles to loving Obama fully again a Hillary White House!

  • Dweebston||

    I've got the worst f***ing attorneys...

  • John||

    And Obama will never fire Holder. Holder is his alter ego. Firing Holder would be like firing himself. It is unthinkable. Ultimately, Holder knows he will never hold another big job in government. He also is wealthy and set for life. No matter what happens Holder will leave in 2016 to some high paying do nothing thanks for supporting the cause job. So neither Holder nor Obama care how much flack Holder takes. That is Holder's job. Holder went after the right people and beat down the opposition media in 2012 and made sure any one with any dirt was afraid to say anything until after the election. That is what he was paid to do. I am sure he wakes up every day knowing he is a great and loyal American and laughs his ass off at the thought that anyone out there might want him fired.

  • Barry Zuckerkorn||

    If I had a son, he look like Holder. Only a lot younger. And less brown.

  • Zeb||

    But definitely the same mustache.

  • wareagle||

    in other words, Holder doesn't give a shit and doesn't have to give a shit, and neither does Obama.

    If Holder is still on the job a few months from now, Turley's follow-up will be how everyone needs to move on, the matter is settled, all is well, and anyone persisting in chasing the AG is a partisan hack.

  • John||

    I was very surprised Obama didn't replace Holder after the election. It was obvious he was going to be a liability and a distraction. And of course Obama knew all of this was coming. It makes no sense why he didn't send Holder home to spend more time with his family. They could have then blamed all of these scandals on someone who wasn't in the administration anymore.

  • T||

    Holder has the pictures of Obama doing things, John. I know not what they are...

    Seriously, Obama can't throw Holder under the bus because Holder can fucking bury Obama if he wants to. Holder and Jarrett are untouchable by Barry, and all three of them know it.

  • Pro Libertate||

    It's either that or the hubris that they're untouchable.

  • itsnotmeitsyou||

    I'm thinking it started off as hubris and once it started collapsing and they realized they might be in some shit, they started making sure they had something on anyone who might throw them under the bus.

  • Pro Libertate||

    It's the cover-up that gets them in trouble. Every time.

  • ant1sthenes||

    They still have to fix the midterms. After that, maybe it will be time for Holder to go.

  • Tonio||

    John| 5.29.13 @ 12:21PM |#

    And Obama will never fire Holder. Holder is his alter ego. Firing Holder would be like firing himself. It is unthinkable.

    So, John goes from "Obama will never fire Holder" at 12:21 to surprise at 12:40 that Holder had not already been replaced.

  • John||

    Perhaps I am surprised that Obama is so loyal to Holder and that causes me to conclude that he will never fire him?

    Do we need to hand out programs so you can follow the arguments Tonio?

  • John||

    Still waiting for all of those scientific arguments for abortion you keep claiming exist. Let me guess, you just don't want to give them. But if you did, they would be devastating.

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    You obviously don't read any Jonathan Turley.

  • Raven Nation||

    Agreed. I'm not sure I always agree with him but he seems to be pretty consistent in attacking abuses of power by politicians (which might be a comment on my own lack of consistency).

  • PapayaSF||

    Oh, I think it's very possible that Holder will fall on his sword to protect Obama. This is pretty deep doo-doo, and someone high up has to go. Holder will get some sweet consulting gig at a Soros-funded foundation, or a part-time professorship somewhere.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Obama has the worst fucking attorneys general.

  • ||

    Sweet. Correctly pluralized FTW (and funnier that way too)!

  • Virginian||

    Damn it Fist, I was going to do it wrong on purpose to troll her. Now you went and gave her a grammar swoon.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    (It was a typo. Shhhhh.)

  • Rrabbit||

    Put Reno, Ashcroft, Gonzales, and Holder in a bag and hit the bag with a club. Can't go wrong there.

  • tarran||

    Will the bag be preloaded with a few poisonous asps and feral cats?

  • Spartacus||

    Certainly not! Feral cats deserve better.

  • Dweebston||

    I should have scrolled down before posting.

  • Marc F Cheney||

    *attornies' in general

    FTFY. HTH. LOL. TANSTAAFL.

  • ||

    Nobody in management in this administration does or knows anything - it's always some GS 11 wage slave 9-to-5ers going rogue. I don't think my eyes can roll far enough back in my head.

  • Hugh Akston||

    Holder hadn't even heard of the Associated Press until he read about them in the newspaper.

  • Bee Tagger||

    He should really take a closer look at whoever would write such things about him.

  • RBS||

    He only reads Reuters

  • RBS||

    Of course, this isn't any better either.

  • ||

    It's not better, but it's also not true. A lifelong low- to -mid-level bureaucrat is not going to do anything that isn't in their job description or ordered directly by management. That's why high-level management's denial of everything is so ridiculous.

  • Hyperion||

    That's why Hitlary is a shoo-in for POTUS 2016. Cause ain't no one who knows nothin more than the Hildebeast.

  • Zeb||

    Aside from the fact that half of the country hates her, including not a few democrats, I just don't see a woman of her age getting elected president. I'll be really surprised if she even gets the Dem nomination.

  • wareagle||

    I am neither a Republican nor conservative

    is this supposed to make him seem a like a reasonable guy?

  • Barry Zuckerkorn||

    I think it's supposed to make liberal readers stop going LALALALALA-I CAN'T HEAR YOU until they get through the first couple of paragraphs.

  • D.D. Driver||

    KOCH BROTHERS!!!

  • sarcasmic||

    It's supposed to deflect the kneejerk "You criticized one of us! That means you're nothing but a conservative ideologue! You're a Republican shill! What you say is wrong because of who you are!"

    Not that it ever works. If you're not on our TEAM, you're the worst of the other TEAM.

  • Pro Libertate||

    Of course he should be fired. And of course a special prosecutor should be appointed. These aren't rationally debatable. Not for we mere citizens, anyway.

  • CE||

    Fired? I think he meant "indicted".

  • Pro Libertate||

    That, too.

  • John||

    He flat out lied to Congress about investigating Fox. He said in so many words he had never heard of DOJ subpenaing journalists emails and would not support them doing so even though he had signed off on the Fox News subpena well before that. That is perjury.

  • Pro Libertate||

    What, you expect him to read what he signs? He's a busy man. Besides, is a Faux News guy really a journalist or, technically, human at all?

  • John||

    And coming this summer

    Sharkanado!!

    http://www.vulture.com/2013/05.....to=5x00005

  • Pro Libertate||

    That's got monster hit written all over it.

  • Fatty Bolger||

    Catchphrase: "Enough is enough! I have had it with these motherfucking sharks in this motherfucking tornado!"

  • Hyperion||

    You jest now, but if we don't stop this global... err... climate change, sharknados will be a reality! Let's see you laughing when those flaming sharks land in your back yard!

  • Pro Libertate||

    I'm trying to figure out how this is supposed to work. Are the sharks supposed to be living in the tornado? Really, there's no way they'd survive the g-forces. And, even if they could, a shark flopping about on land isn't really much of a threat.

    Perhaps the shark teeth get flung out from the tornado at high speed, presenting a danger to people in range?

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    Just believe, ProL, everything is much easier that way.

  • itsnotmeitsyou||

    I think that is a SyFy pictures original. Suspension of disbelief is a prerequisite to watching one of their movies.

  • Pro Libertate||

    I can't even get up to the suspension part. Perhaps it's metaphysical, with the tornado possessed by the soul of a shark?

  • itsnotmeitsyou||

    Hmm, interesting thought. A shark is killed in a storm at sea and his soul inhabits the wind, whipping it up into a tornado on land and wreaking his vengeance on mankind for it's unrelenting War on Gaia.

    Sounds about a plausible as AGW, so it could work.

  • Cliché Bandit||

    Ice spiders was cool.

  • ||

    I saw Piranhaconda on my TV guide the other night and almost recorded it...just 'cause.

  • Mr. Soul||

    Dr. Evil: You know, I have one simple request. And that is to have sharks with frickin' laser beams attached to their heads! Now evidently my cycloptic colleague informs me that that cannot be done. Ah, would you remind me what I pay you people for, honestly? Throw me a bone here! What do we have?

    Number Two: Sea Bass.

    Dr. Evil: [pause] Right.

    Number Two: They're mutated sea bass.

    Dr. Evil: Are they ill tempered?

    Number Two: Absolutely.

    Dr. Evil: Oh well, that's a start.

  • Ayn Random Variation||

    Yeah, he gets millions of cables, I mean, docs, to sign, every day

  • sarcasmic||

    It's only perjury when a peasant does it.

  • Hyperion||

    ^THIS^

    As for our betters, they just misspoke. So it's all good, nothing to see, move along. Their intentions were good.

  • Pro Libertate||

    No. You misheard.

  • Rrabbit||

    We're sorry, but national security. Move on, peasant, nothing to see here.

  • tarran||

    John,

    What mechanism does Congress have to punish a sitting AG who perjures himself?

  • Pro Libertate||

    "The President, Vice President, and all civil Officers of the United States shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other High Crimes and Misdemeanors."

  • db||

    Impeachment should be far more common than it is. Bush, Obama, possibly even Reagan, should have been impeached.

    Sadly, the three branches of government have become, not adversarial factions guarding against abuses of power, but fig leaves for each other, complicit in the destruction of the principles of their own founding.

  • Pro Libertate||

    Sure would help if we'd bounced the last three presidents from office. They all deserved it.

  • WTF||

    So, by some stretch the republican House impeaches, and then the democrat Senate will not convict.

  • Pro Libertate||

    Depends on how much blood there is in the water. Most politicians will turn on their young if there are possible electoral consequences to not doing so.

    I think an Obama impeachment would likely take overwhelming evidence to get the Democrats to vote for a conviction, but a Holder or other lesser official impeachment might not, especially if it were considered an alternative to going after the president.

  • WTF||

    Obama could be filmed raping puppies on the steps of the Capitol and Democrats would not vote to convict him. I doubt they would vote to convict any of their top men.

  • lap83||

    The Koch brothers were talking about adopting those puppies, it was a mercy raping.

  • itsnotmeitsyou||

    I was going to search to see if beastiality is a crime in DC, but I'm probably on so many watch lists already that I don't want to risk being branded a pervert too.

  • db||

    Let them play the TEAM game. Conviction or no, an impeachment would serve at a minimum two purposes: to establish without a doubt in the mind of the public the intractable problems of a de facto two party system that operates as two wings of the same party; and to male public lots and lots of juicy scandalous facts about those in power.

    Hell, even the politicians who make it through should love it as it will remove competition and sate the public's appetite for uncovering wrongdoing, providing them cover for a while.

  • sarcasmic||

    that operates as two wings of the same party

    Yeah. Well who else you gonna vote for?

  • db||

    Well, that's a question I can answer for myself, but I would hope that shining sunlight on the murky world of TEAM politics might eventually wake folks up to alternative parties. Or even to members of TEAM parties that understand the problems and pledge to alter the system. A forlorn but entirely lost hope.

  • db||

    Should have been "not entirely lost hope" but maybe I unconsciously wrote correctly.

  • John||

    What pro said. And it is a felony. So once he is no longer AG, the next AG can prosecute him or be impeached himself.

  • Pro Libertate||

    This weird reluctance to impeach officials or, even more so, to prosecute them, is an absurdity if we want our government to be limited at all or to not be entirely corrupt. We should be bouncing them every few months.

  • John||

    We only ever talk about impeaching the President. And that is totally the wrong approach. The real action is in the various heads of the executive branch. Impeaching a President is basically invalidating an election. Congress is rightfully loath to do that. The people voted for the guy right or wrong. But no one voted for Holder or some other clown on the cabinet. Appointees ought to be routinely impeached if for no other reason than to make sure the executive branch doesn't forget who really is in charge.

  • Pro Libertate||

    I agree completely. In fact, our system would be a whole lot healthier if the branches defended their prerogatives with more zeal.

  • sarcasmic||

    This weird reluctance to impeach officials or, even more so, to prosecute them, is an absurdity if we want our government to be limited at all or to not be entirely corrupt.

    It's the same idea as bad cops. They all do the same shit. Sometimes they get caught by the public. When that happens they cover for each other because next time it might be them who gets caught.

  • Pro Libertate||

    Right. Which is why we need a force outside of government that exists for the sole purpose of removing government officials. The Censor!

  • db||

    Impeachment by Congress would be more likely to result in conviction if the Senate were selected in the original manner.

  • sarcasmic||

    Impeachment by Congress would be more likely to result in conviction if the Senate were selected in the original manner.

    The passage of the 17A killed the republic and replaced it with a democracy.
    How many of these mandates on state governments, funded or unfunded, would get through a Senate if its members represented those same state governments, as opposed to being popularly elected?
    (rhetorical question)

  • Neoliberal Kochtopus||

    I hate to be technical, but didn't he say he would never support prosecuting journalists? He never said anything about investigating them. /pedant

  • Pro Libertate||

    I dunno, they busted Martha Stewart for less.

  • John||

    That could work except that the application for the subpena called the reporter a co-conspirator. So Holder was telling the court he considered the journalist to be a criminal and presumably planned to prosecute him.

  • Pro Libertate||

    Not in his heart, John. Not in his heart. Which is filled with remorse.

  • db||

    Save it for your horse
    You got to save it for your horse
    You will be filled with great remorse
    If you give your momma love you should be saving for your horse

  • Fatty Bolger||

    Yep. Either he lied to Congress, or he lied to get a warrant.

  • Pro Libertate||

    Both, incidentally, absolutely requiring removal, one way or the other.

  • Rasilio||

    Holder is just next in a long line of AG's who should be/have been fired.

    I mean look at the bozo's we've had for the last few decades, Reno, Ashcroft, Gonzales, Mukasky, Holder every single one of them should have been fired over any number of offenses and at least 2 of them should haven been indicted.

    Realistically Thornburgh and Barr are the only AG's in my adult life who may not have deserved to have been fired/indicted and with them I don't know how much it was that they were scandal free vs just being less in the spotlight

  • db||

    These guys have made whole careers out of justifying immoral behavior through legal sophistry. Ask yourself whether you'd rather live next to one of them, or to a registered sex offender.

  • DEATFBIRSECIA||

    Sex offender, any day.

  • Anonymous Coward||

    Ignoble legacy

    Yet, at this month's hearing, the attorney general had had his fill. Accordingly, Holder adopted an embarrassing mantra of "I have no knowledge" and "I had no involvement" throughout the questioning. When he was not reciting the equivalent to his name, rank and serial number, he was implicating his aide, Deputy Attorney General James Cole. Cole, it appears, is Holder's sin eater. Holder was so busy denying responsibility for today's scandals, he began denying known facts about older scandals, such as the "Fast and Furious" gun operation.


    Most transparent administration EVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • Pro Libertate||

    This is crazy. If they're all this incompetent, they need to resign. If they're all this corrupt, they need to be forcibly removed from office.

  • db||

    You would think they would want to go with "incompetent," as they have, as there seems to be no established standard for incompetence in public office worthy of removal from high office.

  • ||

    Reading Team Blue politicos on the Daily Kos and HuffPo, the biggest reason Holder can't go is because the Senate GOP would give the next person hell during the confirmation hearing and would basically drag everything that's gone wrong during Holder's tenure out into the spotlight at once.

  • Pro Libertate||

    Yes. That's their job.

  • Dweebston||

    And so they're advocating for his removal? Because corruption should be brought to light, even against their party's desires?

  • Ayn Random Variation||

    I came across some libs yesterday who are turning on Obama.
    I'm in Obamaland, NJ.
    Turns out out Shoprite is switching everyone to part time hours in order to avoid obamacare. I felt bad listening to the complaints of these obama lovers last night, but the evil part inside of me was laughing my ass off.

  • ||

    What you should do is calmly and politely explain to them why their hours are being cut and if they see the light try to help them along, if they get all pissy and defense and start to spout DNC talking points you can freely enjoy the schadenfreude.

  • sarcasmic||

    Their hours are being cut because their greedy corporate employer cares more about profits than giving them the health care to which they are entitled.

    Profits before people.

    This is a failure of the free market that can only be solved with single payer.

  • PapayaSF||

    I ask my liberal friends: If Single Farmer didn't end hunger in the USSR and Communist China and North Korea, why expect Single Payer to fix the health care system?

  • db||

    How is this not going to end badly? I am concerned that these folks, who in general are just trying to make an honest living, are going to get roped into some sort of workers's party or OWS nonsense when they're told that it's all their evil capitalist bosses' faults for trying greedily to flout the wondrous good intentions of Obamacare. How could this not have been predicted?

  • Ayn Random Variation||

    Remember: feature, not a bug.

    Anyone who was paying attention saw this coming.

    So now Obama will demonize these companies, along with the doctors opting out by going cash only, and lower or eliminate the hours requirement and criminalize doctors not accepting insurance.

  • ||

    While I agree that Holder should be fired, I don't like the arguments that say "Look, even this flaming liberal thinks some other flaming liberal sucks, therefore, we should all think he sucks!" It doesn't really add any heft to an argument regardless of which way it cuts ideologically, but it remains one of the most potent rhetorical weapons.

  • itsnotmeitsyou||

    It doesn't really add any heft to an argument regardless of which way it cuts ideologically, but it remains one of the most potent rhetorical weapons.

    It goes to show that these cries for justice aren't just some rightwing conspiracy theory that they were initially billed as by MSM. So many partisans will simply ignore anything from the wrong TEAM as a silly conspiracy theory that serves only to rattle a sabre. When people from the same TEAM start looking at the accusations and saying "ya know what, this really does stink", it goes a long way to changing hearts and minds.

    There will always be people who will defend TEAM to their deaths, but the more middle ground people will see things like this and start thinking a bit deeper into these misdeeds.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Progressive Puritans: From e-cigs to sex classifieds, the once transgressive left wants to criminalize fun.
  • Port Authoritarians: Chris Christie’s Bridgegate scandal
  • The Menace of Secret Government: Obama’s proposed intelligence reforms don’t safeguard civil liberties

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement