Some Questions for Eric Holder

|

The Legal Times reports that Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) is gearing up for next week's confirmation hearing for Attorney General-designate Eric Holder:

In a speech on the Senate floor Tuesday, Specter, R-Pa., said he plans to focus his inquiry on three areas: the pardon of fugitive commodities trader Marc Rich; the decision by Holder's then-boss Attorney General Janet Reno not to appoint a special prosecutor to look into Vice President Al Gore's 1996 fundraising activities; and the clemency granted to a group of Puerto Rican nationalists.

"All of these matters relate to judgment," Specter said. "They relate to whether Mr. Holder had the kind of resoluteness displayed by Attorney General Griffin Bell, by Attorney General Elliot Richardson, to say 'no' to their superiors."

Specter also said he plans to ask Holder his views on journalists' privilege, the Bush administration's surveillance policies and the Justice Department's evolving view of corporations' attorney-client privilege.

A few questions about the Second Amendment wouldn't be a bad idea either.

Whole thing here.

Advertisement

NEXT: 'Chiefs, Thieves, and Priests'

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.

  1. (Points finger at Congress) Ha Ha!

  2. A few questions about the Second Amendment wouldn’t be a bad idea either.

    Why? Nobody on the democrat side of the committee gives a rat’s patoot if the AG is openly and avowed hostile towards the second amendment. Specter sure as hell hasn’t got enough of a spine to bring it up. I may have to stick some pins into my Coburn voodoo doll to see if I can wake him up enough to raise the issue.

  3. woops wrong article

  4. Nelson, your 12:25 pm comment is appropriate in any thread.

  5. There seems no other place to put this, but I was wondering when Reason would comment on Obama’s apparantly willingness to cut Medicare and Social Security:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/08/business/economy/08deficit.html?hp

    “We expect that discussion around entitlements will be a part, a central part” of efforts to curb federal spending, Mr. Obama said at a news conference. By February, he said, “we will have more to say about how we’re going to approach entitlement spending.”

  6. “We expect that discussion around entitlements will be a part, a central part” of efforts to curb federal spending

    You’re misreading it. He’s going to have a “discussion”, which will be more along the lines of “Ok how can we cut federal spending enough to pay for my 20% increase in entitlement spending”

  7. Oh, pish, Hazel. Where does the Big O say he is going to cut entitlement spending?

    Aint. Gonna. Happen.

  8. I think that Specter is being too circumspect. Holder potentially had a role in a number of Reno’s more questionable moments, ranging from Waco through Elian Gonzales, and probably also Jamie Goerlich’s “Wall”. He was, after all, high in the chain of command for most, if not all, of these.

    In the end, I think that the Puerto Rican terrorists are going to be a non-issue. It appears to me that their clemency was a result of a trade much above Holder’s head (or pay grade). The nominee who should be asked about this is Hillary Clinton, along with the pardon of Marc Rich, etc.

  9. I agree with Bruce Hayden: someone in the Senate needs to ask Hillary about the Rich pardon and about Gorelick’s wall. Also about international donations to Bill’s library and whether she as Secretary of state will recuse herself from any deliberations regarding any country whose chief of state made a donation to that library. What a web of conflict of interest that will be! Oh, and then there’s Hsu, and, and, and. . .F

  10. While we’re here, Holder should be asked why he’s so gung-ho on the Charge of the Light Brigade Drug War, when 70%+ of the populace considers it a failure.

    Hope and Change!

    Cheers –
    T

  11. While we’re here, Holder should be asked why he’s so gung-ho on the Charge of the Light Brigade Drug War, when 70%+ of the populace considers it a failure.

    Seconded. A real simple one like “Are we winning the War on Drugs the Poor or should we be putting more young men in jail?”

  12. Oh come on. Specter is just saving up some Republican Points for the next election. Which he’ll likely lose anyway.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.