Eric Holder

3 Reasons Why Eric Holder Is the Perfect Presidential Candidate for the Democratic Party (Though Not America)

He's an intolerant deep-state hypocrite, for starters.

|

In the wake of Tuesday night's hope-crushing defeat of House candidate Jon Ossoff in Georgia's special congressional runoff election, the Democratic Party is once again casting about for the ideal political archetype in this fallen, Trumpified world of ours. As fate would have it, Yahoo News floated a suggestion just hours before Ossoff's rebuke: "Eric Holder joins the anti-Trump resistance — and mulls a presidential campaign of his own." From the article:

"Up to now, I have been more behind-the-scenes," Holder told Yahoo News in an exclusive interview about his plans. "But that's about to change. I have a certain status as the former attorney general. A certain familiarity as the first African-American attorney general. There's a justified perception that I'm close to President Obama. So I want to use whatever skills I have, whatever notoriety I have, to be effective in opposing things that are, at the end of the day, just bad for the country.[…]

"If opposition is to be the course—and it must be—we must recognize and remember that the power of the American people has been too often underestimated. Once roused we are a mighty force."

Feeling the Holder yet?

About the best thing you can say about Barack Obama's longtime attorney general and self-described "wingman" is that he's not Jeff Sessions, and that in the final two years of his tenure he started taking tentative steps in the direction of long-overdue criminal justice reform (this after four years of cracking down hard on medical marijuana, among other unwoke practices). But as flawed as Holder is, he slots almost uncannily well into the odd and off-putting place the modern Democratic Party finds itself in, as the two-party pendulum swings away from Trumpism yet with little noticeable enthusiasm for the fast-approaching #resistance fighters on the left.

In how many ways is Eric Holder the ideal candidate for the Democratic Party, if not the rest of America? I count at least three:

1) He's intolerant of Republicans. Forget Hillary Clinton's half-hearted "basket of deplorables," which after all only accounted for "half of Trump's supporters" (and for which she later issued a tepid regret)—Holder has suggested just flat banning Republicans from respectable venues of discourse.

Three days after the election, the federal government's former chief law enforcement officer was the lead guest on HBO's Real Time With Bill Maher, and beginning at about 5:40 in this clip went on a remarkable tear against Maher's tendency to invite onto his program Republicans such as Rep. Darrell Issa:

Holder: The one thing I didn't like about your show, given all the crap I had to deal with him, I had to watch your show and then see him up here, you know.

Maher: Well, you know…

Holder: Ban him!

Maher: Uh, no, that's—we can't do it that way. Come on. We have to come together, we have to listen to both sides.

Holder: Not in this new world we have. We push our side!

"We push our side" fits snugly into the post-Ossoff lefty punditry just flat writing off Republicans as irredeemable. "This not a failure of Democrats," as one wrote, "but toxic, vindictive voters willing to elect hateful bigots." Republicans don't need tough love, they need tougher hate. Send Eric!

2) He's a Deep Stater. In an era where former CIA/Goldman Sachs employee Evan McMullin is getting thunderous liberal ovations (except when suggesting that maybe the authoritarian tendencies of this presidency are cause to at least question the size and scope of government), and where Vox is running headlines such as "The FBI is America's best hope against Trump," what better candidate than a guy who spent 12 years in the Justice Department, five years as a Superior Court judge, four years as U.S. Attorney, and four years as deputy attorney general, before elevating to Justice Department's top slot (with some hot Wall Street action on the side)? We need authority to rid ourselves of authoritarianism, people!

Holder has the kind of record that would be routinely portrayed as problematic if attached to the letter R. As Nick Gillespie pointed out in 2013, not only did the then-A.G. "sign off on the search warrant for Fox News's James Rosen's personal emails, he is at the center of questions over the state's broad surveillance of the AP, an operation that has raised hackles across the political spectrum regarding First Amendment issues and civil-liberties concerns." But hey, that was back before the nation slipped into true darkness. Speaking of which…

But he doesn't have the old-timey middle name! ||| Media Research Center
Media Research Center

3) He's a hypocrite about the attorney general's independence from the presidency. The same man who while still in office referred to Barack Obama as "my boy" is now furrowing his brow about (in this Buffalo News paraphrase) "whether current Attorney General Jeff Sessions will be able to put aside a political relationship with President Trump and work with some independence from him." Do tell.

Holder, lest we forget, was officially held in contempt by Congress (including by 17 Democrats) for refusing to divulge documents to an oversight committee looking into the Fast and Furious scandal. As attorney generals tend to do, he performed the liver function in the body of the Obama administration, filtering out whatever toxic Republican accusations were thrown its way. (Hence his particular ire for Issa, who was always poking around Holder's business via oversight committees.)

In the political spot-changing season that comes every time the keys to 1600 Pennsylvania switch hands, Capitol Hill anxiety about the A.G.'s independence from POTUS has gone from a fringe Democratic opinion to an urgent national priority. When Obama's wingman left office, Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont) gushed, "I hate to see Eric Holder leave….I've been here throughout with a lot of attorneys general. Nobody's done it better than he has." Leahy was considerably less hospitable to the arrival of Jeff Sessions:

I am concerned that the independence of the Justice Department will be in jeopardy under this administration. It is already clear that the cost of saying "no" to the president is your job. Now more than ever, we need an Attorney General willing to pay that cost. I am not convinced that describes Senator Sessions. Throughout his nomination, he has not demonstrated the independence that he himself once demanded of nominees.

Eric Holder dutifully hates the Electoral College. He thinks Trumpism represents "the worst of us." He has greased the revolving door between Washington and Wall Street as well as anybody. He may just be the perfect 2017 Democrat.

"[P]lease let this 'Eric Holder for 2020' thing actually be real," Stephen A. Crockett Jr. prayed over at The Root. After all, nothing says #resistance like getting behind the former chief prosecutor in all the land. "Whatever he decides his new role would be," wrote Essence's Malaika Jabali, "Holder's legal expertise and public platform defending civil rights are sorely needed now, as the President has become intent on undoing practically all of the progressive gains of Obama's administration."

Reason on Eric Holder here.

NEXT: Carrier Will Move Jobs to Mexico, Despite Trump's Promise to Keep Them in Indiana

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. “…we must recognize and remember that the power of the American people has been too often underestimated. Once roused we are a mighty force.”

    I guess that “we” does not include the millions who voted against Clinton.

    1. He doesn’t consider those to be people.

  2. Jesus, Matt, I’m trying to break my fast here.

  3. Remember all those jokes Colbert made about him being Obama’s cock holder?

  4. Dems must be reaching the bottom of the barrel with the likes of Holder and Warren.

    Or they will just prog harder with Kamala Harris.

    No, the problem isn’t them or the shitty candidates or that most people don’t actually agree with their failed ideology. No… it’s gotta be those dastardly republicans!

      1. Not to go all birther here, but is it too much to ask for a long-form birth certificate when the guy runs around calling himself a Ugandan Head Hunter?

      2. Needs moar rhyming:

        Fifteen Dolla Kamala!

    1. Progging harder is a likely response. A lot of the most insane leftists are saying Ossoff just wasn’t far enough to the left and couldn’t excite the identitarians and socialists who stayed home on Hillary, and insist the Dems can no longer court the racist white working class who jumped ship to Trump

      But a part of me wishes they just keep throwing their money at every race and trot out Hillary-redux candidates over and over because damn was that result hilarious

      1. A lot of the most insane leftists

        The same idiots hated Bill Clinton and Barack Obama for being “free-trade corporatist whores”. They never get their Bernie Sanders.

        1. No, the same people who thought Clinton was too far right wanted someone like Obama, who was marginally to the left of Clinton; once they got Obama they decided he was too far right for their taste. IOW, the goalposts just keep moving.

          Just like how the people who replaced Stolypin (well, he was killed) with socialist Kerensky five minutes later decided they wanted Lenin.

      2. From what I’ve read, a lot of the “Ossoff wasn’t far left enough” crowd thinks the Democrats need to focus less on identity politics and move to the left economically. The identitarians and socialists have plenty of overlap, but there is also some divided between those camps.

        1. That was a lot of the Hillary/Bernie split, but I think that the far left crowd wants a candidate who can believably embrace both. Plenty of those same people also complained that he was a white male

      3. Unfortunately the net result will be more republicans sliding further towards the squishy statist ‘centrism’ of establishment D.C.

    2. Marxist Stedman is as big a stiff as Gigolo John Kerry. Just a little more chocolatey, and stiffer.

  5. Fun fact: Eric Holder is liberty-hating jerk-face.

    Good article.

    1. You know who else was a liberty-hating jerk-face?

      1. Just about every politician, ever?

  6. former CIA/Goldman Sachs employee Evan McMullin

    Welch whispers the name of the cuck’s choice 2020 Libertarian Party nominee!

      1. shut up, Cucksty Guzzler – Beta

    1. Nothing says Libertarian like being a former CIA spook.

      1. Who better to fight the state than a former cog in the machine? What could possibly go awry?

  7. Elizabeth “White Indian” Warren is the perfect candidate. She sounds like she’s just about ready to snap and sneak a fully loaded AR-15 into the well of the Senate any day now.

    1. Now that’s just a silly, completely implausible idea. No way would Elizabeth Warren be able to load an AR-15.

      1. She’d use a bow and arrow just as her ancestors did.

        1. And she could actually go on the warpath.

        2. But would she comply with the ten-arrow quiver limit?

          -jcr

      2. If she can find an AK, I’m sure Di-Fi would be happy to help her out with some tips on safe gun-handling.

  8. Holder: Not in this new world we have. We push our side!

    Probably sounded better in the original German.

    1. At least Holder is willing to admit that Maher isn’t a libertarian.

      1. How hard do you have to prog to make Bill Maher the reasonable one in a conversation?

        1. ^THIS

      1. I bet Sam Kinison would have made the best Alex Jones impressions.

  9. This was a pretty funny article and probably the best thing I’ve read all day. Even though I’d agree Holder makes perfect sense as the pick, I suspect they won’t be able to shake the identity politics and will go with a woman or a minority.

    1. On further inspection, I see that he is indeed black. Couldn’t tell from the tiny picture. So yeah, I think this is pretty spot on.

  10. Have I ever mentioned that I like Welch? If not, I like Welch.

    Yo, Welch! Pop in some contacts, slick your hair back with some Dapper Dan and throw on a white suit and you could win a *William F Buckley look alike contest.

    */Halloween costume ideas

    1. Welch strikes me as more of a Fop man.

  11. ‘Ol Fast & Furious Holder should be the next Democratic candidate.

    He was the first cabinet member to be held in Contempt of Congress.
    He authorized lethal force of Americans overseas in extra-judicial murder.
    He failed to prosecute anyone for the IRS targeting scandal.

    It would give Trump the first 50 state electoral victory.

    1. Yeah, the Dems could nominate Hitler and still win Cali, NY, and Hawaii.

      1. And Washington, Oregon, Massachusetts, Maryland, Vermont, Rhode Island, and several others I’ve failed to mention.

        1. Thanks to King county, WA will always vote Marxist.

        2. Hawaii, Connecticut, New Jersey, Delaware, Illinois. Actually Virginia looks like it has finally tipped into the permanent Dem majority category as well.

  12. It would be fun to see Fast and Furious brought up in a debate

    yeah right….”and I believe his Fast and Furious wasn’t 2 Fast and 2 Furious enough!”

    1. “I want to figure out how to get kids to go 2 fast and 2 furious to the polls!”

    2. Which one of the many Fast & Furious “scandals”? The Dubya ones (they all began under him) or the one Holder found out about after he became AG?

      1. ‘ “Gunwalking”, or “letting guns walk”, was a tactic of the Arizona Field Office of the United States Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), which ran a series of sting operations[2][3] between 2006[4] and 2011’

        Hmm…there seems to be a bit of an overlap between the the administrations in power who used such tactics.

        While technically correct, and W. deserves all the scorn possible for initiating the program, PB once again refuses to admit that compliance with the S.O.P. was not only sanctioned by the proceeding administration but expanded upon.

        In essence: BOOOOOOSSSSHHHHHH!!!!…again, nearly a decade later.

        1. OTOH the “Gunwalker” plan included coordinating with Mexican law enforcement when the guns were walking. They failed to track them, and the program was cancelled.

          Holder had the advantage of history, which he failed to learn from. Well, except F&F was never coordinated with anyone south of the border.

        2. Let us not forget, Obama’s entire election platform could basically be boiled down to “I’m not W!” Sheesh, the man won a Nobel frickin’ Peace prize for the amazing accomplishment of not being George W. Bush. Yet, once in office, he basically doubled down on all of W’s worst ideas. The left continued to applaud. Please explain to me the reasoning behind this.

      2. You know that when your predecessor does this sort of thing, it comes to light, AND YOU FUCKING COVER FOR THE PEOPLE INVOLVED – its your scandal to. You bought it.

        But Buuuuuuuuuush! Doesn’t work for *anything* that happened in the Obama administration. It’d be different if Obama had discontinued the horrible shit his predecessor had done – instead he doubled down *on everything*. From Tarp to more wars to Fast and Furious, his whole administration is nothing but taking the baton from Bush and running on like it was a fucking relay race.

  13. You left out Holder’s worst quality. He justified the killing of American citizens via drone without judicial or congressional oversight and made his argument before Northwestern’s College of Law. Interesting how overly sensitive college students didn’t protest such a break with precedent and the rule of law.

    1. Wasn’t it Holder who, after murdering the 16-year-old brother of the 8-year-old girl Trump eventually murdered, said it was basically his fault for being related to a terrorist?

  14. Yes, the Democratic strategy is doubling down on the same identity politics that cost Hillary the election against the most hated man in the country. God speed.

    1. ‘The most hated man in the country’ must not be all that hated, considering how many people like him.

  15. “Holder’s legal expertise and public platform defending civil rights are sorely needed now, as the President has become intent on undoing practically all of the progressive gains of Obama’s administration.”

    That’s what voters are clamoring for in a presidential candidate: legal expertise. Just look at this uplifting rhetoric:

    I have a certain status as the former attorney general. A certain familiarity as the first African-American attorney general. There’s a justified perception that I’m close to President Obama. So I want to use whatever skills I have, whatever notoriety I have, to be effective in opposing things that are, at the end of the day, just bad for the country.

    “There is the informed contention that my tax plan will generate 2 million jobs over 18 months.”

  16. I think Holder is a stalking horse.

    I don’t think he’s actually organizing any potential candidacy, or that donors are lining up to throw money at him But i think he’s being floated in order to give the media someone to talk about/pick apart so that the actual people preparing their own runs can work behind the scenes and put out feelers while avoiding too much media Q+A.

    And i think they’ll do the same thing a few more times over the next year or two. I’m not suggesting its any grand conspiracy, i think its just very tempting for the left-media to throw out “What about X”? pieces to at least keep their base talking about who they want to have run. it provides a bottomless pit of market research, and keeps people thinking about “the next step” rather than dwell too hard on their current abysmal position in congress, where they’ve got no real power other than to screech contemptuously at testifying members of the administration.

    1. He’s not. It is fake news (Welch this time).

      1. You mean it’s Yahoo News.

        Of course, you got confused because you’re just a libertarian classical liberal who loves free markets and Eric Holder.

        1. Why should P’s B bother to read the article? He already knows everything.

    2. I think you’re right. It’s too early. Anyone being mentioned now will probably lose their momentum long before they can start bringing in campaign cash. So who else will they throw out there? I’m guessing we’ll still see Clinton and Sanders mentioned on occasion. Biden and Warren will probably come up too. But none of them will be able to hold people’s attention for very long (except maybe Biden). It’s a long way to 2019 and the media speculation beast must be fed!

  17. Also, Holder’s personality varies between “boring” and “jerk”

    iow he’s a bit like Hillary. He’s just not a likeable character in any real sense. He was AG for years, yet can you remember anything he ever said that was the slightest bit interesting/witty/persuasive? All i remember is slimy evasions and shitty-lawyerness.

    1. He’s basically Obama without the easy-going manner. Having him President would be like having Coleman Young’s reign of terror in Detroit distilled into a 4-8 year span.

  18. Progressives hate Holder for “not prosecuting the banksters” (Prog CT).

    This fake news is hilariously ridiculous.

  19. They probably figure that if The Rock doesn’t run they need another “Fast and Furious” star.

  20. Adding – he is an affirmative action case – like Obama, and also Castile’s killer.

    1. Add Clarence Thomas.

      Wait, Obama was elected. Make that Holder and Thomas.

      1. +1 Thurgood Marhsall.

  21. It’s Michelle Obama’s for the taking.

    1. Finally, a Democratic candidate that would exercise her right to bare arms!

      1. Bare….and eat arms!

      2. The right to bare (and rip off) arms.

      3. Don’t you mean ‘bear arms’?

  22. If he becomes President, we can only hope that he falls into a wood chipper.

    Repeatedly.

    1. Preet just scratched himself on the inner thigh.

  23. “Up to now, I have been more behind-the-scenes,” Holder told Yahoo News in an exclusive interview about his plans. “But that’s about to change. I have a certain status as the former attorney general. A certain familiarity as the first African-American attorney general. There’s a justified perception that I’m close to President Obama. So I want to use whatever skills I have, whatever notoriety I have, to be effective in opposing things that are, at the end of the day, just bad for the country.[…]”

    A large helping of poison would probably accomplish that the best.

  24. Man, the DNC sure loves to recycle, eh?

    1. It’s like having an Indian co-worker who, as long as you have known him, always wants to go for Indian food at lunchtime. So are you expecting one day he’s going to want to go to McD’s?

  25. “If opposition is to be the course?and it must be?we must recognize and remember that the power of the American people has been too often underestimated. Once roused we are a mighty force.”

    “We?”

    Somehow Holder has missed the part where, if the American People are voting against Democrats, he might not want them to get all roused up enough to use their underestimated power.

    Be careful what you wish for.

  26. He would really need to start identifying as a woman.

  27. 1, Intolerant of republicans.
    2. Deep state
    2. Hypocrite about the attorney general’s independence from the presidency

    He would be the perfect fit for leading Cuba (I hear Raul is retiring soon). Plus:
    4. Cuban dissidents are pro-Trump.

    That is just a perfect storm for Holder any way you look at it!

    http://www.newsweek.com/what-c…..ump-627627

  28. You forgot about the Marc Rich pardon, which was the most inappropriate, inexcusable, and corrupt abuse of presidential pardon power in American history.

  29. .The author of this article clearly has an animus against Holder. (“He’s an intolerant deep-state hypocrite, for starters.” As far as tolerance is concerned, that statement amounted to the pot calling the kettle black.)

    The article itself has more the feeling of a transcript of public speech (e.g. “feeling the Holder yet?:)

    He’s intolerant of Republicans.

    So? Something similar could equally be said of most ideologues of BOTH parties. They are intolerant of views from the other side. Holder was simply being honest.

    He’s a hypocrite about the attorney general’s independence from the presidency.

    A hypocrite is someone who proclaims one view but practices a different one. The author is too busy flinging mud to spend much time demonstrating Holder’s hypocrisy.

    It is also it is not clear from the article whether the author himself favours the AG’s independence or is against it, and therefore what exactly is the point he is attempting to make by pointing to Holder’s alleged hypocrisy. That is, is the author trying to defend the notion of AG independence or denounce the whole idea as a Democrat myth?

    In the context, I will point out that noted libertarian Andrew Napolitano is on record as stating that President, not the AG, is the chief law officer of the US. Meaning the AG is required to do what the President tells him to do. If the AG doesn’t like it, then his only other option is to resign. Is that a view the author agrees with?

  30. Eric Holder as leader of the Resistance is similar to the concept of Bryant Gumble doing gangsta rap. You don’t get more establishment than Holder. When he and his wife role-play in the bedroom, it involves mortgage rates most likely.

  31. I would rather see Yellowstone erupt than Holder as President. Both would be the end of America but Yellowstone would be more humane.

  32. Not a good choice.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.