Yesterday Senators Sheldon Whitehouse and Patrick Leahy offered up fulsome praise for Eric Holder, President-Elect Obama's nominee for Attorney General. Yep: Senators Whitehouse and Leahy chose to support Eric Holder to lead the Department of Justice. Yep: the same DOJ where Holder, as Number Two, chose to privately support the Marc Rich pardon for a year without knowledge of the DOJ offices and officials formally charged with reviewing Presidential pardons. Yep: the same Marc Rich who chose for his pardon attorney Jack Quinn, a personal friend of Eric Holder....the DOJ # 2 who served Quinn's client by cutting out the Department he puported to serve. Yep: the same Holder the DOJ # 2 who chose to call Quinn -- lawyer to DOJ petitioner Rich -- to ask Quinn about jobs for a couple of Deputy Attorney General Holder's ex-hires.
After the pardon was signed, Mr. Quinn has testified, Mr. Holder called him to commend him on "a very good job." Mr. Holder also asked Mr. Quinn to consider hiring two former aides, one of whom had already contacted Mr. Quinn on Jan. 2 "at Holder's suggestion."
Yep: the same Holder who -- after leaving DOJ -- chose to take money from Chiquita and use his influence as former Deputy Attorney General to help him get Chiquita a slap on the wrist.
Indeed, Holder himself, using his influence as former deputy attorney general under the Clinton Administration, helped to negotiate Chiquita's sweeheart deal with the Justice Department in the criminal case against Chiquita. Under this deal, no Chiquita official received any jail time. Indeed, the identity of the key officials involved in the assistance to the paramilitaries were kept under seal and confidential. In the end, Chiquita was fined a mere $25 million which it has been allowed to pay over a 5-year period. This is incredible given the havoc wreaked by Chiquita's aid to these Colombian death squards.
Yep: the same Chiquita that admitted choosing to fund Colombia's right-wing terrorist death squad, the AUC, with 1.7 million dollars. Yep: the same AUC that chose to get Chiquita maximum profits...by torturing and murdering labor activists. Oh well. Why should Democrats in the Village let little things like choosing to work against DOJ from within or get sweet deals for those who fund United Brands/Chiquita's terrorist death squad du regime trip up their rush to show loyalty to The Leader?
Hey, what's so bad about choosing to get paid by Chiquita, the terrorist death squad's paymaster? Who could object to a well-connected law partner at a powerful Village firm -- the partner who chose to take money from terrorists' funders -- becoming our next Attorney General? Isn't that what we've been fighting for: a free market?
In 1997, according to the federal complaint, a right-wing paramilitary commander named Carlos Castaño came to Chiquita's subsidiary Banadex with a business proposal. A ruthless killer, Castaño had just become "supreme leader" of several smaller militias that he was banding together as the A.U.C. for a major military offensive against the Marxists. [snip]
"This company was in a bad position dealing with bad guys," says Eric Holder, a Washington attorney representing Chiquita. "There's absolutely no suggestion of any personal gain here. It's not a case like Tyco, where someone is squirreling money away. No one is out buying great shower curtains."
As a corporation, though, Chiquita stood to benefit greatly from the lethal cleansing that Castaño delivered. At the time, the Marxist guerrillas routinely kidnapped U.S. executives, blew up railroads, and sabotaged oil pipelines. Chiquita says it became increasingly difficult to protect its workers and their families. Castaño's death squads, however, were squarely pro-business. They were not just ridding Urabá of guerrillas; they were killing leftists and eradicating unions.
"The payments Chiquita made to the paramilitaries were part of a project that the A.U.C. called Operation Genesis," says Gloria Cuartas, who was the mayor of Apartadó from 1995 until 1997, when Castaño threatened her life and drove her out of the area. "It called for the elimination of the left and of all social groups that were supposedly contributing to instability for investors and the multinationals." Francisco Ramirez, a leading labor lawyer with the United Confederation of Workers, the largest labor union in Colombia, says that money from Chiquita and other companies "created these paramilitary groups and helped destroy the unions."
The A.U.C.'s wave of terror was swift and brutal. Among the most savage of its many massacres was a 1998 attack on an Urabá village in which paramilitaries murdered 11 peasants after burning them with acid to force them to confess they were guerrillas.
Oh. That.
Well, it doesn't seem to bother Senator Leahy. Nor did the year Eric Holder spent as Number Two at DOJ using his Federal office to give the DOJ the mushroom treatment on the Rich pardon.
Rebuilding morale and public confidence in the Justice Department continues to be a top priority, and Eric Holder's extensive experience and knowledge of the Department will serve him well as he faces many challenges as Attorney General. After the scandals that have undermined the public's trust in the Justice Department and that have damaged the morale of its dedicated professionals, it would be especially fitting to bring in a leader who is widely admired by the staff and especially by the professionals of the U.S. Attorneys' Offices across the nation. He is an outstanding nominee for this challenging position, and he should have the support of senators from both sides of the aisle.
Isn't it pretty to think so?
For the Villagers, choosing to help get a "slap on the wrist" for the people and megacorp that funded death squads is merely so much water blood under the bridge.
Why should a Senator bother to uphold his sworn oath to uphold the Constitution -- you know, the one that gives the Senate their "advise and consent" role over Presidential appointments -- when a Villager's career could be at stake? Especially when the Villager's an old colleague. Just ask Senator Whitehouse:
"Our new Attorney General must restore the Justice Department's proud tradition of independence and excellence, and insulate it from improper pressure even when it comes from the White House. No one will fill that role more capably than Eric Holder.
"I served in the Clinton Administration with Mr. Holder, and can attest to his vast experience, his calm judgment, his legal skill, and his unswerving loyalty to the Department and its principles. I have no doubt that he will offer the independent, wise leadership necessary to repair the terrible damage of the Bush years. He has my enthusiastic support."
In America's Village what really matters is loyalty to Party and The Leader.
Change we can believe in? Looks like the same ol' Village Gore Vidal described in 2006.
We've become slavish. My favorite emperor was Tiberius and Tiberius, when he became emperor after Augustus died, the Senate sent him, kind of round robin, from all the Senators, SPQR, and the Senate sent him a document which agreed to any proposition that he might send down from Palatine Hill to the Senate without any time of pondering or anything, automatically because the emperor has spoken. He sent it back to them with a nasty little message and he said, 'well, suppose the emperor has gone mad? Or suppose he's dead and you don't know it?' That often happened then. 'And, is this a wise policy that anything that comes from the Senate to the Palatine Hill is going to be accepted?' And they said yes. They sent it back to him a third time and Tiberius had a courier take it back to the Senate and he said, 'How eager you are to be slaves!'
Jeebus, we couldn't have the impudent members of the world's greatest debating club in the Legislative Branch merely refrain from praising an Executive Branch appointment. Especially the Executive-Elect's appointment of his pal -- the very guy who betrayed DOJ as Number Two -- to take power at DOJ as Number One.
Failure to praise that would seem like a public breach of personal loyalty to The Leader. And that would be unjust.
Outright opposition, of course, would be an act of lèse majesté.
"Well, Doctor, what have we got-a Republic or a Monarchy?"
Doctor Franklin, I am so very truly sorry: we failed.
Hey, it could always be worse. At least The Leader didn't nominate his horse for Attorney General. We'd already be reading servile Senators' fond memories of their time in the stables together.
OK, enough carping. This is no time for tears: The Village celebrates. All hail The Leader's choices. We eager slaves [So many of those who are about to cry? The eager slaves who are about to lie?] salute them!
Login Here
Spotlight



Support this site!
Keep
up with news
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search


RSS/XML Feed
Any comment seems almost pointless.
The post speaks for itself.
Thanks for putting that information together, Kirk.
Digg
sounds like Holder palled around with pals of terrorists.
Sometimes it seems like Larry Silverstein gave Michael Mukasey mushrooms.
Remind me again why Himmler was put in charge of the Shutzstaffel.
This guy comes to DOJ with blood on his hands. I can live, for now, with the other appointments but this one really sticks in my craw.
does this mean you don’t think holder will be using this helpful post: Cheat Sheet for Eric Holder: Torture and Jus Cogens?
The one thing our Department of Justice really needs is a leader who respects procedure, will proceed where the evidence takes him, and is unafraid to say no to power. Eric Holder has, in successive episodes (respectively: teh Marc Rich pardon; his tenure as USAttorney for DC; the Chiquita terror funding) proven himself exactly the wrong kind of leader for this department at this time.
Glenn Greenwald and Richard Cohen both raise the excuse that everyone’s entitled to one mistake. But at Dr Murphy clearly demonstrates, Eric Holder’s career is riddled with mistakes, bad judgments, and conflicts that should disqualify him for the Attorney General’s job.
This nomination, and the Village rallying around it, mystifies me. Are our Democrats in the Senate so eager to play the Bill Frist/Mitch McConnell role for the President of their own party? What happened to institutional pride, the foundation of our system’s checks and balances?
This is not a good nomination. Has anyone heard from Russ Feingold yet?
Has anyone heard from Joe Lieberman yet? I shudder to think of his whining weasel voice, effusively praising Eric Holder as nominee to be attorney general…
I’m having trouble getting outraged about this story, or frankly, even getting it.
He was a corporate lawyer, and a friend of his was representing Rich, basically. The fact his firm represented Chiquita says more about the corporate lobbying scene than anything else; linking Holder to the shit that Chiquita’s done is lurid, gets people’s blood up, but it doesn’t say that much about Holder. And while I agree that his handling of the Rich pardon shows bad judgment, I’m with Glenn Greenwald here — it doesn’t disqualify him.
I’m not thrilled about the nomination, but it does make some sense. The guy knows DOJ, and it’s going to take someone with that kind of knowledge to root out the Federation Society moles that Bush & Co. are putting into the place. And frankly, I don’t think having an Obama loyalist in DOJ is a bad idea either: it’s already clear that the GOP will be running their anti-Clinton playbook, and I don’t think that we want a Janet Reno in charge under those circumstances.
OT, but here is the Georgia Secretary of State’s page where you can check to see what’s happening with our runoff. Polls closed a bit over an hour ago.
The Reptiles and their MSM have created a great shadow over MSA.
Reminds me of JCS Directive 1067 (Morganthau Plan) which guaranteed economic chaos in Germany after WWII.
JCS - Joint Chiefs of Staff
Will any Rethugs on the Judiciary Committee bring any of this stuff up at the confirmation hearing? The spineless Dems sure as hell won’t.
Why would Lieberman like Holder?
Lieberman, in my estimation, would be looking for an ally in DOJ to undermine Obama. Holder would not fit that bill.
No, Lieberman will bring up the Rich pardon. To undermine Holder, and to get someone “independent” enough to ally with him as Chairman of the HS & Government Services to investigate the administration.
We seem to be in agreement here. I’d like to see what happens in 49 days, or 149 days, after the team is actually doing the job, before we start castigating them…
Federalist Society?
So far, ouch!
Yeah. Why would anyone care what the character of the person running the DOJ is?
Oops that was for Marion in Savannah at 12.
OT- has Obama changed his position on jobs since the campaign from creating 2.5 million jobs to saving or creating 2.5 million jobs?
Yes, that’s what he sez. There are currently around 137 million nonfarm payroll jobs, so that if he ends up his presidency with that number, he can claim to have “saved” 137 million jobs. Wonder why W speechwriters didn’t figure that one out.
neuro, thanks for the digg!
selise, love your question at 8
Teddy, thanks for your formulation: glad this info is of use
and Southern Dragon, I’m afraid I also have scant hope any Dem in the Senate will honor the Oath they swore to uphold and protect the Constitution and excercise their Constitutional role of providing advice and consent for Executive Branch appointments to high Federal office.
Change we can believe in: now the President appointing his unethical pal as Attorney General has a “D” after his name.
O Brave New Village to have such leaders in it!
You forgot to mention that it’s all Clinton’s fault. /s
Right now members of the Bar have established their own rules, which they call “ethics”. Their “ethics” allow them attorneys to ensure that megacorps who deliberately commit mass poisoning (quaintly called “pollution”) to keep on poisoning for decades while the corporations’ counsel take homw six to eight figures to abet the mass posioning.
Others may be OK with that state of affairs. I work in medicine, and I see the victims of mass corporate poisoning and other intentional harmful acts committed by corporations. I’ll keep working to destroy the profitable “ethics” that lets creeps like Holder get wealthy representig coporate killers.
Others’ mileage may vary: so be it.
The First Amendment allows Eric and his fellow law partners in their lucrative DC practice to associate with anyone they damn well please.
The same First Amendment allows the rest of us NOT to associate with people who chose to enrich themselves by accepting money from corporations that fund death squads.
The same First Amendement allows political appointees to shun people who chose to enrich themselves by accepting money from corporations that fund death squads.
We don’t have to allow people like Holder into our living rooms: acting collectively, we don’t have to allow them into our public offices. Calling out the lawyers who are complicit in protecting the corporations who fund death squads - calling our the lawyers who are complicit in protecting serial posioners - that’s the start of changing opinion about creeps like Eric Holder.
Forty years ago drunk driving was a reliable punch line on the Tonight Show. Now drunk driving’s an automatic trip to jail. Collectively, pollution, workplace deaths, and other corporate misdeeds - the same misdeeds the corporations choose to commit in furtherance of maximal profits - they kill more Americans than drunk drivers do.
Unlike the drunk drivers, the corporate attorneys profit from their work.
Keeping people who chose to use their legal education in this way out of public life is our choice: if Glenn or other attorneys don’t like that advocacy, that’s their choice.
Those of us who’ve never had corporations as paying clients in a legal practice may well choose differently. I know I have.
Yeah, I figured I’d leave that one for Regency /s
Color me clueless, but I thought that Scooter Libby was Marc Rich’s lawyer. That’s what made the repug squeels about the pardon funny to me.
In all the plea deals I’ve seen lately one of the requirements is for the defendant to own up to his/her actions. Since Chiquita is a corporation and corporations are now considered persons under the law the persons who actually made the deals with AUC are off the hook instead of being named as accessories before, during and after the fact. I would like to see corporations stripped of their “personhood” status. I also want to see Dow pay for Bhopal. Yeah, I’m a dreamer.
Here’s what bmaz - himself a criminal defense attorney - had to say in comments on a previous post about Holder. (bmaz was addressing a specific commenter, but here I’m not trying to address any specific person. I am trying to address the common — and erroneous — tendency to equate defense attorney’s representaion of specific living individuals with corporate counsel’s work on behalf of for-profit corporations)
and:
and:
and:
OT
KO’s interview of Murdoch biographer is spectacular. How he characterized Ruppert is highly funny.
“but you’re not the only one”
imagine that *g*
damn. I gotta get broadband - that’s an interview I’d like to see
Author sez Murdoch, “is, how shall I put it, hen-pecked.” Apparently he was conservative when he was married to a strict R.C. wife. But his current wife is much younger and much more liberal, so now Ruppert hates Fox and especially hates O’Reilly. Also did a funny mock of Murdoch’s mumbling.
Unless one buys organic, Chiquita and Dole are the only bananas available in my area. I remember the Dole pineapple plantations in Hawaii. Thugs.
What, ya can’t say pw on teebee?
Someone has trained the author in timing when he speaks. There was a long pause after is, and before hen-pecked. Then another pause. Much better than using a cruder word because it got left to your imagination.
The last Esquire had a quite lengthy article on Murdoch…pretty interesting, blending the families, etc.
Kirk Murphy, not giving up the fight. Woot!
How can one hate something that provides a very generous revenue stream into one’s pocket?
BTW, what is a “mushroom year”
I was being facetious.
I seriously doubt that you can. Would give GOP ladies the vapors. “g”
There was something about that in the interview. IIRC, author said that Ruppert would do anything that made him potloads of dough. KO asked if Murdoch thought he could make a lot more money owning liberal news, and author said: in a minute. Author also sez Murdoch’s eyeing NYT.
I know. But I thought it was fascinating on how the author actually did it & why it came across so well. So I thought I’d try to understand it by putting it into words.
Son is being groomed to take over I believe. I haven’t seen anything about his political leanings. Haven’t looked, either.
Oh, you did great. I didn’t have any trouble imagining it. The only thing I couldn’t see was the smile.
“Dear, do you consider yourself pw?”
“No, dear.”
I know nothing about Murdoch except what I’ve picked up in the ether. But when it came out yesterday that Murdoch hates O’Reilly, it provoked me to make sure to watch the interview tonight. It was worth it. Not enough to make me read the book, though. Full Disclosure: My wingnut son loves Fox. So I’m plotting how to use my newfound info the next time I see him.
I’m from EarthFirst! - we fight til the last tree is standing (or not standing, depending on the tree sit)
Glad you asked about the “mushroom year” - that’s the year Holder spent giving DOJ the mushroom treatment on the Rich pardon…while he was #2 at DOJ.
I’ve been thinking about amending the title to “…Ignore Death Squads and Holder’s ‘Mushroom Year’ at DOJ”, but not sure if would clarify or obscure…
Any thoughts?
Well, a lot of folks might not know much about mushrooms, bein’ city folks an’ all, so it might still be a little murky. *g*
And I’m with ya on til the last tree…
Keep ‘em in the dark and shovel shit on them.
whitehouse and leahy are becoming more of a disappointment the more i watch them…. :(
and here i thought it was “feed them shit” *g*
As mushrooms don’t have mouths, either one would work.
Whitehouse = D Specter?
thanks kirk. there’s a big difference between representing an individual client - who is a real person - and a corporation which is not.
i refuse to buy the story that corporations should be treated like people when it comes to rights. that’s just bs and something like saying my shoe has rights.
that’s potentially very insightful. and depressing as hell.
hope you’re wrong.
This is an example of why I don’t hold much hope for anything more than business as usual.
I know about mushrooms.
One for the bag, one for me. One for the bag, two for me.
Why do you think you know the man’s character.
Even the pardon stuff is thin gruel. The Chiquita stuff’s a smear, AFAIK, and says more about folks like us pushing it than it does about Holder, frankly.
Not the Lake’s finest hour.
Ja. I’m assuming that there are Federalist Society hacks getting burrowed into DOJ, along with the Regent Law School types to make sure that Jesus stays in the Constitution (because at Regent, they’re sure he’s in there somewhere).