Submitted to a Candid World
Obama Administration
Words Matter: “Extraordinary” Really Means Something
On Sunday, February 1, the L.A. Times featured an article claiming the Obama Administration was intent on continuing rendition as a tool to combat terrorism. The article referred to several anonymous “current and former U.S. intelligence officials” who claimed the program is likely to expand. It continued to state:
The decision to preserve the program did not draw major protests, even among human rights groups. Leaders of such organizations attribute that to a sense that nations need certain tools to combat terrorism.
Was the article referring to rendition policies that have been used by several presidential administrations, or was it focusing on the last administration’s use of extraordinary rendition, where suspects are abducted and taken to secret CIA-run facilities, operating in foreign countries that are willing to play host, and then subjected to anything but the rule of law, including torture, indefinite detention, and isolation from legal representation? I could not imagine human rights groups would let this matter slide if, indeed, Obama was continuing some form of Bush’s extraordinary-rendition policy. At best, the article is a case of sloppy journalism because this distinction is not clear.
With more questions than answers, Ames and I sprang into action on Sunday, attempting to get to the bottom of the issue. (I would like to paint a picture of us using all sorts of contraptions in a Batcave-esque “Candid World HQ,” but really, we were stuck with email and IM.)
Ultimately, the article is highly misleading. Glenn Greenwald sorts is all out, but as his posts tend to be quite long, I’ll summarize: Obama’s executive order ends extraordinary rendition. Reading right-wing blogs, though, tells another story. They have absolutely embraced the LAT article as truth. Greenwald links to several of these, who “damned well told” us “pro-torturing, posturing, hypocritical Leftists” Obama was going to follow Bush policy, presumably because liberals have zero skill in maintaining national security.
Greenwald ends his post with an excerpt from the Rachel Maddow Show. It’s a good clip, perfectly capturing the “WTF!” Ames and I were spitting on Sunday.
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
(On another injustice front, Verizon FIOS subscribers — yours truly — in large swaths of the NY/NJ area do not get MSNBC and, therefore, are sadly bereft of Maddow each weeknight.)
Um, Is All of This Part of Obama’s Grand Plan?
Because if it is, I can stop pushing my rationalization skills to the brink. Specifically, I refer to …
- His failure to consult with Dianne Feinstein on the choice of Leon Panetta to head the CIA. Dianne was pissed and the day after (yesterday) announced she wants the Senate to seat Ronald Burris. ((Frankly, I do, too. Blagojevich is still governor, and while Burris appears to be a scruples-less opportunist — common among politicians — the appointment appears legal. The Dems will likely lose the seat later — unless Burris promises not to run and they can get a clean candidate.)) Either the message is don’t frak with Dianne, or Obama asked Dianne to release this message when he called her to apologize “profusely” for the Panetta faux pas, sort of like how he indirectly directed Democrats to lay off Joe Lieberman.
- Bill Richardson … Oh, Bill, I still like you so much, but what’s the deal, dude?! I hope the picture is as rosy as Richardson painted in Sunday’s announcement of his withdrawal as commerce-secretary nominee: It’s the length of the grand-jury investigation and not because the investigation will result in charges that will hamper his nomination.
The Democrats need to get their acts together and stop looking like five-year-olds at a dance recital, off beat and facing different directions.
(This is a short, exasperated, stream-of-consciousness post as I’m on a plane back to New York today … from L.A. sun to sleet and snow and slush.)
Holiday Fun: Who Are YOU in the Obama Administration?
Overloaded with the commercial, sectarian, and familial demands of the holiday season? Well, chill out to some silliness and find your alter-ego in Obama’s Administration.
David Axelrod. Pisces. You’re like Greg Maddox. You look like an accountant, but you’re a first-ballot hall-of-famer with a wicked skill at strategizing and delivering results. No one could pick you out of a lineup, and no one suspects the crazy power you wield, having Obama’s ear. You must suck at basketball, though, because the press never mentions fun times with Obama, playing H-O-R-S-E.
Rahm Emanuel. Sagittarius. You remain firmly convinced you will one day build a sentence where every part of speech is a form of the “F” word, and we don’t mean “Farm.” Your best work happens behind-the-scenes, and you don’t mind playing rough as long as the show goes off without a hitch. You are loyal and ferocious, not like a silly pitbull with lipstick, more like a quasi terrorist in tights.
David Plouffe. You have no astrological sign because no one knows your birthday. Not even you. That is how tight a ship you like to operate. Rumors, leaks, and innuendo run on your schedule. By the way, since you didn’t like the ships that were out there, you built your own.
Hillary Clinton. Scorpio. You’ve been through the wringer. When you agree the sun is shining, you are accused of crazed partisanship. You have made Rush Limbaugh rich. Your husband is one helluva handful, but you are no martyr. You put the smack down, and he is finally leashing it so you can do your job. You have a strange fan base that idolized you and then began spreading every cockamamie conspiracy theory that has come up since loonies decided the moon landing was staged. You are considering taking out 14 million (or at least a few) restraining orders.
Susan Rice. Scorpio. You don’t mince words, and you aren’t afraid to call out your own when you think they are being lame. You are critical of bureaucratic inaction, but to survive in your career, you have had to be a part of that inaction at times. You are competitive, and you are smarter than a whip. Basketball player bonus point.
Tim Geithner. Leo. You are the kinda-cute geek the girls all secretly like, but your aloofness and passive affect are tiresome and have led you into a real mess. You ran around with the other members of the chess and business clubs, and the clubs’ annual fund-raising programs have been found out as high-tech pyramid schemes. You are set to meet with your parents in the principal’s office. You better get your story straight before then. Basketball player bonus point.
Eric Holder. Aquarius cusp. Sheesh! You do your job, and one crazy event that happens on your watch, like, a million years ago still comes and bites you on the ass. Where’s the forgiveness? Britney didn’t have this much trouble coming back. You might be the circle member that doesn’t make it to the two-hour season finale. It would be a shame, but politics always demands a pound of flesh. Basketball player bonus point.
Janet Napolitano. Sagittarius. You are constantly being confused with that singer from that band. Although you don’t look like you could be, you are quite a successful tightrope walker and can make sensible, reasoned decisions, even though you are a politician. It’s a good thing you are single and don’t have kids, otherwise, you wouldn’t be able to add two numbers or speak in complete sentences. Basketball (fan) bonus (half) point.
Bill Richardson. Scorprio. You look good in a beard. You make an excellent big spoke (governor) in a little wheel (New Mexico). You are affable, and with the exception of a poorly managed spying incident, no one has anything bad to say about you. You run the risk of developing a “could’ve been a contender” complex, but we hope fixing a terribly neglected department will give you new focus and energy.
The Others. From Opie-like Arne Duncan to inconsequential Ray LaHood, you could be corny Tom Vilsack, cowboy Ken Salazar, careful Mary Schapiro, or connected Hilda Solis. (And there are others still; suprise us with your pick!)
The Rest of the Cabinet: Gut Reactions to Obama’s Picks
Obama delivered a slew of nominee announcements over the last week, so many it is impossible for me to give my usual attention to each, researching and weighing the nominees’ records on salient issues. Instead, armed with the New York Times, my gut, and a willingness to speculate wildly, I am offering a brief synopsis and opinion of each nominee.
SECRETARY OF EDUCATION: ARNE DUNCAN
A long-time personal friend to Obama, Duncan might actually be an education secretary who has the president’s ear. He has a great deal of elementary-education experience, but he is lacking in secondary and tertiary education experience. I don’t particularly mind this point: Almost all education research indicates it’s early education that makes the difference for educational attainment. He is not a politician, which might enable him to have a fresh, untainted approach; conversely, it might hinder his attempts to make connections with everyone from state governments to local districts to congress to teachers unions. Obama’s education platform understood the issue cannot be solved with standardized tests or vouchers alone. Obama also isn’t afraid to go up against the unions and their protectionist tenure policies. Duncan’s personal relationship with the president likely ensures he understands Obama’s aims. Didionsmommy verdict: O.K.
SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR: KEN SALAZAR
If Salazar, a current Colorado senator, can stop Interior Department employees from snorting meth off of office toaster ovens, his battle is half won. The other half of his charge isn’t so cut-and-dried. The Department of the Interior is the agency that administers oil and mineral leases, and for the last eight years has offered a smorgasbord of treats to oil- and energy-industry lobbyists (in exchange for a few hookers and the aforementioned meth, of course). Environmentalists are wary of Salazar; industry spokespeople are pleased with Obama’s pick. Being from Colorado, Salazar has had to work with oil and mining interests. He has put the kibbosh on oil shale exploration, but he has also supported reopening abandoned mines. Considering Obama won Colorado with the help of campaigning by seated democrats, his pick of Salazar appears, at least partially, to be a thank-you appointment. Didionsmommy verdict: Not thrilled
SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE: TOM VILSACK
Obama’s selection of Iowa’s former governor further cements corn-based biofuels as the center of Obama’s alternative-fuel plans. The selection also indicates agriculture subsidies aren’t going away any time soon. I knew it was a long shot to see major reform or even removal of farm subsidies from the federal budget, and for a split second I was hoping the Vilsack pick might be an inspired surprise effort to grease the skids with Iowa agriculture interests to move toward a no-subsidy farming industry. But then I came to my senses. Didionsmommy verdict: Unamused
SECRETARY OF LABOR: HILDA SOLIS
Obama lived up to labor’s expectation by selecting Solis, who sports a very pro-labor voting record in Congress. I would like to see a Labor Department that goads unions to modernize and adapt and streamline so that they remain relevant to workers and flexible in a changing economy. I don’t know much about Solis. I like the fact she is from California and that she represents a district dominated by working-class Asians and Latinos: the new faces of U.S. labor. I hope she isn’t going to be a blank-check for unions, though. Didionsmommy verdict: Unsure
SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION: RAY LA HOOD
The NYT article announcing LaHood’s nomination didn’t have much detail about the man. Wiki confirms my suspicions: LaHood doesn’t have much experience in transportation. If we go by Wiki, Jim Oberstar will be the force guiding the Department of Transportation. Didionsmommy verdict (LaHood): Inconsequential; (Oberstar): O.K.
CHAIRWOMAN OF THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION: MARY SCHAPIRO
Well, after Chris Cox’s tenure at the SEC, things really couldn’t get any worse. This isn’t a fair lead-in to Schapiro’s nomination. Apparently, she has been a long-time advocate for oversight and regulation, and she has served high-level positions in both the SEC and the Commodities Futures Trading Commission. There is discussion of eventually merging the two groups, which is something Schapiro’s experience would facilitate. Didionsmommy verdict: O.K.
Geithner Better Be Doin’ His Homework
… and gettin’ his story straight.
The New York Times published an incisive editorial on Monday about the lame habit Treasury and the Fed (including Geithner) have of throwing up their hands and saying they had no legal authority to act otherwise when faced with challenging questions about their failed handling of bailouts and assorted crises.
I remain cautiously optimistic that Geithner can successfully represent and implement Obama’s platform, but I have absolutely no problem with bringing out the hot coals during his confirmation hearing.
Luckily you are spared further pontification on this matter as I am on a plane today, flying across country with a toddler. (And we thought managing the financial markets was tough.) I’ll be “reporting” from my old Los Angeles stomping ground over the holidays. Cheers!
Obama’s Energy and Environmental Teams: Make Room for Science!
Based on the gobbledygook and denialism on energy and the environment that has come out of W’s White House, I thought the scientific method was permanently relegated to fourth-grade science projects, most of which are better reasoned than, say, the White House’s position on carbon emissions.
With Obama’s introduction of his energy and environmental teams, yesterday, it is clear science … and reasoning … and research … and development are all coming back to the federal government in a big way. Of course, there is a great deal of work to be done: building coalitions with private industry, funding research of new energies (how to harnass, how to deliver), devising international agreements to protect the environment, cleaning up the gargantuan mess left by a century of industrial development.
Obama has put together a team that can face these challenges.
First, Dr. Steven Chu, Obama’s nominee for Secretary of Energy, is a Nobel-prize winning physicist who is the director of Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and who is very vocal about climate protection. He also is the lead on a huge solar and biofuel research project between UC Berkeley, British Petroleum, Lawrence Berkeley, and the Univerisity of Illinois.
Since initially announced in 2006, there has been controversy surrounding the partnership between UC Berkeley and British Petroleum, that cooperation would dilute academic integrity. I understand the fear, but I also understand the desperate need we have to unite private industry and academic research. Academia needs to learn how to incorporate the realities of the modern economy in research models, and private industry needs to learn how not to summarily dismiss science that threatens even to minimally eat into profit margin. I hope, too, Chu’s biofuel research produces policy that looks far beyond the simple answer of replacing food crops with fuel crops.
Second, Obama created a new position for Carol Browner: White House Coordinator for Energy and Climate. Yes, the loathed “czar” word has been attached to the position. Nonetheless, Browner served as EPA administrator through both Clinton Administrations, and successfully fought off several Republican attempts to erode environmental protections. Apparently, she is a tough nut and can get results.
Obama’s EPA administrator, Lisa P. Jackson, and his chair of the White House Council on Environmental Quality, Nancy Sutley, will report to Browner. There is concern about Jackson’s effectiveness, based on constituent dissatisfaction regarding her administration of the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection. Some say she did the best she could under Governor Corzine, who has taken some controversial stands (or, sometimes, NON-stands) on state environmental issues. (If any readers can comment in more detail about New Jersey’s situation, please do not hesitate to do so.) I hope reporting to a former EPA head will help Jackson — a chemical engineer — find success at the federal level.
Nancy Sutley is Deputy Mayor for Energy and the Environment in Los Angeles, and she represents the Mayor’s Office on the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. (The importance and power of the Water District cannot be overstated. Think Chinatown, minus the murder and incest.) As chairwoman of the Council on Environmental Quality, Sutley must clean up the council’s image as a staging area for Big Oil and other chemical- and energy-industry lobbyists to assemble their wishlists for granting by the Bush Administration.
Certainly Chu, Browner, Jackson, and Sutley more than meet minimum criteria we can expect from energy and environmental leaders, and I am hopeful this team can establish a solid foundation of renewable-energy R&D and stringent climate-protection priorities that do not alienate business. Yes, I do believe this is possible.
UPDATED: Mammas Don’t Let Your Babies Grow Up to Be … Journalists
Tempest in a teacup?
Mainstream media’s (MSM) addiction to innuendo over evidence certainly has found a fix in the Blagojevich scandal, printing Republican calls that Obama “immediately disclose any and all communications his transition team has had with the governor’s office.” Turns out RNC chair, Mike Duncan, is campaigning to save his job against five opponents, and is trying to deflect attention from the RNC’s laughable contribution to the 2008 presidential campaign and the loss of several congressional seats, opting to focus moral outrage at Obama by implying transition-team complicity in the Blagojevich circus. Not to be outdone, Duncan’s opponents are weighing in with their own judgments.
That Duncan is using this tactic is fine; that MSM are fanning the flames of implied accusation is not. Once again, MSM is taking the easy road, relying on the sexy angle instead of delving into the real story: the Republican Party’s identity crisis, the failure of tried-and-true Republican campaign strategies in the face of substantive issues, and the strange “failure of management” regarding Palin’s very expensive image. Duncan needs to answer for quite a bit, but apparently not enough to displace speculation by the MSM on Obama’s potential involvement in pay-to-play politics. Apparently, picking a cabinet and designing an effective economic stimulus package isn’t enough of a test for Obama. The true test is how Obama handles the big crisis: Blagojevich.
One need only read the 76-page criminal complaint against Blagojevich and the transcript of U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald‘s press conference to understand Obama and his team likely do not have a whole lot to add to the scandal. (This list will help you understand who’s who in the complaint.)
During the press conference Fitzgerald asserted “there’s no reference in the complaint to any conversation involving the president-elect or indicating that the president-elect was aware of [Blagojevich's plan], and that’s all I can say.”
It is naive to think Rahm Emanuel did not speak with Blagojevich’s staff about the senate appointment, and the Chicago Tribune confirms he did, but Obama did not deny his staff had communication with Blagojevich’s staff. Rather Obama denied his staff participated in any wrongdoing, any collusion in Blagojevich’s fantastic schemes to enrich himself. The conversations regarding Blagojevich’s grand senate-appointment schemes were largely “brainstorming” sessions that invoked scenes from Tony Soprano’s office at the Bada Bing!
It appears the only meaningful contact between Blagojevich and the Obama camp occurred through an SEIU official. On approximately November 5, Blagojevich met with the SEIU official “to discuss the vacant Senate seat, and [Blagojevich] understood that SEIU Official was an emissary to discuss [Valerie Jarrett]’s interest in the Senate seat.” On November 12, Blagojevich again spoke with the SEIU official, this time unloading his desire that Obama secure funding for a charitable organization Blagojevich would head after leaving office, in exchange for appointing Jarrett. This conversation took place on Wednesday. By Friday, November 15, Obama had named Jarrett to a position as senior white house advisor, effectively removing his team from Blagojevich’s game.
But these facts don’t impress the RNC, and the MSM are eagerly delivering the outrage. This isn’t the first time in recent memory the MSM have let us down. Unfortunately, it is much cheaper to publish speculation rather than investigation, and amidst MSM lay-offs and bankruptcy, there is little hope this strategy is going to change.
UPDATE: The Obama team just released its statement regarding its interactions with Blagojevich (emphasis mine):
“At the direction of the President-elect, a review of Transition staff contacts with Governor Blagojevich and his office has been conducted and completed and is ready for release. That review affirmed the public statements of the President-elect that he had no contact with the governor or his staff, and that the President-elect’s staff was not involved in inappropriate discussions with the governor or his staff over the selection of his successor as US Senator.
Also at the President-elect’s direction, Gregory Craig, counsel to the Transition, has kept the US Attorney’s office informed of this fact-gathering process in order to ensure our full cooperation with the investigation.
In the course of those discussions, the US Attorney’s office requested the public release of the Transition review be deferred until the week of December 22, in order not to impede their investigation of the governor. The Transition has agreed to this revised timetable for release,” said Obama Transition Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer.
Tom Daschle: Secretary of HHS
(No other reason than because it is funny.)
Yesterday, Obama formally announced Tom Daschle as his nominee for Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services. Today, I will be on the phone for approximately 45 minutes with my prescription-benefit provider, trying to find out why my co-pay for a monthly prescription has increased 59% in one month.
Daschle was a soft-spoken, big player in the Senate during the Clinton and first W administrations. The New Yorker has a couple of very interesting articles on Daschle’s ability to make stuff happen by keeping the Democratic Caucus united.
Since losing his senate seat in 2004, Daschle has been very active in studying health-care reform policy. He held a position with a D.C. lobbying firm with several medical-industry clients, which might require some maneuvering on the part of the Obama team in light of the camp’s “no lobbyists” promise. He also is a Distinguished Senior Fellow at the Center for American Progress, where he has written several articles, three on health-care reform in the U.S. where he points out:
and proposes innovative solutions like
The statistics are frightening.
I’ll bet everyone reading this post knows at least one person in each group. I certainly do.
Daschle is a co-chair with Senator Bill Frist of ONE Vote ’08, a non-profit organization aimed at raising public awareness and interest in fighting global poverty and health crises. He also recently published Critical: What We Can Do About the Health-Care Crisis. (Read a review here.)
Is Daschle another Clintonista? I suppose so, but remember it was THE Clintonista who made health-care reform a front-page, kitchen-table issue. (Frankly, I thought Obama would tap Hillary for HHS.) I have little problem with someone who was on the front lines of those ’90s battles in HHS now, especially considering what Bush’s HHS focus has been. I also appreciate the effort Daschle has expended to accrue knowledge and tools to find practical, consensus-building solutions to this problem. Finally, Daschle still holds a lot of sway in Congress. His 2004 defeat was surprising and untimely. (I know Republicans will disagree.) I believe many members of Congress are looking forward to working with Daschle again.
Hey, Liberals! Here’s Another “L” Word for You: “Lude”
Liberals need to chill on the always-a-bridesmaid complex
As in: Take one … And relax on the “Obama’s really a Clinton” paranoia. Not only is it premature to assert Obama is selling out liberal economic ideals, it is also inaccurate.
FREAK OUT NO. 1: Obama has backed off his call for a windfall tax on Big Oil’s mega profits. It is unfortunate that the best explanation the Obama camp has for the plan’s disappearance is that the plan was proposed when oil was over $80/barrel and since it is now under $80, there is no need for the tax. I can find the campaign promise, but I am unable to locate when and where $80 was made the benchmark. Nonetheless, I don’t think it’s time to fret. First, oil prices are down, because — ta-da! — the global economy is waiting for emergency surgery. Banging the drum for a windfall tax now would look unreasonable and unfocused. When should liberals worry? If Obama backs down on elimination of oil industry tax credits and other subsidies, then liberals can meaningfully and rightly say, “Houston, we have a problem.”
FREAK OUT NO. 2: What about dropping the immediate repeal of the Bush tax cuts? Since the election the economy is revealing itself in ever-amazingly bad shape. Obama is correct to focus on oversight reform of financial markets and developing his massive economic stimulus package, including huge infrastructure investment. Letting the tax cuts expire on time in 2010 rather than rewriting tax law for 2009 doesn’t substantively change Obama’s campaign tax plan.
FREAK OUT NO. 3: But Obama’s economic team is dominated by of a bunch of Clintonites. Well, so what? If I remember correctly, the Clinton Administrations turned the economy around. Did Robert Rubin and Larry Summers (and, much less, Timothy Geithner) oversee the dismantling of government regulation of the derivatives market with Alan Greenspan? Yes. But I think it is pretty clear that oversight is an inescapable reality in the future. The weight Obama gives to Volcker’s input indicates the corporate and banking communities should brace themselves for some majorly tough love.
The establishment of the National Infrastructure Development Corporation is something to get VERY excited about. It will act as a bank that will sell bonds to fund specific infrastructure projects, similar to how state and local governments sell municipal bonds. This is a revolutionary proposal that conceivably will eliminate pork. Marketed correctly, it could also provide a source of national pride. I’m thinking if bonds are directly marketed to the public (in addition to the usual institutional-fund investors), like war bonds were in the 1940s, we could see an environment where infrastructure development and maintenance stays a top priority and people feel involved in ensuring the health of their communities. What more could a liberal want?
My inability to see Obama’s nominees and his campaign rhetoric as mutually exclusive is not because I am not a true liberal. Last Sunday, on Meet the Press, Tom Brokaw quoted Obama as saying, “being a president is 90 percent circumstances and about 10 percent agenda.”
Here is Obama’s response:
As tough as times are right now–and things are going to get worse before they get better–there is a convergence between circumstances and agenda. The key for us is making sure that we jump-start that economy in a way that doesn’t just deal with the short term, doesn’t just create jobs immediately, but also puts us on a glide path for long-term, sustainable economic growth.
I think it is perfectly acceptable for people to debate and question and demand. Thus, I am fine with liberals voicing their concerns, but if establishing policy and programs to optimize long-term growth means pissing off some liberals because action isn’t occurring exactly how, when, and where they want, then fine with me. We should be so lucky if that’s the greatest cost we face as we rebuild our present and design our new future.
Marc Rich Is SO 2000: Eric Holder as Obama’s Attorney General
While we're on the subject of pardons ...
Torture, warrantless spying, Guantanamo … The next attorney general has a lot to clean up when the Bush frat party vamooses next month. Obama recently named Eric Holder as his nominee for the job. One would think with the beating American civil liberties have sustained, mainstream media would be focused on Holder’s positions on same. Instead, much reporting has chosen to focus on Holder’s involvement in Bill Clinton’s on-his-way-out-the-door pardon of Marc Rich, billionaire fugitive.
Marc Rich?!
The Rich angle is a lot sexier, in a Miami-Vice-sockless-loafers kind of way: money, oil, flights to Switzerland, more money, more oil, tanned socialite wife, and … Bill Clinton … Who wants to read boring stories about a bunch of Muslims locked up in beautiful, sunny Guantanamo Bay?
Barring the occasional invasion by PUMAs, A Candid World’s readers aren’t afraid to tackle tough issues and want to know how Obama is going to repair our reputation as moral leader among nations and protect our rights as citizens (natural born or not).
Who is Eric Holder? Yes, he was involved in the Marc Rich pardon. The NYT Op-Ed page has alternately claimed the Holder/Rich connection is and is not a big deal. The editorial staff, thankfully, focuses on Holder’s positions on Guantanamo, FISA, and torture, offering a more reasoned view than the Washington Post‘s Richard Cohen, who feels the Rich pardon wholly disqualifies Holder for the AG position. More important than the Rich pardon, Holder needs to account for his words in the first months following 9/11, when he suggested enemy combatants and other terror detainees might not be entitled to Geneva Convention protections.
Of course, much time has passed since January 2002, when Holder made these questionable remarks. In June 2008, Holder presented a speech at the National Convention of the American Consititution Society. Holder calls for closure of the “national embarrassment” that is Guantanamo and transfer of prisoners to U.S. soil. He also calls for an immediate end to extraordinary rendition and for an absolute rejection of torture. He condemns warrentless wiretapping. He further calls for adherence to the rules of FISA, and if there is broad agreement among military, intelligence, and legal communities that FISA needs updating, then fine: Improve FISA; don’t circumvent it.
There is no tension between an effective fight against those who have sworn to harm us and a respect for our most honored civil liberties tradition. We can never put the welfare of the American people at risk, but we can also never choose actions we know will weaken the legal and moral fiber of our nation.
Oft quoted, too, is this excerpt from a March 2006 National Journal article regarding the confirmation of Alberto Gonzales as AG; Holder says:
The attorney general is the one Cabinet member who’s different from all the rest. The attorney general serves first the people, but also serves the president. There has to be a closeness at the same time there needs to be distance.
Very different from Gonzales, Holder would be an attorney general who is interested in restoring rather than trashing constitutional protections. In the end, people (mostly) on the right will focus on the Marc Rich pardon; people on the left, on Holder’s early post-9/11 positions. Of course, these issues should be addressed in confirmation hearings.
BUT can we please focus on the latter rather than the former?! Believe me, Marc Rich is an amoeba on a flea on a rat relative to the real issues that matter for our country’s future.
