Posts Tagged ‘terror trial’
March 19th, 2010 at 2:27 pm
Eric Holder Would Be Fired If Obamacare Were Already Passed

Another week, and now there are two articles dissecting Eric Holder’s tumultuous ride as United States Attorney General.  In one, Michael Gerson lists five consequential mistakes, any one of which would be enough to spur the Democratic blogosphere into a feeding frenzy had Alberto Gonzalez been the culprit.  Among his transgressions are incoherently keeping some Bush era terrorism policies while changing others.  The effect is creating a man without a constituency.  Then, there are the quickly reversed decisions to try certain terrorists in civilian court, close down the prison facility at Guantanamo Bay, and give Miranda warnings to the undie-bomber.

Almost forgot; Holder’s planned indictments of John Yoo and Jay Bybee fizzled after being dismissed by the Justice Department’s top career attorney.

Not to be outdone, Massimo Calabresi attempts to explain away any threat to Holder’s job security as the product of partisan Republicans.  However, he doesn’t give one example of a major Holder decision carrying the day.

The overriding prominence of Obamacare is certainly benefiting Holder because it is shielding him from a much-deserved performance review.   Sacking him now would only add to the perception that the Obama Cabinet is staffed by people who couldn’t manage themselves out of a paper bag.

Unlike the specter of Kathleen Sebelius, Eric Holder has made his presence felt in this administration.  If President Obama ever gets a string of wins, don’t be surprised to see Holder announcing his intention to return to the private sector.

March 13th, 2010 at 12:32 am
Prediction: AG Holder Will Be the First Cabinet Member to Leave

Though I don’t subscribe to the idea that public officials should be hounded out of office over policy differences, I do think there comes a time when a person becomes such a distraction that an Administration is probably better off asking for a resignation.  That time is fast approaching for Attorney General Eric Holder.  By all accounts, he is a decent man with establishment credentials.  He may even be a good attorney.  But he is not an effective Attorney General.

To date, Holder’s most consequential decision as AG was moving Guantanamo Bay detainees from a military court system to a New York federal criminal court.  Though the decision was apparently fought by the White House, President Barack Obama let Holder make the call.  After protests from everybody except the Justice Department, the decision is in the process of being reversed.

Now, it is revealed that he failed to provide the Senate with seven briefs he signed prior to his nomination as AG.  Republicans claim these are material omissions that could have derailed his nomination.  Probably not.  But all of these are self-inflicted wounds that give the president’s opponents something to crow about.  As of today, Holder is a third strike away from being the first Obama Cabinet member to be asked to call it quits.

February 10th, 2010 at 12:07 pm
New York Senate Opposes Terror Trial in NYC

The Associated Press reports:

ALBANY, N.Y. (AP) — The New York Senate has passed a resolution opposing trials of terrorists being held in New York City.

The resolution passed Tuesday urges President Barack Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder to move trials of those linked to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks back to the military tribunal system.

President Obama and Attorney General Holder are reportedly considering alternative venues for Khalid Sheikh Mohammed’s trial.  But both still believe it best to try the 9-11 mastermind in a civilian court.  They may be the only two people left in America who feel that way.

January 29th, 2010 at 12:05 pm
Moving Terror Trials out of New York?
Posted by Print

That’s the word from the New York Times.  If the grassroots outrage didn’t sway the White House, the objections of Mayor Michael Bloomberg and fellow Democrats appear to be enough for the White House to at least consider moving the terrorist trials.

Even liberal Democrat Chuck Schumer from New York has gently nudged President Obama away from the New York City location.  Schumer recommended to the Administration that they “find suitable alternatives” and that “concerns about costs, logistics and security” might force the trials out of New York.

Since costs could balloon to more than $1 billion for civilian trials in New York, the President is rightly balking from his initial decision.  Let’s hope his newfound ambivalence leads him to the correct decision.

January 15th, 2010 at 1:34 pm
Now Obama is Spreading the Terrorists Around

Who knew when then-candidate Obama told “Joe the Plumber” about the benefits of spreading the wealth around, the future president meant security dollars for domestic terror trials? With estimates for terror trials in New York City totaling hundreds of millions of dollars, President Obama is seriously considering duplicating the increased costs in manpower, housing, and screening for at least one such trial in Washington, D.C.

Maybe it’s about creating jobs. After all, the most direct way for government to create a job is to add an employee to its payroll. One thing is certain; exposing another U.S. civilian population to the presence and possible attack of terrorists won’t make anyone safer. Except, perhaps, the men awaiting trial.