Did You Know...

   

Republicans who voted to confirm Holder now complain about Holder

Share
By Michelle Malkin  •  August 24, 2009 05:21 PM

GOP Sen. Kit Bond voted to confirm crime-coddling Attorney General Eric Holder on February 2, 2009.

Sen. Bond cluelessly explained that Holder was “a good listener.” As I reported at the time, 19 Bend Over Republicans joined the majority to install Holder as head of the Obama Justice Department. Let me refresh your memories:

Alexander (R-TN)
Bennett (R-UT)
Bond (R-MO)
Chambliss (R-Ga)
Collins (R-ME)
Corker (R-TN)
Graham (R-SC)
Grassley (R-IA)
Gregg (R-NH)
Hatch (R-UT)
Isakson (R-GA)
Kyl (R-AZ)
Lugar (R-IN)
McCain (R-AZ)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Sessions (R-AL)
Snowe (R-ME)
Specter (R-PA)
Voinovich (R-OH)

Now, Sen. Bond and several others on this list are whining that Holder didn’t pay attention to their entreaties against appointing a special prosecutor to investigate the CIA. Just received the following letter to Holder from Bond and Company. So much for those good listening skills, eh?

Kyl, Bond, Sessions Respond to AG Holder’s Decision to Appoint a Special Prosecutor to Investigate CIA

WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senate Republican Whip Jon Kyl (Ariz.), U.S. Senator Kit Bond (R-Mo.), Vice Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, U.S. Senator Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and other senators today sent the following letter to U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder in response to his decision to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate CIA officials who interrogated al Qaeda terrorists:

“We are deeply disappointed by today’s announcement that you have chosen to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate CIA officials who interrogated al Qaeda terrorists. As we explained to you in a letter dated August 19, 2009, reopening those cases—which career prosecutors have already determined do not warrant criminal prosecution—could, among other things, have a chilling effect on the work of the intelligence community.

“We believe that the concerns raised in our letter warranted, at a minimum, careful consideration and a reasoned response. Instead, you moved forward without responding to our concerns or discussing with a coordinate branch of government the potential national security consequences that may result if the intelligence community is operating against a backdrop of prosecutions. The handling of this important issue calls into question your confirmation hearing commitments that you would establish a ‘full partnership’ with Congress and that you ‘recognize that congressional oversight and judicial review are necessary, beneficial attributes of our system of government.’

“Wholly apart from whether this issue should have been reopened, the manner in which you have chosen to do so is itself troubling. In the ordinary course, criminal investigations and prosecutions are to be handled by career Justice Department officials working under the oversight of the Department’s senior management. The Department’s own regulations permit deviation from the “normal processes of the Department” and the appointment of a special prosecutor only where there is a ‘conflict of interest for the Department’ or other such extraordinary circumstances. 28 CFR § 600.1. Because there is no apparent conflict of interest here, the customary basis for a special prosecutor is lacking.

“Moreover, history has shown that special prosecutors, who lack the accountability of career prosecutors to Justice Department management, often take an expansive view of their investigative authority. Thus, despite your assurances that this investigation will be narrow and focused, there is a real risk that today’s announcement portends a long, arduous, and unpredictable process for the intelligence community. By delegating the prosecutorial function to a largely unchecked special prosecutor, you are responsible for having set a course that may diminish our intelligence efforts, which fundamentally rely on forward-leaning responses to national security concerns.

“We fear that the true cost of this endeavor will ultimately be borne by the American people, who rely on the intelligence community, operating without distraction, to protect them from the many threats, known and unknown, that our country faces in this post-9/11 world.”

U.S. Senators Richard Burr (R-N.C.), Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.), Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), John Cornyn (R-Texas), Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), and Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) also signed onto the letter.

On August 19, these same senators sent a letter to Attorney General Holder emphasizing the danger and consequences of taking such action as was announced today. As of today, no reply has been received.

Message to Holder-confirming GOP Senators. You should have known better then.

You have some nerve complaining now.

blog comments powered by Disqus
Posted in: Gitmo

Strategic patience: Obama admin unveils global security policy that will carry lots of ‘wait’

February 6, 2015 06:57 PM by Doug Powers

kerry9

You’ve got a friend

Obama’s stern message for ISIS: You’re really not that different from ‘high horse’ Christians

February 5, 2015 08:40 PM by Doug Powers

inquisition

NOBODY expects the progressive worldview inquisition!

Obama still unclear on ideological motivations of ISIS (aka ‘this organization’) after latest act of barbarism

February 3, 2015 09:47 PM by Doug Powers

obamaclosing

Considerations.

Couldn’t have predicted this: Gitmo detainee Obama released for Bergdahl back in touch with Taliban

January 29, 2015 04:02 PM by Doug Powers

shocking

Catch & release consequences


Categories: Afghanistan, Barack Obama, Gitmo, Terrorist attacks

Follow me on Twitter Follow me on Facebook