So what if Eric Holder played a role in Bill Clinton’s decision to issue financier Marc Rich a pardon?  Going into the confirmation hearings, and considering how the previous Attorney General allowed flat out politicization of the Justice Department in order to do his Master’s bidding, I think Holder comes out smelling like a rose.  Unfortunately, his connections to the Clintons are making a few ReThugs salivate at the idea of making a Clintonista squirm, just out of spite and because most of the GOP are just plain weasels (FROM POLITICO):

In a column in The Washington Post on Tuesday, Richard Cohen argued that Holder’s role in the pardon should disqualify him as attorney general because it shows he cannot stand up to power. But Senate Democrats have generally accepted Holder’s admission that he regretted his role in the decision-making process over the pardon. They place the blame on Clinton, not Holder, who was deputy attorney general at the time. (emphasis mine)

However, some Republicans are showing some common sense, even if the rest want to engage in the double standard approach:

Leahy’s GOP counterpart on the panel, Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, has said the Rich pardon will be a big issue at the confirmation hearings, which will likely begin in January. But he said he would not block the nomination, and Senate Judiciary Committee ranking member Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah) has said that he supports Holder despite his role in the Rich pardon.

Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), another member of the Judiciary Committee, told reporters last month that he tends to give deference to a presidential Cabinet appointment, particularly for new administrations, and he praised Holder’s credentials.

But the article does not to allow us to forget that there is a weasel element amongst the Democrats, as well as their ability to engage in a circular firing squad when its advantageous.  Cue Senator Chuck Schumer, who had this to say at the time of the Rich pardon:

For instance, Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), a member of Democratic leadership and one of the most outspoken members of his caucus, said of the Rich pardon in 2001 that “there can be no justification in pardoning a fugitive from justice.”

He added: “Pardoning a fugitive stands our justice system on its head and makes a mockery of it.”

But now that it’s Obama who’s in charge, ol’ Chuck’s singing a new tune:

Although Holder played a critical role in the Rich pardon, Schumer now says that Holder is a “classy and historic pick for attorney general,” and nobody with his “experience and integrity” would have any trouble being confirmed.

I am pissed because I see the pattern of double standards being applied here.  While the Bush Administration was allowed to appoint everybody from the horse trader to run an agency to deal with natural disasters like Hurricane Katrina, to trying to nominate his cleaning woman to the Supreme Court (although in all honesty, the GOP themselves tanked that one), if any Democrat cried “foul” they were decried as being non-supportive of Dubya and un-American.  In the Obama Administration, I understand the best and brightest have to also be competent to get the job done, I’m still seeing the pattern of scrutiny that was not afforded to the Bush Administration, and the nation wonders why the Federal Government is in a shytstorm as a result of all the damned incompetent “Rangers” holding Cabinet positions and other high ranking authority positions, simply because they raised boatloads of cash for Bush, and it still wasn’t enough to keep him from finageling two elections to take the White House.

As I said, I know a damned pattern when I see one. And so should you.

Related Posts with Thumbnails