Video- AG Holder Press Conference On Times Square Terrorist

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Official: Terror case may happen outside Manhattan

I actually understand and think this is good idea, at least on the financial basis.

WASHINGTON – Facing growing opposition to its plans to hold the Sept. 11 terrorist trial in New York City, the Obama administration is considering moving the proceedings elsewhere.

Two administration officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said Friday the Justice department is drawing up plans for possible alternate locations to try professed 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and four alleged accomplices in case Congress or local officials prevent the trial from being held in Manhattan.

The two officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the deliberation.

Attorney General Eric Holder announced last year that the trial would be held in Manhattan federal court, generating stiff opposition in Congress and in New York.

Word that the administration is considering a backup plan for its most high-profile terrorism trial comes after President Barack Obama and Holder have spent weeks on the defensive about their handling of terrorism threats.

(snip)

The officials did not say where else the trial might be held, but others have suggested an unpopulated island near Manhattan, or nearby military installations.

New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who originally supported the plan, reversed his position this week and called Holder to lobby for moving the trial outside lower Manhattan. The city has claimed it will cost them hundreds of millions of dollars to provide security for a court case that is expected to last at least a year.

Dick Cheney takes swipe at Obama over prosecutor

Funny, this is not the way the smartest man on the intertubes sees it.

(CNN) — Former Vice President Dick Cheney is again taking aim at President Obama, issuing a statement Monday suggesting the administration's decision to name a prosecutor to investigate CIA interrogations under President Bush fuels "doubts about this administration's ability to be responsible for our nation's security."

"The people involved deserve our gratitude," Cheney said in the statement. "They do not deserve to be the targets of political investigations or prosecutions."

The former vice president also said documents released Monday prove enhanced interrogation techniques yieled valuable information that "provided the bulk of intelligence we gained about al Qaeda"

AG Holder overturns Bush immigration order

One overturn at a time.

WASHINGTON (CNN) — Attorney General Eric Holder overturned on Wednesday an order by the Bush administration that made it more difficult for defendants to appeal the rulings on their immigration cases, Holder's office announced.

The order, enacted by former Attorney General Michael Mukasey 13 days prior to the end of then-President George W. Bush's term, limited immigrants' efforts to reopen their cases by claiming they had ineffective assistance of counsel.

The order and its abolishment focus on whether non-citizens have a constitutional right to effective counsel in deportation cases.

From the Dep't. of WTF? Holder Not Reviewing Siegelman Prosecution

By GottaLaff

I've posted over and over again about the horrific, unfair treatment of Don Siegelman, and how his case leads straight to Karl Rove. Siegelman deserves to have his case scrutinized, but apparently, that ain't gonna happen any time soon:

Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. is moving to revamp Justice Department procedures in the wake of the prosecutorial debacle in the Ted Stevens case. But Holder said today that he is not reviewing the Justice Department's prosecution of former Alabama Gov. Donald Siegelman on corruption charges, nor other corruption cases involving Alaskan officials.

The House Judiciary Committee has been probing allegations that the Siegelman case was politically motivated by the Bush administration. Siegelman, a Democrat, was convicted in 2006.

"I don't have any reviews under way at this point, but I always want to ensure that the Justice Department acts in a way that is consistent with the long tradition of this great department," Holder said.

Let's hope that "at this point" means there is still a chance.

Holder [...] is preparing to announce some changes in the department's procedures for such prosecutions, however.

Thom Hartmann has been giving out Holder's phone number, encouraging all of us to call (politely) in protest. Feel free to join him:

Call Attorney General Eric Holder Now

CALL ATTORNEY GENERAL ERIC HOLDER AND ENCOURAGE HIM TO REVIEW GOVERNOR DON SIEGELMAN’S CASE: (202) 514-2001

(ALTERNATE # Office of the Attorney General - 202-353-1555)

America unmasked: The KKK is alive and kicking in 2009, but shhh... don't talk about it

By GottaLaff

Attorney General Holder said that we are a "nation of cowards" and called for a national dialog on race. Surprise! Republicans are appalled. Of course they are. That is absolutely reprehensible! Nearly as reprehensible as this:

These images show members of the Ku Klux Klan as they want to be seen, scary and secretive and waiting in the wings for Barack and his colour-blind vision for America to fail. Anthony Karen, a former Marine and self-taught photojournalist was granted access to the innermost sanctum of the Klan. [...]

Karen’s images of the Klan and its supporters regularly appear on the recruiting websites of the far right. Out of context, the images of hooded Klansmen and their families tell us little of the real story – the inexorable rise in the number of extremist organisations in America. [...]

As people lose their homes to foreclosure and, without the benefit of a safety net, find themselves slipping into poverty, there is already a search for scapegoats underway. Immigrants from central and South America have become particular targets as the grim economic times take hold. [...]

Since the 1930s the KKK has been in a state of disorganisation and today it probably has 6,000 members. But the economic crisis is swelling their ranks and already, a month after the inauguration of the first black president, the tidal wave of interracial harmony that greeted Obama’s election is starting to recede. [...]

More than 400 hate-related incidents, from cross-burnings to effigies of President Obama hanging from nooses have been reported, according to law-enforcement authorities and Potok’s organisation, which files lawsuits against hate groups aimed at making them bankrupt.

Late last year, two suspected skinheads who had links to a violent Klan chapter in Kentucky were charged with plotting to kill 88 black students. They were then going to assassinate President Obama by blasting him from a speeding car while wearing white tuxedos and top hats. They were never going to succeed, given the huge security net around Obama, but the fact that they had planned such an outlandish attack may be a harbinger of things to come.

“There is a tremendous backlash to Obama’s election,” says Richard Barrett, the leader of the Nationalist Movement, another white supremacist group. “Many people look at the flag of the Republic of New Africa that was hoisted over the White House as an act of war."

Now, that's appalling.

Yet, how very and awfully uppity of a black cabinet member to even suggest that people are afraid of conversing openly about racial issues. One might even go so far as to say it's presumptuous. I mean, really, what would our African American A.G. know about such things?

To those who would still challenge Holder, I'd like to pose this:

Why is it that, if America is so un-cowardly, so many people still utter the word "black" in hushed whispered tones? "HE'S black, YOU KNOW." "MY BROTHER MET FINALLY SOMEONE... SHE'S black." Gasp!

What if they were overheard? What are they so afraid of? Or am I being presumptuous by asking such a reprehensible question about their cowardice?

(Start listening to Rachel Maddow at about 2:38. She pretty much confirms the need to open up lines of honest communication.)

H/t: Ady

VIDEO: Fox News/John Gibson suggest Eric Holder is a monkey

By GottaLaff


Enough is enough:

Essentially, here's what happens. The anchor/reporter are talking about a monkey that has escaped from a zoo in Seattle. The anchor then shows viewers her desktop "screensaver" (actually desktop background) that has a monkey, which, when angry, has a "bright blue scrotum." [...]

She then throws it to John Gibson, who says, and this is a quote, "We were talking about Eric Holder today on the radio, and his bright blue scrotum."

Why are these people allowed on the air? This kind of disparagement, let alone racism, in the media, is beyond despicable.

H/t: Clancy, Dr. President

UPDATED- NOT TRUE, DOCTORED VID BUT OLIVER HAS A HUGE POINT.

Eric Holder Sworn in As First African American Attorney General

Holder: Oh no I didn't

By GottaLaff

Original post about Eric Holder's non-promise here. Now we have a more definitive denial via TPM, who spoke to Holder's aide:

The aide definitively denied Sen. Kit Bond's (R-MO) claim that Holder had given him "assurances" of avoiding future prosecutions of Bush intelligence officials who engaged in torturous interrogations.

"Eric Holder has not made any commitments about who would or would not be prosecuted," the aide said via e-mail. "He explained his position to Senator Bond as he did in the public hearing and in his responses to written questions."

Follow the link to TPM for the written version that was given to Senator Jon Kyl.

Kit Bond's remarks about Holder? Not so fast, say Sen's. Leahy, Whitehouse

By GottaLaff

Punk'd... or should I say, misled. And I was never happier to be talked down:

The implication of the piece is fairly clear: Holder promised Bond to eschew prosecutions, and Bond promised not to block his nomination. Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT), chairman of the Judiciary Committee -- which approved Holder today -- strongly denied that such an exchange could have occurred.

"It would be completely wrong if a senator said, 'I'll vote for you if you promise to withhold prosecution of a crime'," Leahy told me. "No senator would make a request like that. It'd be improper."

"Maybe Governor [Rod] Blagojevich [D-IL]" would have sought such an assurance, Leahy quipped. He never specifically referenced Bond, who declined to answer questions about the Times piece while leaving the Senate chamber this afternoon.

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), a Judiciary panel member and former federal prosecutor, had a similar response when questioned about the likelihood of Holder making the "assurances" that Bond believes were offered.

"It sounds a little improbable ... it's, frankly, improper for members of Congress to demand [a pre-determinative stance on] prosecutions."

Sounds like the Times report should be taken with a full shaker of salt.

Improper is an understatement. Even if it was inaccurate, let's keep our fingers crossed that Holder isn't even thinking in the direction of the Times' report.

However, Ellen Ratner's reporting is usually pretty good, so the question of Rove's "executive privilege" is still a problem.

H/t: Eve

True or False: Holder assures GOP on interrogation prosecution and telecom immunity

By GottaLaff

UPDATE: Patrick Leahy and Sheldon Whitehouse dismiss this as bunk.

Original post:

How can one make a decision to prosecute or not prosecute before one investigates and has seen the evidence? Granted, this piece is from the Washington Times, but.... If accurate, this would be politicizing the legal system, which was BushCo's M.O. It better not be Holder's:

Sen. Christopher "Kit" Bond, a Republican from Missouri and the vice chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, said in an interview with The Washington Times that he will support Eric H. Holder Jr.'s nomination for Attorney General because Mr. Holder assured him privately that Mr. Obama's Justice Department will not prosecute former Bush officials involved in the interrogations program.

Mr. Holder's promise apparently was key to moving his nomination forward. [...]

Sen. Bond also said that Mr. Holder told him in a private meeting Tuesday that he will not strip the telecommunications companies that cooperated with the National Security Agency after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks of retroactive legal immunity from civil lawsuits--removing another potential sticking point among GOP senators.

In the interview Wednesday, Mr. Bond said, "I made it clear that trying to prosecute political leaders would generate a political firestorm the Obama administration doesn't need."

He added, "I was concerned about previous statements he made and others had made. He gave me assurances that he would not take those steps that would cause major disruptions in our intelligence system or cause political warfare. We don't need that kind of political warfare. He gave me assurances he is looking forward." [...]

Mr. Holder made a similar point to senators last week in a little-noticed written response to questions from Republican senators Jon Kyl of Arizona and John Cornyn of Texas. Mr. Holder indicated that he would not prosecute any intelligence officers who participated in the interrogation program and who had followed Justice Department guidance.

Prosecutorial and investigative judgments must depend on the facts and no one is above the law, Mr. Holder wrote. But where it is clear that a government agent has acted in 'reasonable and good faith reliance on Justice Department legal opinions' authoritatively permitting his conduct, I would find it difficult to justify commencing a full blown criminal investigation, let alone a prosecution.

The legislative director for the American Civil Liberties Union, Caroline Fredrickson, said Wednesday that she was alarmed by Mr. Bond's statements and was hoping, Kit Bond is not stating this in the way that Mr. Holder stated it to him. She added, We are hoping there will be a clarification. It would be extraordinary if our top prosecutor, before taking office, would have predetermined whether or not to pursue certain cases because of political pressure.[...]

Mr. Specter called "satisfactory" Mr. Holder's statements that interrogation techniques authorized by legal opinions would provide a strong cover from prosecutions. According to Mr. Specter, Mr. Holder could not make any more explicit statements without knowing the facts of specific cases.

According to Ellen Ratner (of Talk Radio News Service) on Thom Hartmann just now, Holder is also caving on the question of Karl Rove's claims of "executive privilege".

Thom Hartmann's reaction to the Rove matter: We have to put the pressure on these guys. Yes, and the pressure better be enormous. This is not acceptable.

H/t: Fernando

Holder's on his way to becoming Attorney General

By GottaLaff

Let the Republicans "flex their muscles". In the end, Holder will sail through:

The Senate Judiciary Committee voted Wednesday to send the nomination of Attorney General-designate Eric Holder to the full Senate.

The committee's Democratic members unanimously supported Holder; GOP Sens. John Cornyn of Texas and Tom Coburn of Oklahoma voted no.

Arlen Specter will support Holder

By GottaLaff

Well, isn't that special:

The top Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee announced Tuesday he will support the nomination of Attorney General-designate Eric Holder when the panel votes on it Wednesday.

Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pennsylvania, had angered Holder during the confirmation hearing 10 days ago when he questioned Holder's "fitness" for the office.

Specter questioned whether Holder would be politically independent from the White House, recalling Holder's refusal as deputy attorney general to seek an independent counsel for an investigation of allegedly questionable fund-raising by then-Vice President Al Gore.

A clearly annoyed Holder then warned Specter he was "getting close to the line in questioning my integrity." [...]

And Specter, who later met with Holder privately, says he is satisfied on yet another point — that Holder is not intent on prosecuting Bush-era officials who were operating under what they presumed to be a lawful order when they engaged in harsh interrogation techniques. [...]

With Specter agreeing to support the nomination, Holder's floor vote and swearing in could be accomplished by the end of this week.

Holder may not be "intent" on prosecuting BushCo, but it will get done eventually, because it has to. I shall personally will it. From what I've been hearing, U.S. Attorneys, along with the Siegelman case, may be the catalysts.

Republicans to Holder: "Promise not to prosecute BushCo, 'k?"

By GottaLaff

Can the Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee be any more inappropriate?

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., a former U.S. attorney and former Rhode Island attorney general criticized Republican members of the committee for delaying a vote on Holder's nomination.

"Republicans on the Judiciary Committee have asked Eric Holder to make a commitment, before he is even confirmed, that he will not prosecute any Bush administration officials for their involvement in acts of torture during the last administration," Whitehouse said in a news release. "Anyone familiar with the criminal justice system -- especially those with experience as prosecutors or judges -- should know that a prosecutor should make no determination about who to prosecute before he or she has all the facts, and particularly not in response to legislative pressure."

Promise you won't bust the Bush Crime Family for breaking the law, committing war crimes and stuff like torturing and junk, 'k Eric? If you sweartogod you won't do that, we'll be your bff*.

The GOP has lost all sense of reality, utterly and completely. It's just one big delusional sack of mental illness now.

*best friends forever

VIDEO-- Feingold Questions Attorney General Nominee Eric Holder on FISA

By GottaLaff

This is the video I've been looking for. Think Progress, thank you. However-- and this is a big "however":

The New York Times reports that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court is expected to issue a major ruling validating “the power of the president and Congress to wiretap international phone calls and intercept e-mail messages without a court order,”even when U.S. residents’ personal communications are involved:

In validating the government’s wide authority to collect foreign intelligence, it may offer legal credence to the Bush administration’s repeated assertions that the president has constitutional authority to act without specific court approval in ordering national security eavesdropping.

Huh? Wha? No. Nonononono. No.

VIDEO-- Holder confirmation hearings, Lindsey Graham (R-SC): "I'm almost ready to vote for you right now"

By GottaLaff

For Ady:

VIDEO-- Attorney General Nominee Holder: "Waterboarding is torture"

By GottaLaff

A far cry from Mukasey (thanks, Feinstein and Schumer). Take a peek at what sanity looks like:

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Quickie: FISA, Feingold, and Attorney General Nominee Holder

By GottaLaff

Indications of good news to come: Russ Feingold is very happy with future A.G. Holder's response to his questions on the FISA issue. "Restoring the credibility of the Department of Justice" were the words Russ Feingold just used in regard to the nominee.

I was otherwise engaged during the interchange, so I didn't liveblog. I'm sure we'll dig up the video soon.

Senator Herb Kohl To Holder: Can You Beat Obama In Basketball?

Pretty damn funny.

Eric Holder AG Nominee Hearing at 930a EST

You can stream it live here. Expect lots of wingnuttia.