Mother Jones - Comments for "Why Eric Holder Represents What's Wrong with Washington"

Well...I feel so proud of

Well...I feel so proud of Mr. Holder. That is just so nice of him. It will "cost" him $2.5 million a year. Yah.

Well, I am losing millions a year also by not being a crooked lawyer. And that just makes me such a good person.

You must really look up to those Bush - Obama pompous elite.

Just like Bush, Obama LOVES the big drug companies. We will all get nice pain killing drugs and all our kids can be on ritalin under the BUSH - OBAMA "no child left behind" (without drugs).

OBAMA - Just the same old FAILED BUSH POLICIES

Obama: The same old failed Bush policies. They are probably "...having a beer..." together.

Bush made Homeland Security. Obama - wants his very own "civilian army". They both love the police state.

Oh, and how about that patriot act? How convenient that Obama could complain about it. Have you noticed? Its still there! Much to Obama's convenience.

State Religion: Bush loved giving money to the Religious nuts. So does Obama. Not that anyone talks about it though.

Oh yeah...just leave the TROOPS TO ROT, just like Bush did.

How about racism? Bush had New Orleans. Well, Well. I guess Obama won't give those California farmers water. Obama HATES hispanics. And its all for some little fish. Why don't you just kill me Mr. Obama? Send your SEIU RACIST THUGS.

China: Well, I guess human rights aren't that important after all, at least according to Obama's little lackey Clinton "...there are far more important things to worry about..." Like we have to go beg China for more money. JUST LIKE BUSH.

and speaking of money, how about that

NATIONAL DEBT? Oh we just have to bail out those poor poor rich bankers and financiers. After all, if it wasn't for them, what would the poor pathetic little person, the unwashed masses do? We have to SAVE THE FASCIST ELITE!! Oh ... Obama's not a FASCIST? How could that be? Oh my!! Do you even know what it is? Why don't you read what Mussolini did and how he manipulated the masses.

Tax cheats, con men,

Bush had Haloburton. Obama has ACORN. No bid contracts? Why don't you check the facts.

Should I go on?

thank you for this nice

thank you for this nice article..thanx more
شات مجلة حواء مسجات منتديات عالم حواء العاب بنات العاب

Bush committed hate crimes

Speaking of U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder: Eric Holder is a racial-minority individual, and in his heart and mind he inevitably does not endorse hate crimes committed by George W. Bush. George W. Bush committed hate crimes of epic proportions and with the stench of terrorism (indicated in my blog). George W. Bush did in fact commit innumerable hate crimes. And I do solemnly swear by Almighty God that George W. Bush committed other hate crimes of epic proportions and with the stench of terrorism which I am not at liberty to mention. Many people know what Bush did. And many people will know what Bush did—even to the end of the world. Bush was absolute evil. Bush is now like a fugitive from justice. Bush is a psychological prisoner. Bush has a lot to worry about. Bush can technically be prosecuted for hate crimes at any time. In any case, Bush will go down in history in infamy. Submitted by Andrew Yu-Jen Wang B.S., Summa Cum Laude, 1996 Messiah College, Grantham, PA Lower Merion High School, Ardmore, PA, 1993 “GEORGE W. BUSH IS THE WORST PRESIDENT IN U.S. HISTORY” BLOG OF ANDREW YU-JEN WANG ______________________ I am not sure where I had read it before, but anyway, it is a linguistically excellent statement, and it goes kind of like this: “If only it were possible to ban invention that bottled up memories so they never got stale and faded.” Oh wait—off the top of my head—I think the quotation came from my Lower Merion High School yearbook.

What bothers me most about Holder, is noted in the second sentence. And that is "worked at the NAACP Legal Defense Fund".

To me, like Mecha, or La Raza, the NAACP is what I derisively call "a race first" organization.

They are not concerned about inclusion....except for their own race.

It is not that I dislike these racist organizations, rather that I DESPISE them!

I think we should not lose sight of the fact that according to the article, Holder will get paid around $2.9 million for 2008, his final year at Covington, which means that being attorney general will cost him at least $2.5 million dollars a year.

In a world where a low-level associate at a major firm makes more money than most of the judges he will appear before, I think this is a strong indication of Mr. Holder's dedication to the public good.

G. Kelly
(no relation to previous poster)

This is not a criticism of your post. This information needs to be known.

I just want to say that all of this information (I believe all, it's been a while) appeared in an article in the online version of the Washington Legal Times when Holder's nomination was initially publicized.

The Legal Times, which is a newspaper and therefore "objective," simply reported the news - what Holder was doing since 2000, working at the private Washington law firm.

When I read the Legal Times article I thought Obama, say it ain't so. Then I thought, it's a corporate world baby.

But I agree with Corn. Holder made a choice to defend corporate interests. He didn't have to do that to earn a living.

The Legal Times' article did not present the information with the angle of 'this is what's wrong with Washington.'

This is the value of news media like MoJo. We must think about things from a non-majority viewpoint. I don't recall seeing articles about Holder's corporate activities in the rest of the Main Stream Media. That's sad. I think most articles/stories focused on the Rich pardon.

Just goes to show you they focus on something wrong with Holder so we don't think about the bigger picture.

Thank you.

Thank-you David. A brilliant piece that summarizes what is wrong with government and why so many of us remain only very cautiously optimistic about the new administration.

Criticizing a career civil servant for taking a temporary turn at a big corporate law firm is fair enough, I suppose. But only as long as these critics are aware that the vast majority of attorneys everywhere spend their entire careers in private practice, seeking "the highest pay check, period" to use Aaron's terminology. In fact, isn't that pretty much what 97% of Americans do for their entire careers? The fact that Holder is being criticized for spending only 90% of his career altruistically, in comparison to most Americans who spend 0%, seems ridiculous to me. Apparently, only the ideologically pure are acceptable, huh?

Furthermore, these critics don't really understand the legal market. First, Aaron, taking a job at a large corporate law firm is not the best way to make a lot of money as an attorney. Ask any corporate lawyer. The richest lawyers in the country are all class-action plaintiff's attorneys.
Second, working as a law school prof or a law school dean (two of the primary, and more "acceptable" jobs critics are saying Holder should have chosen) is completely different from actually working as an attorney. Law profs teach, and are expected to pump out obscure, scholarly articles with regularity. Unless they're clinic professors, they don't actually practice law. Deans spend their time hiring and maintaining faculty, glad-handing and harassing donors, and trying to find ways to manipulate their school's US News ranking. A person who loves being a lawyer would have no interest in these positions.

I posted about the selfsame topic on the Daily Kos a few hours after it became known that Holder was Obama's selection in November. I got so much heat for that post. I think the point is clear--Holder sold out, period. He didn't have to. As Corn suggests, he could have chosen to do many other things. But he went for the highest pay check, period, and in so doing crawled into bed with corporate America. This is the revolving door. This pick was much more about Obama being chummy with Holder. It would have been one thing for Holder to join a corporate firm after law school to pay off the debt or what not. But he went in late. That's disappointing. He may be a fine AG. But he may not be too. He may still take lunches, not to mention cash, from the CEOs and GCs he hung with at Covington. They may play golf or something. There could be backroom deals that will never come to light,until many years later.

I don't see this guy as a fighter for what he believes in. Holder strikes me as a yes man.

Interesting article. Certainly adds a great deal of background to Holder the nominee that I can understand some will take issue with. I am not as impressed with his candidacy as I once was but I think it is still a net positive.

Nevertheless, I cannot fault an individual legally practicing his profession after he leaves government service. If his previous activities are so troubling then maybe a code of conduct should be defined for government officials who leave office that precludes their occupying roles of the sort Holder occupied.

To measure someone against some arbitrary and subjective standard of what they should or should not do once they leave office strikes me as unfair.

The point isn't that Holder did anything wrong, of course he did what he should do for a client.

The question is, why did he choose to represent the clients he did. He had enough options after leaving government work, he chose to represent corporations that paid him a ton of money. That's his right, of course, but he's gotta bear the burden of defending that choice.

The Marc Rich pardon has another side not much discussed. In the Starr Report, it is noted that shortly before Clinton broke off his whatever with Monica, he warned her that a "foreign power" was bugging her unsecure phone. It seems that the genius Clinton did not figure it out that phone sex from a secure to an unsecure phone makes both insecure. According to "Gideon's Spies: The Secret History of the Mossad" by Gordon Thomas, that foreign power was Israel that used blackmail not only to get the pardon of Rich long tied to Mossad, but also to call off a FBI mole hunt for a mole code-named "Mega" a Mossad mole in place at very high levels since times of Poppy Bush.

So much for it was only about consensual sex as if true, and the evidence suggests it is (there really was an ongoing FBI mole hunt called off in 1998) then the hold Israel has on the Clintons remains and gets tighter the more they use their leverage.

Let me add that stigmatizing representation of corporate defendants will result in thse defendants being represented by lawyers who don't give a shit about the public interest and will lie, cheat and steal to get their clients off. And there are plenty of lawyers like that. In order for the system to work, we need public spirited, ethical attorneys representing corporate defendants. So Corn's attack is not just unfair, in the big picture what Corn is arguing would actually undermine the public interest.

I'm surprised that Corn would post such utter crap. Holder didn't help "the company slip past McGraw's charges." He didn't get the company off on a technicality (not that there's anything wrong with that -- technicalities matter.) He didn't engage in discovery abuse or other unethical behavior to obstruct the other side's case. He negotiated a consensual settlement. Presumably, McGraw thought there was a risk that he would lose at trial. The settlement was the result of arm's length negotiations by lawyers assessing the pros and cons of their respective cases. If the case went to trial and a jury found that McGraw failed to prove his case, would Holder still be a villain? Corn says he believes corporate defendants have a right to representation, but that's an empty statement if lawyers who professionally and ethically represent those corporate defendants are subject to cheap smears by people like Corn.

I am usually impressed by David's work and find him highly engaging and likeable on TV and bloggingheads. It's disappointing that someone usually so thoughtful would write something so mindless.

Mother Jones - Comments for "Why Eric Holder Represents What&#039;s Wrong with Washington"

Well...I feel so proud of

OBAMA - Just the same old FAILED BUSH POLICIES

thank you for this nice

Bush committed hate crimes

Mother Jones - Comments for "Why Eric Holder Represents What's Wrong with Washington"