Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Eric Holder's Conflict of Interest

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
annabanana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 03:55 PM
Original message
Eric Holder's Conflict of Interest
Source: OpEdNews

Seems Mr. Holder, before being selected Attorney General of the United States of America, worked for a firm called Covington and Burling. The tip I got was that the firm had a very important client whose name was George W. Bush and they represented a very important organization I am sure ya'll all have heard of - the Republican National Committee. I was in shock when I checked it and it was true. My favorite research item I ran across is when they were protecting the RNC from having to turn over Karl Rove's emails that were run on the RNC Servers. It shocked me. Plus I found it mighty interesting that AG Eric Holder never enlightened anyone about his conflict of coming from a big Washington DC law firm that represented the Republican National Committee and George W. Bush in the 2000 election contest.

Read more:

Is this why the DoJ has been pursuing those cases involving Repubs (Ted Stevens) and NOT taking on cases involving Dems (Don Siegelman)??
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 04:02 PM
Response to Original message
1. I used to work for a big DC law firm that represented the Carlyle Group. But, that doesn't make me
Edited on Sat Aug-08-09 04:09 PM by leveymg
a Bush stooge. This sort of bi-partisan representation and makeup of DC law firms is a fact of life that says nothing about how Holder will perform as Attorney General. Except, that he's part of the upper tier of the power structure, but that's a different issue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 04:31 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. The better story would be Covington alumni and Honduras. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
bertman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 10:12 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. Exactly. The Chiquita Connection rears its ugly head again. But don't mention it on here.
He's an Obama appointee so he's clean, clean, clean.

These bastards are all thick as thieves. You do not get appointed to posts like AG unless you're under the corporate thumb and have proved your worth. Holder has certainly proved his worth to the corporatocracy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Liberation Angel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 11:36 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. He proved he's a good ;attorney
The Chiquita case is complicated. Ciquita paid bribes to leftists and rightists and broke the law. Holder pled them out in a criminal conviction which he claimed was the fault of the Bush administration for failing to tell Chiquita not to bribe after chiquita ASKED Chertoff for advice on what they should do to protect their employees.

anyway, you cannot assume that a lawyer's clients are the equivalent of the lawyer when it comes to "cleanness" or integrity. Everyone has a right to decent legal counsel.

I am pretty confident Holder is WAY more on our side than all the thick s theives bastards you refer to.

Would you have preferred like John Bolton as AG???

Holder took the best position he could get to do what he believed was best for his career and politics. It was pragmatic. Politics ain't pretty and neither is the law. But he helped get Obama elected and that says he is not a corporate fascist tool (or at least not a complicitous one)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
bertman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-09-09 11:14 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. I understand your argument, but what bothers me about it is that you assume that a
lawyer has to leave his morality at home in a closet when he's doing his job as an attorney.

Whatever happened to resigning one's position when given the assignment of representing corrupt, obviously guilty clients? The, I-had-to-take-the-case-because-I'm-an-attorney excuse--because that's what it is--just doesn't fly. You're right that it might cost that attorney his/her job and maybe even future jobs (or high political office), but that's what integrity entails.

I'll take an honest person over a "pragmatist" any day of the week. A pragmatist will put the screws to you in a heartbeat because he/she views it as the only viable option to preserve his/her career or advantage, regardless of the impact on others. That is what seems to be the biggest problem in our government. No one is willing to actually sacrifice for the principled position. And Holder is certainly no exception.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 08:59 PM
Response to Original message
3. Holy cow---!!! And, finding legal problems with the Stevens case -- !!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Liberation Angel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-08-09 11:18 PM
Response to Original message
5. I think that one can be too smart about things like this
It is a natural step for Holder to work for a scummy top tier law firm like this in DC after working for Clinton

But the reality is that the only thing tat can be said about his "loyalties" is that this firm deals with the worst of the worst as clients and he worked there the way millions of us work for evil corporations.
It does not prove that he is necessarily evil or other than a typical opportunist playing the political game so that he could advance and MAYBE make things better.
For a dissection of this firm i would suggest begin here:

These guys also represented some good progressive cases including Guantanamo prisoners

But they represented fascist scum as well

that is how money is made by lawyers

so i do not think it means as much as the OP implies other than that Holder plays the power game. It looks like he is going to appoint a special prosecutor on torture and many of his moves have been pretty good.

I am not crazy about Holder bu we could have done a LOT worse or a lot better. But Holder has experience like few others and hopefully he will use it for the best.

I reserve judgment for now

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Jan 16th 2018, 05:34 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC