Leahy’s office was very interested in the Washington Times story.

[kpete]

Did Holder Promise No Prosecutions?
By: emptywheel Wednesday January 28, 2009 11:32 am
http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2009/01/28/did-holder-promise-no-prosecutions/

Update: JimWhite had a very productive call with Pat Leahy's office on this. But since his call with Bond's office was considerably less productive, I agree with JimWhite that Bond might need to hear from a few more Americans who believe Senate votes should not be premised on promises of non-prosecution. If you'd like to join in, Bond's office is [phone]. (Apparently you're not the only trying to give Bond a piece of your mind, so be persistent.)

............

Pat Leahy’s office was very interested in the Washington Times story. They also transferred me to the SJC office who took down the web address and forwarded it to the proper folks for action. I told them that if this is true, we need Bond’s resignation and Holder’s withdrawal. They agreed in both offices that this is a huge problem if real.

I got cut off from Bond’s office when I asked them when we would have Bond’s resignation.

Reid’s office was the usual void.
http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2009/01/28/whitehouse-and-leahy-scold-cornyn-and-specter-for-asking-for-no-prosecution-guarantee/#comment-130972

[bdamomma]

1. I was so upset about this I just faxed the article to Senators Leahy

and Senator Whitehouse.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3711142

[Beetwasher]

2. It's Washington Times Propoganda

In other words, total bullshit meant to smear Holder and cast doubt on his nomination among Democrats.

It's the WASH TIMES for goodness sake! It's what they do.

I don't believe for a second Holder made any such assurances to a REPUB behind closed doors. No way in hell.

[seemslikeadream]

3. what?

:wow:

[mmonk]

4. Thanks so much.

We the people need to have our say. An AG cannot make a promise he will not prosecute in the future even if it is warranted.

[bobd0]

5. The Obama administration must follow the evidence wherever it leads

otherwise we're still living in a dictatorship.

If there was a quid pro quo in the Holder vote those involved must be held accountable as well.

[lonestarnot]

6. Quid Pro Quo. Does he want to start off that way?

[Mme. Defarge]

7. Maybe the upside is

that in order to prove that no promises were made, it will be necessary for Holder to prosecute.

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

8. I hope Holder comes out real quick with a denial.

Especially after the way Whitehouse and Leahy stood up Spector and Cornyn and called them out on how patently wrong/illegal this would be.

If Holder doesn't deny it, than I have a very hard time supporting him even though I loved that he was clearly able to say water boarding is torture, because it is.

[maddezmom]

10. so far just his aide but here is the denial

Aide: Holder Has Made No Decisions On Prosecuting Bush Officials
An aide to Eric Holder rejected a report Wednesday suggesting that the Attorney General nominee had pledged not to prosecute members of the Bush administration officials who were complicit in illegal harsh interrogations or torture.

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

The statement came hours after the Washington Times quoted Senate Judiciary Committee member Kit Bond saying Holder had privately insisted that he would not conduct such prosecutions. That report caused a stir on the Hill, where Democrats were left wondering whether Holder had privately placated Republican concerns that he would investigate Bush administration officials involved in interrogations.

Publicly, Holder has tried his best to be non-committal on what he would do in regard to torture investigations saying "nobody is above the law," but that he didn't "want to criminalize policy differences that may exist" between administrations. Because he defined waterboarding as torture during his confirmation hearings, it was assumed that he would have a responsibility to investigate the Bush administration admission that they have used waterboarding on a select few detainees. But in a question form offered to Republican Senators on Judiciary he was much more vague (indeed, cold to the idea) when asked if he would prosecute the matter.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/28/aide-holder-has-made-no-d_n_161971.html

[struggle4progress]

9. Washington Times is a lying Moonie rag