How On Earth Was Eric Holder Confirmed?

Considering how easy it was for the mainstream media to get President George W. Bush's attorney general, Alberto Gonzalez, out of office for doing what he was allowed to do, why is Eric Holder being given a free pass? A better question would be: "How on earth did he ever get confirmed with his dubious background?" One might suggest that political correctness had something to do with Congress reluctant to reject the first African-American attorney general, but Mr. Gonzalez was the first Hispanic attorney general and he was crucified.

More than likely, Mr. Holder's ideology meshed with the Democrat congressional majority and the White House, and so a media enraptured with President Obama held its fire.

There were those who tried to deny his confirmation by informing the public of who Mr. Holder is and what his record says of his character. An independent public interest group, Judicial Watch, took out a full-page advertisement in the Washington Times that warned:

"Mr. Holder's record demonstrates a willingness to bend the law in order to protect his political patrons. On his watch at the Clinton Justice Department, the pardon process was upended and corrupted by a 'pay to play' mentality. This undermined, in the least, the appearance of the fair administration of justice by the Justice Department," Judicial Watch noted in its letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee, dated January 13, 2009. "Mr. Holder is the wrong person to head the Department of Justice."

Judicial Watch enumerated many of the questionable connections that Mr. Holder had been involved with while serving as deputy attorney general in the Clinton administration, and if he'd undergone a legitimate vetting, he never would have passed the confirmation hearing.

Mr. Holder supported presidential clemency for 16 members of a violent Puerto Rican terrorist group, the FALN, which was responsible for almost 120 bombings in the United States that killed six people and permanently maimed dozens of others, including law enforcement officers. Mr. Holder also supported clemency for two Weather Underground terrorists imprisoned on weapons and explosive charges.

When he approved a pardon for financier Marc Rich - the first fugitive ever granted presidential clemency - he had to be aware that Mr. Rich's ex-wife, socialite Denise Rich, had donated $400,000 to the Clinton Presidential Library and $70,000 to Hillary Clinton's Senate campaign. According to Judicial Watch, Mr. Holder also advised the attorney general, Janet Reno, not to seek an independent counsel to investigate alleged fundraising abuses by Vice President Gore.

Then as now in the Obama administration, Mr. Holder continues to ignore serious incidents of corruption that loom too close to his political bosses in the White House. During the 2008 election, the New Black Panther Party dressed in paramilitary garb and threatened voters approaching the polling stations. Mr. Holder dropped the case.

He also refused to investigate charges that the Obama political machine traded VIP access to the White House in exchange for campaign contributions, which is eerily similar to one hatched by Mr. Holder's former boss, President Clinton, when Lincoln bedroom overnights were for sale.

Ever wonder why James O'Keefe and Hannah Giles decided to go undercover to expose ACORN? Perhaps it's because our attorney general failed to launch a full investigation into the more than 400,000 alleged fraudulent ACORN voter registrations in the 2008 campaign, some of which were captured on video. Unfortunately, the American public doesn't seem to pay much attention to voter fraud because of its general apathy and cynicism toward the election process.

National security is another matter that has brought into focus Mr. Holder's controversial decisions that expose his dubious priorities in establishing new rights for terrorists that threaten this nation. The idea that the evil mastermind of the September 11th terrorist attacks, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed - who'd already admitted his guilt - should be brought to New York City, the still-wounded scene of his fiendish attack, for his trial is beyond comprehension. Is it any wonder that many suspect that this show trial is really a gimmick to try the Bush administration for its interrogation tactics in Gitmo? Perhaps, Mr. Holder's Bush Derangement Syndrome is in full overdrive and has loosened some screws in his cranium.

Equally incomprehensible is Mr. Holder's decision to provide attorney privileges to the would-be "Underpants Bomber," Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, after only 50 minutes of interrogation by the FBI. Efforts to compare this with the "Shoe Bomber," Richard Reid, are flawed, as Reid didn't have a confirmed Al Qaeda connection, as did Mr. Abdulmutallab. In addition, the shoe bomb incident occurred in late 2001, soon after the 9/11 attacks, when the issue of military tribunals was still being debated. Mr. Abdulmutallab was on a mission planned by our sworn enemy and indisputably fits the description of an enemy combatant.

However, Mr. Holder, answering critics of this decision, defended it by saying in a letter to the Senate Republican leader, Mitch McConnell: "No agency supported the use of law of war detention for Abdulmutallab, and no agency has since advised the Department of Justice that an alternative course of action should have been, or should now be, pursued."

Likewise, Mr. Holder's defense for trying KSM in New York is equally self-serving, especially since the police commissioner, Ray Kelly, said at a recent speaking engagement, "We were not consulted." He went on to say that the proposed trial "will raise the threat level of this city that will not end any time soon.... We will have to look at the entire city as a potential target."

If Mr. Holder never bothered to consult with city officials before deciding to hold the KSM trial here, then, perhaps, he never bothered to consult any agency before granting the Underpants Bomber civil rights he didn't deserve.

This preference for the rights of terrorists should remind us that his former law firm, Covington & Burling, which represents 17 Yemenis currently held in Gitmo, has provided and continues to provide pro bono representation to terrorists. But whether his allegiance is to his former cohorts or to this nation, this possible conflict of interest and his previous record should have raised red flags in the congressional confirmation committee.

That it didn't is extremely worrisome and should serve as notice to voters in November that a change in Congress is the change we truly need.

Alicia Colon lives in New York City and can be reached at aliciav.colon@gmail.com and at www.aliciacolon.com