Skip to comments.Specter draws blood from Holder
Posted on 01/16/2009 9:25:52 AM PST by rightwingintelligentsia
It took nearly eight-and-a-half hours, but Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) finally got under Eric Holder's skin.
Specter was questioning Holder on why Holder objected to the appointment of an independent counsel to investigate alleged fundraising violations by former Vice President Al Gore during the 1990s.
Holder overruled former FBI Director Louis Freeh, who is now supporting Holder's nomination, in opposing that move. Holder pointed out that career DOJ lawyers in the Public Integrity Section backed his position, which then Attorney General Janet Reno eventually adopted.
Specter disagreed with that assessment, and he said that incident, along with Holder's involvement in the Marc Rich pardon scandal, raised doubts about his fitness for the post of attorney general.
"I think it's so clear that it raises questions about your fitness for the job," Specter said.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
Surprises never end.
I hope Spector asks Holder if he considers burning children alive at Waco is torture...
Gee... Specter acting like a Republican senator? What next?
Holder will be obviously the most corrupt, totalitarian Attorney General in American history.
He is up for re-election in 2010...
“Specter disagreed with that assessment, stating that Holder is not legal under Scottish law.....”
I must say, this Scottish-made wool sweater is serving me *very* well today.
[”You’re getting close to the line. You’re getting close to questioning my integrity,” Holder said. “That is not appropriate. That is not fair.”]
WAAAH WAAAH! What a whiner!
Liberals have been questioning President Bush and every other Bush Admin official’s integrity for 8+ years!
You mean Sen. Sphincter actually grew a set (at least temporarily). Who knew?
Wasn’t Specter the one who ripped Anita Hill during Judge Thomas’s hearings?... He can be a tough opponent when he gets on your case, imo.
"You're getting close to the line. You're getting close to questioning my integrity," Holder said. "That is not appropriate. That is not fair."
No one is allowed to question his integrity? I think that's one of the fundamental problems with the Washington elite - they have no integrity!
Holder better watch out. He is about to become about as popular as Longshanks (Indeed, maybe its face-painting time).
Aye, but is not Kenyan law now in rule here?
Spectre could have really drove the point home much better, if after Holder replied about “questioning his integrity”, he had replied, “Duh? Ya think?”.
Arlen is in re-election mode.
Yes, he did. But the following year when he was up for reelection and was running against a woman in the “year of the woman”, he wimped out and started apologizing for being so tough on her.
Oh, no no no...Surely you know that title is reserved for the eeeeevil John Ashcroft, who hated black people and wanted to wiretap billions of innocent Americans so he could force his religious beliefs on them. Plus, he was Hitler...AND Satan...Both...
Sadly enough, he'll get over it.
Not fair? You've got to be kidding.
Silly me. I always thought that the purpose of the Senate's 'Advice and Consent' role in appointments was precisely to 'question' the qualifications, temperament and integrity of nominees.
Liberals, when pressed, resort to statements of selective indignation..
Damn, AC, you beat me to it!
A shame, isn't it, that when a politician half does something right, the first instinct is to see when he/she is up for reelection...
I hold no brief for the nominee, but I wonder what would have happened if Holder claimed Scottish law as his reasoning...considering Spectacle's recent support for it...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.