Share on Google Plus Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Share on LinkedIn Share on PInterest Share on Fark! Share on Reddit Share on StumbleUpon Tell A Friend 1 (1 Shares)  
Printer Friendly Page Save As Favorite View Favorites View Article Stats   3 comments

Exclusive to OpEdNews:
OpEdNews Op Eds

Sessions says DOJ should be free from political pressures and ideological excess

By (about the author)     Permalink       (Page 1 of 1 pages)
Related Topic(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; ; , Add Tags Add to My Group(s)

View Ratings | Rate It

opednews.com Headlined to H2 6/18/09

Yesterday at the Senate Judiciary Hearing attended by Eric Holder, Jeff Sessions called for de-politicizing the justice department. Great idea! There's no better place to start than his own back yard and with Governor Don Siegelman!

This is the beginning of Jeff Sessions' opening remarks to Eric Holder at today's senate judiciary committee hearing.  I transcribed as much as I could.  Here's the point.  Look at the highlighted statements.  If he means what he says, then Jeff Sessions should welcome and advocate for Don Siegelman to receive justice and freedom.  Surely Governor Siegelman was the victim of "political pressures and ideological excess".  Surely Sessions would ask that this administration's DOJ "elevate the department above the politics and bad policy" of the Bush administration.   

Shouldn't we ask Jeff Sessions to stand up for Don Siegelman?  He wants to take the politics out of the DOJ.  What better place to start than in his own state of Alabama with its own political targets?

 "Attorney General Holder, I’m glad you’re here today to address the committee as we fulfill our oversight responsibilities for the department of justice.  The department plays a critical role in protecting the rule of law and preserving national security, and it must be free from political pressures and ideological excess. 

 Mr. Holder, I supported your nomination to be Attorney General.  I think I was a minority in my party that did so.  But I did so because I believe that your previous experience within the department would serve to elevate the department in its mission above politics and bad policy. And I was assured by your promises during the confirmation process to that effect.   

So it is difficult for me to tell you this.  I am disappointed.  During your confirmation hearing you promised to adhere to the Constitution and put the rule of law over political or other considerations.  You said you had learned from the past and you had not returned to pre-9/11 criminal law concepts in protecting the American people from terrorist attacks.   

You told Senator Lindsay Graham that you agreed with him that “every person who commits to going to war against American or any other peaceful nation should be held off the battlefield as long as they’re dangerous.”  And I don’t think your actions we’ve seen so far are consistent with that commitment.  Since your confirmation you’ve done a number of things that I think you’ve pledged not to do.   Time and again I find myself reading about political appointees who have overruled career department attorneys to further some agenda or left-wing activity. 

 One such instance came when you rejected the office of legal council on its conclusions that Congress’s recent legislation on the District of Columbia voting was unconstitutional…as it appears plainly to be.  During your confirmation hearing you emphasized that your view of OLC opinions would not be a political process.  So when OLC, the Office of Legal Council, who’s assigned this responsibility, has prepared an opinion for you that said the Congress’s legislation WAS unconstitutional, I would expect you to listen to their opinions and follow them or explain precisely why you do not. Instead, you moved around them and sought a second opinion from the Solicitor General’s office, an office that’s really required to defend whatever it’s asked, and asked them for their legal advice.  You again, I think, followed pressure from the left to override common sense when you allowed the department of justice to release OLC opinions regarding interrogation, even though high profile members of the intelligence community warned you that it was unwise to do so."

 

Marilyn Noyes is a native Los Angeleno with a background in market research and advertising. She's a political activist and member of Progressive Democrats of Los Angeles. Marilyn is an artist who shoots abstract photography and an animal lover (more...)
 

Share on Google Plus Submit to Twitter Add this Page to Facebook! Share on LinkedIn Pin It! Add this Page to Fark! Submit to Reddit Submit to Stumble Upon

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Writers Guidelines

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Standing up for Don Siegelman

Homage to Southern Progressives!

Eric Holder's stand on DNA opens the door for Don Siegelman

Because I am a Progressive

SOMETIMES YOU REALLY NEED SOME ENCOURAGEMENT"SOMETIMES YOU GET IT!!!

Don Siegelman Has Fans Everywhere

Comments

The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
3 people are discussing this page, with 3 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
(Or you can set your preferences to show all comments, always)
has a right to be disappointed. Nothing wrong with... by Nick van Nes on Thursday, Jun 18, 2009 at 9:05:28 PM
There seems to be plenty of disappointment to go a... by Bryan Emmel on Friday, Jun 19, 2009 at 2:50:28 AM
The DOJ had little latitude in the case of Senator... by Frank Smith on Friday, Jun 19, 2009 at 10:07:31 AM