- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
I can see omooex's point.
The position of AG is a political appointment. So having an opinion on the cases Holder has taken seems fine. Glenn, you don't have to agree with omooex on the issue, but if omooex is uncomfortable with Holder's choice of taking a particular case, what's wrong with that?
A religious conservative might take issue with a lawyer who was willing to defend Dr. Kevorkian, for example. If you see euthanasia as morally wrong, it's easy to see how someone like that would prefer a different lawyer for AG.
The Chiquita case makes me a bit uncomfortable too. As omooex has pointed out, it isn't like Chiquita has any trouble finding counsel - Holder almost certainly took this case for the money. It's hard for me to fault him for this - everyone needs to make a living, and getting paid well sure is nice.
But someone committed to social justice, or a more just foreign policy, probably would not have taken the case - Chiquita has not been a good corporate citizen, to say the least, in Latin America. I think it does say something about him, about his view of the world.
To recap, I'm making a very mild criticism. I don't see this as a deal breaker, but the Chiquita case is a blemish, in my view, when compared to an ideal AG candidate.
