- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
"Good luck defending "justice is blind," Glenn. As numerous folks come forward to defend some defendants as more worthy of defense, and others less so. And, by dint of who they defend, some lawyers GOOD and others BAD. And, most recently, the new wrinkle of who can afford what kind of defense.
Periodically, I engage in this fantasy that all the authoritarians who need Black and White distinctions are deep in the bowels of the lunatic Right, but reality always comes roaring back, doesn't it?"
Is a sort of high-minded conception of justice really being defended here? It is not as if Holder is acting the role of Atticus Finch, defending a client before a hostile or even impartial judge or jury. He is a powerbroker. Is it even doubtful that he used his connections to get a light sentence for his client? If justice were blind, Chiquita would no longer be in operation. If we lived in a sane world even, that would be so. It seems like your defense of Holder would apply in a perfect system. As it is not some of us tend to look past the black and white distinctions that are trying to be drawn here.
I like the point that someone made about defending the mafia. So how about Bruce Cutler for AG? Does anyone seriously think that someone could defend people like that for profit and be seriously considered for a top governmental post?
