What are these corporate wrongdoing and financial crimes prosecutions you speak of?
by digby
The president is also said to appreciate Mr. Holder’s integrity and his positions during some of the big debates over antiterrorism policies and other volatile issues. The White House also points to his department’s successful defense of the president’s health care program before the Supreme Court and prosecutions in high-profile terrorism, financial crimes and corporate wrongdoing cases.
I think that paragraph must have lost a couple of words in the editing process. It should read:
The president is also said to appreciate Mr. Holder’s integrity and his positions during some of the big debates over antiterrorism policies and other volatile issues. The White House also points to his department’s successful defense of the president’s health care program before the Supreme Court, prosecutions in high-profile terrorism cases and lack of prosecutions in financial crimes and corporate wrongdoing cases.
This comes from an article in the NY Times which has unnamed Democrats kvetching about Holder and agitating for his removal. Apparently, they are unhappy about the IRS and AP/Fox scandals which, as Josh Gerstein points out here, is unlikely to result in dismissal since only the Fox case can be directly tied to him.
So, why the anonymous backbiting? Gerstein thinks these scandals are hitting close to home for some players in the White House so they are looking for a scapegoat. Maybe that’s so, I have no idea. But there are some legitimate reasons to be unhappy with Holder’s performance, the most glaring is the fact that the DOJ simply dropped the ball on pursuing justice for the financial crimes of the past few years. There are very few high profile prosecutions of major financial players because Holder doesn’t even think such crimes are prosecutable. Too big to jail and all that. The administration evidently agrees since according to the NY Times, they are pointing to his record in that area as a success.
.