Saturday, February 20, 2010

Who are they advocating for?

I readily admit that everything I know about our court system I learned from Law & Order but that was back in the days when Fred Thompson was the DA so maybe things have changed.  I was under the impression that in criminal cases that there are two sides: the government, who advocates for "the people", us, and the defense, who advocates for the accused.  Each side has an obligation to act passionately on behalf of the people they represent.  That is why I am more than a bit disturbed by this headline from the Washington Examiner:

Holder admits nine Obama Dept. of Justice officials worked for terrorist detainees, offers no details

So, these nine have switched sides so to speak.  Have they?  Have their passions changed?  Their mindset?  Or is it fair to say that the mindset of our current Justice Department, under the leadership of Atty. Gen. Eric Holder changed?

I don't think I'm too far out on a limb by saying that Holder has made some questionable decisions.  Holder certainly didn't advocate for on the side of Philadelphia voters when he ordered that the case against Black Panthers who stood outside polling places on Election Day with weapons be dropped against the adive of career lawyers. Holder clearly is advocating on behalf the people in Manhattan (or any of us) by choosing to try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in the civilian courts in mid town Manhattan.

Holder is using cronyism to load up the Justice Department with values that are out of step with the very people they are charged with defending-us.  So again, who is he advocating for?

No comments: