Showing posts with label Attorney General Holder. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Attorney General Holder. Show all posts

Monday, March 9, 2015

Fmr. Atty General Gonzalez Defends Holder’s Role in Ferguson Case

Mar. 9, 2015



SMERCONISH: “[Nondiscriminatory] explanation for this data, such as economics?”

GONZALES: “Not to the percentage that we’re seeing here, that’s why the numbers are very troubling to me, and I believe that the Department of Justice was correct in raising this as a civil rights violation system wide in the police department, in municipal courts in Ferguson. And so I believe that this is something that needs to be — has been identified as a major problem and now a corrective action needs to take place.”

SMERCONISH: “Do you wonder, general, if we went to police department anywhere USA if we would find a similar finding?”

GONZALES: “I would hope not quite honestly. We obviously made significant progress in race relations since Selma, and obvious — and there are a number of — I don’t want us to paint with such a broad brush in terms of what happened in Ferguson that we ignore the very positive work that’s being done by police departments and community leaders all across the nation, but we still have racial problems in this country. That’s why we have civil rights law, that’s why we have a civil rights department at the Department of Justice to address these kinds of issues. But I do think it’s important for people to understand that our laws cannot change people’s hearts. Our laws can’t change people’s behavior. It’s going to take grace. It’s going to take communication and understanding before we change people’s hearts. I’m hopeful that we can do that soon. We’re making progress. I’m hopeful this country will have a leadership to take us there.”

SMERCONISH: “How do you rate Attorney General Holder’s response to the situation in Ferguson and his handling of this case?”

GONZALES: “I think that, you know, he received some criticism about the fact that he went there and perhaps raised expectations about — with respect to civil rights prosecution. But again the Department of Justice, the feds were invited into that community after the shooting of Michael Brown occurred and I think his presence there — General Holder’s presence there, I think, sent a soothing message to very (indecipherable) feelings in that community. So, I don’t fault him for that. The only concern that I might have is, again, acknowledgment that all around the country every day police officers put their lives on the line irrespective of the color of the victim or the person that might be involved in the committing of a crime. And I think we need to acknowledge the very fine work that is ongoing but also understand more work needs to be done.”

SMERCONISH: “I agree with you. By the way an irony of this particular case is that — but for the shooting and the killing of Mike Brown, we wouldn’t know what we know about Ferguson and yet in that particular instance, Police Officer Darren Wilson will not be charged by virtue of the conclusion reached by the attorney general’s office.”

GONZALES: “Not only by the attorney general’s office, but also by the grand jury there on the ground. So obviously going in, my understanding was based upon the civil rights laws and the expectations that we have in the Department of Justice, that’s a very tough hurdle to try to meet. But now the facts have been looked at and now we need to see what we can do to address system wide problems here in Ferguson.”

Follow Larry Elder on Twitter
"Like" Larry Elder on Facebook

Tuesday, August 19, 2014

Attorney General Eric Holder
Credit:  AP
By Larry Elder, Jul. 17, 2014

Attorney General Eric Holder, in a recent interview, reiterates the theme heard from the very beginning of President Barack Obama's administration: opposition to Obama's agenda equals racism. "There's a certain level of vehemence, it seems to me, that's directed at me (and) directed at the president."

What is Holder's proof -- to the extent that any is required?

After all, following his election, Obama's favorable ratings reached nearly 80 percent, higher than any president-elect since John F. Kennedy. Obama, in 2008, received a greater percentage of the "white vote" than did John Kerry.

Polls, studies and statistics, for Holder, aren't relevant when it comes to racism. Some claim to possess "gaydar," an ability to discern the sexual orientation of a gay person. Holder, it seems, possesses the instinctive ability to discern "racists."

Holder added, "You know, people talking about taking their country back. ... There's a certain racial component to this for some people. I don't think this is the thing that is a main driver, but for some there's a racial animus."

Is Holder truly suggesting opponents disguise their racial animus through rhetoric like, "taking their country back"? Where have we heard the assertion that the take-back-America slogan equals racism?

Ben Jealous, the former president and CEO of the NAACP, made the same argument back in 2010. "They use this rhetoric," said Jealous, "'take back our country' -- as if nobody else belongs to the country. ... They question the nationality of people of color from the President all the way down. And it's deeply, deeply disturbing."

But CNN's Anderson Cooper played Jealous a montage of Democratic politicians using the very same rhetoric:

Then-presidential candidate Howard Dean, 2003: "Today, we stand in common purpose to take our country back!"

Then-presidential candidate Sen. John Kerry, 2004: "To take back our country ... "

Sen. Charles Schumer, N.Y., 2006: "We are going to take our country back!"

Then-presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama, 2007: "It's going to be because of you that we take our country back."

Then-presidential candidate Sen. Hillary Clinton, 2008: "To make sure we take our country back ... "

New Mexico's Gov. Bill Richardson, 2008: "Are you ready to take our country back?"

Then-Minnesota senatorial candidate Al Franken, 2008: "This is the year we take our country back."

Harvard law professor and defense attorney Alan Dershowitz made the same rhetoric-equals-racism argument back in 1998, only he objected the way the "right wing" refers to themselves as "real Americans." For example, a former Southern Republican criticized Dershowitz by saying, "Real America understands that the Constitution is there for a reason."

To this Dershowitz responded, "Whenever I hear the words 'real Americans,' that sounds to me like a code word for racism, a code word for bigotry, a code word for anti-Semitism." We go again to the videotape:

Then-President Bill Clinton, 1995: "Look, I know America first and foremost is a place where individual effort and family values count. That's why I am successful. But I live in the real America -- not in Washington, D.C."

Then-President Clinton, 1997: "Remember how you have seen things like that during the natural disasters here in California. That is the face of the real America. That is the face I have seen over and over again. That is the America somehow, some way, we have to make real in daily American life."

Then-President Clinton, 1998: "America's got a good agenda in the coming months. We can be for saving Social Security first, better schools, a cleaner environment, and a Patient's Bill of Rights, and we can sell that in every place in America. They are real choices real Americans face in this election."

Then-first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton, 1994: "They have enabled this day to come about, because they were willing to think differently, to put people first, to solve real problems that real Americans face every day."

Then-House Minority Leader Rep. Richard Gephardt, Mo., 1998: "We will carry on this fight every day of the rest of this year to fight for the real issues that real Americans care about so deeply."

Speaking of race, Attorney General Holder said, "The greatest threats (posed by racism) do not announce themselves in screaming headlines. They are more subtle. They cut deeper ... and ... are more pernicious." Holder offered three specific examples of "subtle," "deep," "pernicious" racism.

What are they? One, the push by some states for voter ID. Two, that black men receive longer prison sentences compared to white men for same crime. Third, that black kids are expelled/suspended at higher rates compared to white students.

In the case of voter ID, blacks support the requirement almost as much as do whites. Prison sentences are based, in part on arrests, something juries are unusually barred from hearing about. As for suspensions, schools in both liberal and conservative areas experience the same thing -- black boys disproportionately expelled.

Blame bad behavior, lack of discipline at home or fatherless homes. But blaming the consequences of bad behavior on "pernicious" racism does damage to growth and personal responsibility. Nice work, Mr. Holder.


Follow Larry Elder on Twitter
"Like" Larry Elder on Facebook