Attorney General Eric Holder--chief legal defender of the President's raid into Pakistan to kill Osama Bin Laden--has thus far been somewhat unconvincing in the role. Could it be because his heart's not in it? Could it be because his legal record--a 2004 amicus brief--shows a man convinced that Bin Laden should be treated as a criminal--not an enemy combatant--unless he is encountered on a traditional battlefield?
Andrew McCarthy thinks so--and I tend to agree.
Heard the President this weekend saying "Anyone who didn't think [Osama] didn't deserve what he got needs to have their [sic] head examined."
ReplyDeleteAmazing what a shot in the ol' ratings will do to those ol' principles.
Yep, no more business as usual in THIS Washington.
Personally, I agree with him. But, then again, I didn't have the moral outrage about what the Bush Administration did to enable this success that POTUSO and Eric H had just up until the second we got OBL and POTUSO's polls surged.