PDA

View Full Version : Former Taliban defender appointed to third highest position at the Justice Department



txradioguy
03-06-2012, 09:34 AM
One of the few Americans with the distinction of having been a terrorist’s defense attorney has been named number three in command at the Justice Department.

Attorney General Eric Holder announced Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Division Tony West’s promotion to Acting Associate Attorney General last week.

Harvard- and Stanford-educated with a long legal career, West also has the distinction of having defended American terrorist John Walker Lindh, the American Taliban member sentenced to 20 years in prison after being captured in Afghanistan fighting on the enemy’s side in 2001.

“The American people need to know who is controlling the debate in the Justice Department about terrorist detainees, how they are treated and where they are going to be tried.” Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch explained to The Daily Caller.

Former Justice official J. Christian Adams, the whistle-blower in the Justice Department’s decision not to prosecute the New Black Panther Party voter intimidation case, spoke out against the appointment on Fox News over the weekend.

“The most dangerous thing is that West is overseeing Gitmo policy. It’s not that he’s just some guy at the Justice Department licking envelopes,” Adams said explaining that not only did West defend Lindh he worked on other terrorists’ cases.

“Tony West took on, and his firm, took some of the most radical causes for America’s enemies before coming to the Justice Department,” said Adams.

Nevertheless in 2009 the Senate confirmed West to be an assistant attorney general in a 82-4 vote.

According to Fitton, this recent appointment demonstrates how important even lower level confirmations are.

“Most politicians are oblivious to the impact of lower level appointees on policy. So you have folks with radical pasts and activism being appointed to high levels with Senate approval to these types of positions,” he said.

Holder announced West’s promotion in conjunction with Stuart Delery’s appointment to Acting Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Division last week.



http://dailycaller.com/2012/03/05/former-taliban-defender-appointed-to-third-highest-position-at-the-justice-department/#ixzz1oLMA4mH5

noonwitch
03-06-2012, 09:50 AM
Everyone has the right to legal counsel in our courts, and most lawyers have worked both sides of the system during their careers. Lots of defense attorneys started out as prosecutors and vice versa.

txradioguy
03-06-2012, 10:10 AM
Everyone has the right to legal counsel in our courts, and most lawyers have worked both sides of the system during their careers. Lots of defense attorneys started out as prosecutors and vice versa.

That kind of crap might pass muster with your friends at the DUmp...but here in Reals-ville it doesn't wash.

Name one defense attoryney that we'd all recognize that started out at a prosecutor or "vice versa" as you put it.

I can't think of any. And I certainly can't think of a Republican appointing one that had defended anyone that had openly tried to subvert or terrorize this country.

Odysseus
03-06-2012, 10:38 AM
Everyone has the right to legal counsel in our courts, and most lawyers have worked both sides of the system during their careers. Lots of defense attorneys started out as prosecutors and vice versa.

Yes, but the attorneys for the terrorists chose to do the work pro bono because they wanted to undermine the war effort. They created new precedents that gutted the Geneva Conventions and US law in order to create new rights for terrorists. Several of these attorneys have been implicated in smuggling contraband to the prisoners, including photos of their interrogators. Their goal wasn't simply to defend unpopular clients, but to attack the US through lawfare.

noonwitch
03-06-2012, 01:04 PM
That kind of crap might pass muster with your friends at the DUmp...but here in Reals-ville it doesn't wash.

Name one defense attoryney that we'd all recognize that started out at a prosecutor or "vice versa" as you put it.

I can't think of any. And I certainly can't think of a Republican appointing one that had defended anyone that had openly tried to subvert or terrorize this country.



Vincent Bugliosi is the most famous lawyer I can think of who has worked both sides. he started out as the prosecutor who successfully prosecuted Charles Manson and his followers for the Tate/LaBianca murders. He then went on to defend clients.

Eupher
03-06-2012, 01:58 PM
There's no denying that attorneys have worked both defense and prosecution. And often, opponents in court are the best of friends.

I believe the point that txradioguy's trying to make is that there is a POINT at which an attorney's loyalties to the country might be called into question when he makes a conscious decision to defend John Walker Lindh - a man in court who later became a convicted terrorist and traitor to his country - rather than not.

Part of that question asks, "Do attorneys really have no sense of right and wrong? No sense of 'I'm not touching that case with a 10-foot pole.'?

I haven't taken the time to look at West's bona fides, and I'm probably not going to take the time to do so. Given his legal pedigree of Harvard/Stanford, one might ask the question:

"Is this the best-qualified guy in the Justice Department? Or is this just another quid pro quo from a guy who might have a brilliant legal mind [I'll give him the benefit of the doubt on that one], but who isn't too proud to make a distinction between defending a traitor and running the Justice Department?"

Or is there something a bit more nefarious going on? For example, Holder never met a terrorist he didn't like?

txradioguy
03-07-2012, 04:02 AM
There's no denying that attorneys have worked both defense and prosecution. And often, opponents in court are the best of friends.

I believe the point that txradioguy's trying to make is that there is a POINT at which an attorney's loyalties to the country might be called into question when he makes a conscious decision to defend John Walker Lindh - a man in court who later became a convicted terrorist and traitor to his country - rather than not.

Part of that question asks, "Do attorneys really have no sense of right and wrong? No sense of 'I'm not touching that case with a 10-foot pole.'?

I haven't taken the time to look at West's bona fides, and I'm probably not going to take the time to do so. Given his legal pedigree of Harvard/Stanford, one might ask the question:

"Is this the best-qualified guy in the Justice Department? Or is this just another quid pro quo from a guy who might have a brilliant legal mind [I'll give him the benefit of the doubt on that one], but who isn't too proud to make a distinction between defending a traitor and running the Justice Department?"

Or is there something a bit more nefarious going on? For example, Holder never met a terrorist he didn't like?

Add to that Holder's lawfirm worked pro-Bono on behalf of the detainees at Gitmo...IIRC the deputy Solicitor General for the U.S. defended Gitmo terrorists and that this AG has openly refused to prosecute blatant acts of intimidation and voter fraud/disenfranchisement in the New Black Panther Case...Fast and Furious and his Civil Rights branch that is very pro "social justice" and you begin to wonder who's side the entire Justice Department is currently sympathetic to.