Every Single One: The Politicized Hiring of Eric Holder’s Housing Section
Neta Borshansky: Ms. Borshansky came to the Civil Rights Division straight out of law school as part of the attorney general’s Honors Program, and it’s clear that Eric Holder liked what he saw. At UC-Davis Law School, Ms. Borshansky co-founded an activist group that takes trips around the nation. Her particular trip was to New Orleans, where she and her fellow students volunteered at the Louisiana Capital Assistance Center, which advocates on behalf of convicted murderers facing the death penalty, and the New Orleans Workers’ Center for Racial Justice/People’s Organizing Committee, another militant left-wing organization. The California Bar Foundation awarded her a “public interest scholarship” for “[dedicating] her time to issues of fair housing, disability rights, prisoner rights, and Hurricane Katrina disaster relief.”
Lucy G. Carlson: Ms. Carlson contributed $500 to Barack Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign before gaining her ticket into a career civil service position in the Civil Rights Division.
The Justice Department, however, conspicuously redacted nearly all of her community activities.
Jessica Crockett: Ms. Crockett joined the Section as part of the attorney general’s Honors Program, fresh off a judicial clerkship with an extremely liberal federal judge (Solomon Oliver) in Cleveland, and only a year out of law school. While a student at Ohio State’s law school, she was a leader of the Black Law Students Association and the coordinator of the Street Law Program.
She also wrote a ridiculous law review article titled “Putting the Ball in a New Court: Using Restorative Justice as a Means to Punish NBA Players for the Commission of Violent Offenses,” in which she argued that “rather than issuing blanket game suspensions for violent acts between players in the NBA, the NBA should institute a dispute resolution model that incorporates restorative justice in the form of victim-offender mediations and community impact panels.”
Interestingly, racial separatism was nothing new to Ms. Crockett at Ohio State. As an undergraduate at Northwestern, she was part of the leadership of the Black Student Alliance at Northwestern, which affectionately referred to itself as “For Members Only.”
Her community activities were also redacted from her resume.
Joel Flaxman: Mr. Flaxman, only a few years out of law school, is a contender for most radical ideologue hired into the Section. He is a financial contributor to the Center for Constitutional Rights, a militantly left-wing organization that has aggressively advocated on behalf of terrorists detained at Guantanamo Bay, illegal aliens, racial preferences in hiring, abortionists, and a litany of other extremist liberal causes. He also served as a Public Interest Fellow at the liberal American Constitution Society.
During his time at Michigan Law School, he was a prolific writer on aggressively radical causes. He penned a bizarre article in which he suggested that the U.S. Supreme Court should decline to hear a case anytime a state supreme court has overprotected individual liberties. Apparently, neither the state nor the public has a right to ensure that the Constitution is not enforced overly broadly. Heaven help us if that were true.
He also helped research a report titled “Documenting Discrimination in Voting: Judicial Findings Under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act,” which was intended to be used to bolster the constitutionality of the Voting Rights Act against subsequent constitutional attacks. But as the attorneys in an ongoing constitutional challenge to the VRA recently pointed out, the report is fundamentally flawed and grossly misleading. It appears that Mr. Flaxman never considered the fact that anyone might actually probe the data underlying his research. (Fun aside: the primary author of the report was none other than the Anna Baldwin of “Queer Resistance Front” infamy from the Division’s Voting Section, whom we have chronicled before.)
I think you’ve missed the point, and frankly I can’t even read the article it’s so obvious: hiring *any* conservatives is evidence of bias on the part of the hirer. Hiring only far-left liberals shows that the department and the government understands the urgency of the problems being engaged, and shows that those who are doing the hiring are committed to fixing the problems. Conservative=BAD; Liberal=GOOD. That simple. Trust me, if anyone managed to ask Holder or even Obama at a press conference about this, the look on their face would be something along the lines of “What? You find something wrong with this?” and there would be an expression of complete innocence. Since their ideology *demands* conformity, it’s natural that politically incorrect thinkers are to be avoided at all costs. Note that the Boston Globe article you linked to sniffed that some of the attorneys in the Civil Rights section had worked *defending* clients who’d been accused of racial discrimination. Such a client has no legitimate defense, in these people’s eyes; they get an attorney through a technicality in the Constitution, but if the world were fair, they would just be condemned out of hand, for being wealthy and powerful.
There, I’ve ranted enough. This sort of thing makes my blood boil…
Liberals good, Conservatives bad. You are amazingly under-educated and a smoldering pot of emotions. You have to get outside your limited circle of friends, read some history, study the world economies and then – maybe then – you will be able to speak more intelligently about this topic. You speak hubris without factual standing. You think narrow and your view is narrower still.
Please – read something other than your liberal postmates. Watch something other than Michael Moore, Read Thomas Sowell, Charles Krauthammer, Bill Bennett, Irving Crystal for not other purpose than to widen your horizons. Then you may, just might, maybe will see there are greater truths and other opinions.
I do pity those who think the way you think – or don’t think. Open your brain to other ideas – test them against today’s realities. We will be broker than Greece if people who think like you continue to absent yourselves from welcoming other opinions!
This is off thread but whats going on with the DOJ and the second recent armed assualt on Gibson Guitar? This is really weird.
http://www.gibson.com/en-us/Lifestyle/News/gibson-0825-2011/
James its not weird. its just another chapter in this corrupt regime, the most corrupt in the history of the world,
This series is just extraordinary. Thank you PJM for exposing the outrageous and hypocritical conduct of Eric Holder’s Justice Department. You deserve an award for what you are doing. I suspect Holder and his gang thought they could just get away with this stuff without anyone noticing. That certainly has been what has happened in the past, I suppose. But no longer, thanks to PJM.
Quick question, if I may. Can you tell me which candidates to these jobs were rejected, and whether they were rejected because they were conservatives? That would really strengthen our case against Holder.
The Justice Department did not release those resumes in some part because the rejected resumes are protected under Federal law from release. So in other words, the law prevents a review of the rejectees.
On the other hand, the series has already reported about behavior of Loretta King, the former AAG who did in fact reject people, based on sources familiar with actions of the hiring committees, who were supported by members of the hiring committee, but were not liberal enough for King. Pajamas’s has already reported on this aspect of the rot already. Perhaps “Riverstyx” you can take up the charge and pursue this line of action. For now, PJM has reported on the actual resumes of the people NOT hired, not the unsavory rejections of non-liberals.
These are civil service positions and a thorough housecleaning will be in order. The obvious way to do this is to establish a Department of Left Wing Affairs and as part of decentralization of government, move the entire department to Point Barrow, Alaska (sorry, Alaska). The departmental travel budget will be zero.
Actually, the only practical way to remove these people is to abolish their section, divisions, and offices. They would then have the right to seek employment in another DOJ position, but there is no requirement that they be hired. You may recall the old saw about the “Vanguard” missile program: “Why is the Vanguard just like the Civil Service? Because it doesn’t work and you can’t fire it.”
Actually the vast majority of these positions are out of the Plum Book, and are Appointee positions who “serve at the pleasure of the President.” At any point in time, the sitting (or new) President can fire them all, for no reason at all. (unless of course the President is a Conservative, in which case all bets are off)
These are all career attorneys, not political appointees.
I see a thread of corruption stemming from the abject failure of the U.S. education system.
Obama as an example.
He has never had the requirement of performance based employment; Our education system promotes individuals regardless of performance;
The policy of this unique society of misfits, is to stack the deck against all threats to their existence and agenda. This is obvious, but, necessary for their movement to succeed. In other words, require membership in a gang.
This movement/gang has been entrenched for decades, and has finally got the “tools/members” it needs for conquest: Obama, Holder and his thugs, The Democrat Party, many members of Congress and state and local government individuals and organizations, and main stream media propaganda.
They can only gain control from corruption, collusion, and deception, your basic gang activity.
Is it difficult to see that there will be a significant price to pay to correct and eliminate this covert “government within a government”?
They are engaged in a coup d’état, and will succeed without firing one shot.
It is not difficult to confirm that extreme left wing ideologues (Marxists that presently make up around 23% of the American population according to polls) are in all leadership positions of power within America and most of the World. If Conservatives can take back the Congress and Presidency in 2012, the first order should be the immediate dismissal of all of these Marxists similar to Clinton’s dismissal of all of the Justice Dept. Attorneys when he became President.
Weeding out Marxists from government . . . where have I heard that before? Thank you, Joe McCarthy.
And why didn’t the Bush Administration fire Rosenbaum? Because Bush was a RINO and could not stand up to crybaby liberals and the press.
OMG there is a very serious need for retraining a BUNCH of people once we take back our country & government. Unless we could just shoot them…?
No, you may not.
What in the world happened to the instruction above that physical threats will not be tolerated? You are advocating for the assassination of government employees you don’t like based on a one-sided description of their background. I cannot believe this. And you claim the high moral ground here?
“Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement” — what a bunch of hogwash. This specific threat to shoot DOJ employees — which would never be tolerated if it came from a “leftist” — will never be reported to law enforcement, much less taken seriously. Indeed, unnamed anonymous “DOJ sources” say that Adams and Von Spakovsky actually wanted to obtain the home addresses and contact numbers of these employees from their resumes, undoubtedly so that they could publish them so that people like TLinkS could harass these employees and their families. And then Adams and Von Spakovsky would deny any involvement, citing their legal disclaimers, or claim that TLinKS was really a left-wing radical trying to make them look bad.
His question, not a threat, was answered negatively in just 123 minutes. Can you explain why you needed 29 hours and 36 minutes to ignore the first reply? Are you displaying paranoid psychosis by reacting to an imaginary deserved threat while ignoring the inciting to riot sewage being spewed on televised caucus coverage or just waiting for copy from a community leader?
TLinks you have the best idea of all. just shoot them,
Obama shakes up gun agency over botched Mexico sting
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/08/30/us-usa-mexico-atf-idUSTRE77T3NT20110830
“Shakes up” being defined as “Promoting those responsible, and punishing those whistleblowers who told the truth”
It is my understanding every administration puts “their” people in, and I believe that Bush did not follow that policy.
There are a large number of governmental agencies which are run by presidential appointees. These appointees must be approved of by congress. What happens when the Congress and the President are all on the same party line is that the vast bureaucratic ship of state turns towards a direction that looks a lot like a centralization of power and a primary dominion. These are things which the founders of America sought to avoid.
http://msmignoresit.blogspot.com/2011/09/appointed-bureaucracy.html