The new piece start this way:
I hope that it isn't correct that the NRA will not oppose Holder, but they may have been told by Democratic Senators that there will be a cost to the NRA's opposition. With a huge Democratic majority in the Senate, the NRA might have to trade off a loss with Holder in exchange for some promised protection on other issues. I have no inside information on this, but it is just my guess.
Despite a huge Democratic majority, Eric Holder’s confirmation hearings are going to be difficult. He has a long record to defend. Whether it is his involvement and inconsistent statements about Bill Clinton’s pardon of fugitive financier Marc Rich’s pardon or his pushing Clinton’s clemency of the FALN terrorists or his failure to disclose his work for troubled Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich after Blagojevich's legal problems surfaced, he faces tough questions.
But Holder’s nomination raises other questions about what President-elect Barack Obama claimed that he believed during the campaign. Numerous times he promised that he supported an individual right to own guns and that he wouldn’t do anything to take away people’s guns. . . .
I hope that it isn't correct that the NRA will not oppose Holder, but they may have been told by Democratic Senators that there will be a cost to the NRA's opposition. With a huge Democratic majority in the Senate, the NRA might have to trade off a loss with Holder in exchange for some promised protection on other issues. I have no inside information on this, but it is just my guess.
New Fox News Op-ed: On Eric Holder's Nomination
4/
5
Oleh
abudzar
