Here’s Sen. Charles Grassley’s question and Holder’s astonishing response:

Grassley:”This prior representation, I think, creates a conflict of interest problem for these individuals. I want to know more about who is advising you on these decisions.”

Grassley (paraphrasing): “the names of political appointees in your department who represent detainees or who work for organizations advocating on their behalf&hellipthe cases or projects that these appointees work with respect to detainee prior to joining the Justice Department&hellipand the cases or projects relating to detainees that have worked on since joining the Justice Department.”

Holder: “I will certainly consider that request.”

Grassley is still waiting.

It begs the question of whether of not this clear stonewall is because members of Holder’s own law firm stand to be enriched by representing terrorists. And some are now political appointees at DOJ.

I need only say the names of John Tower, Clarence Thomas and Robert Bork to remind people of the unfair and insipid gauntlet that the Democrats have used on Republican nominees. There is a longer list of really fine American men and women who have not been allowed their hearings or who have declined nomination because they did not want to weather the fire storm that would be brought upon themselves and their families.

Secretary of State nominee Hillary Rodham Clinton is now before the Senate for her nomination. If there was ever a clear conflict of interest for a nominee for this job, she is it. Her husband, President Bill Clinton sold his presidency and its power for his own personal gain. It has long been known that Senator Clinton intervened at least six times with her power on issues directly affecting companies and others that later contributed to her husband’s foundation. That’s what we already know. What else don’t we know? This makes the Blagojevich scandal look like child’s play. The fact that a former president and a sitting US Senator are involved in a “pay for play” scheme casts a much larger shadow than that of a state governor. The landscape for Ms. Clinton to act outside the interests of the United States is way too obvious and it is here that the Republicans in the senate should make their stand. If this is not the proverbial “line in the sand” then there never will be one

The reluctancy of Republican senators to stand up aganist flawed and ethically challenged nominees for President-elect Obama’s cabinet will not serve our nation well. One party bullying the other into lap dog status does not even rise to the level of loyal opposition. The confirmations of Eric Holder and Eric Geithner may be a fait accompli but rigorous questioning along with “no” votes are in order.

New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson said McCain’s campaign “is run by lobbyists that represent Georgia and other countries.”

“He takes huge amounts of money from oil companies that are profiting in the (former) Soviet Union and many parts of the world,” the Democrat told ABC News, attempting to depict a conflict of interest for McCain.

Richardson, a former US ambassador to the United Nations, said the crisis vindicated Obama’s pledge to rebuild US alliances in Europe that were strained under President George W. Bush.

“This has been one of the failures of the Bush administration, failing to build a strong relationship, a mutually beneficial relationship with Russia, so we’d have the kind of influence to persuade them to stop some of these very, very dangerous efforts within their territory,” he said.

Richardson really ought to be embarassed at this awful display of political posturing such a fuid foreign policy and security issue. Georgia is an ally of the US and our other allies whom Richardson spins to suit his own political objectives. Of little matter to Richardson is the fact that Georgia is both a democracy and who’s troops serve alongside US troops in Iraq.