Former Obama Insider Declares Fingerprinting Is Racist

fingerEven when former Obama Administration cabinet members leave their positions, they still exercise political influence.

Are they doing it for the good of The People?

Or are their motives simply self-serving?

For example, why would former Obama Attorney General Eric Holder declare fingerprint background checks as racist?

Former Attorney General Eric Holder has come out against proposals in Chicago and New Jersey to require fingerprint background checks of drivers for ride-hailing platforms such as Uber and Lyft. Why would Obama’s onetime top lawman come out against regulation that is supposed to protect the riding public? Credit the intersection of two forces. First, Holder’s tony corporate law firm, Covington & Burling, represents Uber. Also, as Holder sees it, requiring drivers to submit fingerprints may “have a discriminatory impact on communities of color.”

I was surprised to read about Holder’s opposition, as I have trouble seeing Holder as a model for social justice. As deputy attorney general in the Clinton administration, Holder gave a “neutral-leaning to positive” recommendation for the pardon of billionaire Marc Rich, who fled to Switzerland to evade fraud and tax evasion charges. As President Obama’s first attorney general, he was so stingy with the pardon power that political scientist P.S. Ruckman wrote that inmates seeking clemency had “a better chance of being struck by lightning.”

One thing is certain about Holder’s opposition to fingerprinting background checks of Uber and Lyft drivers:

It has nothing to do with protecting the safety of the riding public.

You know it’s either to advance his private law practice career, or position him to re-enter politics in some role.

 

For a former black Attorney General now in private law practice with a top firm to play the race card to gain favor for his client is the ultimate in inside political cronyism.

You may also like...