Republicans returning from their week-long recess are trying to turn up the heat on the Obama administration over efforts by White House operatives to discuss the possibility of  jobs with two Democratic primary candidates if they dropped out of their races.

Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas, the senior Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, said in a statement on Friday that he wanted hearings to investigate the issue.

“I am concerned that the Obama administration has engaged in a habit of attempting to manipulate the democratic election process to benefit the Democratic Party. Such actions are certainly unethical and may very well be criminal,” Smith said.

Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), the ranking member of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, has previously said the Justice Department should appoint a special prosecutor to look into the allegations.

The swirl of accusations involving the White House, including back-room deal-making and promises of  jobs in exchange for political favors, has led some Republicans to suspect a juicy potential scandal. But as the facts are known, so far anyway, not many lawyers, not even Republican stalwarts, think anybody broke the law.

Steven G. Bradbury, the acting head of the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel under President George W. Bush, told Politico that the president can fill advisory positions in whatever method he wishes, including to “reward political loyalty.” His remarks followed those of former Attorney General Michael Mukasey who has said that finding criminality was “really a stretch.”

Bradbury offered a fuller legal analysis. ”Under the Constitution,” he said, “ it’s the president’s prerogative to fill advisory positions in the White House and to decide who will occupy senior policy offices across the administration,” said Bradbury, who suggested that Congress should not attempt to criminalize the appointment process.

“The president may make those appointment decisions for any reason he deems appropriate,” Bradbury said, “ including to reward political loyalty, and it would raise serious constitutional issues if Congress tried to prohibit the president, or anyone acting on his behalf, from offering appointments in particular circumstances.”

“For that reason,” Bradbury continued, “any statute that purports to criminalize an offer of appointment must be construed, if at all possible, not to interfere with the president’s constitutional authority, and if the statute cannot be read to avoid that result, there’s a strong argument it would be unconstitutional as so applied.”

Justice Department officials have expressed no interest in opening an inquiry. The White House has defended its actions. In one case, according to a report issued last week by White House counsel Robert Bauer, Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel asked former President Bill Clinton to raise the possibility of an unpaid presidential appointment to Rep. Joe Sestak (D-PA), who was challenging and defeated Sen. Arlen Specter (D-PA) in the Pennsylvania Democratic primary.

This week another episode emerged. Colorado senatorial candidate Andrew Romanoff said that White House Deputy Chief of Staff Jim Messina brought up three positions that he might be interested in as an alternative to running against the administration’s preferred candidate, incumbent Sen. Michael Bennet.

Peter Zeidenberg, a former Justice Department prosecutor who worked in the Public Integrity Section and now works at DLA Piper, had earlier said that the Sestak offer wasn’t a crime.

“It sounds like political horsetrading and I don’t think a prosecutor would have any interest in prosecuting such a case. It doesn’t sound to me anything like a bribe,� Zeidenberg said. “You’d be laughed out of the courtroom.�

Attorney General Eric Holder and wife Dr. Sharon Malone arrive at the White House Correspondents' Association dinner with his entourage (Getty).

Attorney General Eric Holder attended the White House Correspondents Dinner this weekend, where he mingled with the star of HBO’s Entourage (and even asked for a guest spot) and impressed ‘Golden Girl’ Betty White.

Holder was a guest of CBS along with White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, Energy Secretary Steven Chu, Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA), D.C. Mayor Adrian Fenty and Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN). Non-politicians guests of CBS included actor Morgan Freeman, actress Julianna Margulies, comedian Chelsea Handler and Ayla Brown, daughter of Sen. Scott Brown (R-MA).

At the dinner, White was seated a few chairs from Holder, who attended with his wife Dr. Sharon Malone.

(HBO)

“I’ve never felt such energy at an event,” White said. “I cannot believe I’m sitting at the same table with the Attorney General. It’s rather mind-boggling.”

Later, at the Bloomberg-Vanity Fair party, Holder “headed straight for ‘Entourage’ star Adrian Grenier” Politics Daily reported. “The AG confessed how much he loooooooves the show, ticking off a couple of last season’s plot twists before asking when the new season starts (June 27). Holder told Grenier he’d happily do a guest spot. ‘I am just trying to work my way on the show some time.’ ‘I might be able to do something about that,’ replied the actor.”

Looks like a Rahm-Graham deal may pan out.

Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina has finalized the details of his proposal to change the nation’s terrorist detention system and White House officials have approached congressional Democrats in the hopes of garnering support for the plan on the Hill, the Washington Post reported Tuesday.

Graham’s proposal comes after weeks of discussion between the South Carolina senator and White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel. In January, Emanuel and Graham began talks on a deal: Khalid Sheik Mohammed, the self-proclaimed mastermind of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, would be tried in a military tribunal, in exchange for Graham’s support for a new U.S. detention center to replace Guantanamo Bay. (Graham has warned that his support for closing Gitmo would be affected by a civilian trial for KSM, which he adamantly opposes.) According to an unnamed administration official cited by The Post, those discussions have broadened and Graham now hopes to reach a “grand bargain” that would resolve many outstanding questions concerning terrorist detention.

The White House opposes some of the ideas in Graham’s proposal, such as a separate national security court to try alleged terrorist detainees, according to The Post. But other provisions — including one that would create a standard process for dealing with habeas petitions, where alleged terrorists challenge their status as “unlawful enemy combatants” in U.S. courts — are likely to find support, The Post said.

The president has struggled to find congressional support for his campaign promise to close the detention facility in Cuba, especially after Attorney General Eric Holder’s announcement last fall that KSM and his co-conspirators would be tried in civilian courts. That decision has been blasted by Democrats and Republicans alike.

Administration officials told the newspaper that they had begun preliminary talks with Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee about Graham’s proposal.

Holder was scheduled to appear before the panel for an oversight hearing today, but the hearing was postponed late Monday to allow senators to attend the signing ceremony of the health care legislation. GOP senators on the committee had planned to intensely question Holder about his views on terrorist detention. That hearing has now been rescheduled for April.

A Justice Department official told The Post that when Holder appears before the committee next month, he will testify that the decision to hold KSM’s trial in Manhattan was a “close call.”

In two speeches Tuesday commemorating Black History Month, Attorney General Eric Holder promised that the Justice Department would continue to fight for racial equality, offering a much tamer statement than in his remarks last year, when he called the U.S. a “nation of cowards” when it comes to race.

Attorney General Eric Holder presents an award to Freeman A. Hrabowski (photo by Ryan J. Reilly).

“There was a time when this very department undermined the rights and privileges it was established to preserve,” Holder said Tuesday, speaking in the Great Hall of the Justice Department’s Robert F. Kennedy Building. “There was a time when it was accepted, almost universally across our country, that the American principles of justice, liberty and equality did not have to be applied equally to blacks and whites, or to women and men. For much of the last century, our justice system did not do enough to help our nation fulfill its promise of equal opportunity,” Holder said.

“Time after time, the American people have proven that we will not become victims of, chained to, a sometimes painful history,” he said. “We cannot allow our past to haunt us. Instead, we must use it to hasten our work and press us further toward justice and through new doorways of economic opportunity.”

That speech, along with another one he delivered Tuesday at the Legal Services Corporation, were originally scheduled for February — when Black History Month is observed — but were postponed after a massive snowstorm shut down the federal government for several days.

During Holder’s speech on Black History Month last year, his comment on racial relations set off a political outcry. Cable news shows and commentators focused on Holder’s “nation of cowards” statement and for the most part ignored the larger context of the speech, which ironically called for “frank conversations about the racial matters that continue to divide us.”

The Great Hall of Main Justice during Tuesday's Black History Month Celebration (photo by Ryan J. Reilly).

President Obama later said that if he had been advising Holder on the speech, he would have recommended different language.

According to The New York Times, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel and Jim Messina, the deputy chief of staff, “proposed installing a minder alongside Mr. Holder to prevent further gaffes — someone with better ‘political antennae,’ as one administration official put it.” Holder fumed and fought off the proposal, according to The Times, signaling that his job was about the law, not political messaging.

But this year, the speech seemed well vetted, and as one person observed, contained “no news.” In contrast to the sharp rhetoric he previously offered, Holder’s speech this year concentrated in broad terms on the DOJ’s role in fighting inequality and highlighted the progress that has been made.

“It may be tempting — when you look at the diversity of people walking the halls of Congress or at the man sitting in the Oval Office — to think that equal justice has been achieved for all Americans. We have made tremendous progress as a nation. But it will take more than the election of the first African-American President to fully secure the promises of equality and justice and conform our present reality with our founding idealism. And it will certainly take more than the appointment of the first African-American Attorney General to ensure that the American justice system reflects our highest principles and the rights our Founders intended,” said Holder.

Before beginning his speech, Holder recognized Vontell D. Frost-Tucker, who is retiring as Director of the Equal Employment Opportunity Staff for DOJ’s Justice Management Division.

Keynote speaker Dr. Freeman A. Hrabowski, the president of the University of Maryland, Baltimore County, focused his speech on his experience growing up in Alabama, relating a story about how his grandmother was unable to vote because she could not pass polling tests. Hrabowski even quizzed the Attorney General Tuesday to see if he could have passed one of the voting tests that were used to prevent African-Americans from voting in Southern states.

Hrabowski asked a question from the Alabama poll test: If a person charged with treason denies his guilt, how many persons must testify against him before he can be convicted? Holder answered correctly — two.

President Barack Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder (White House photo).

We recently wrote about the Attorney General’s communication strategy over the past several weeks, as Republican criticisms of his national security decisions intensified. Holder’s approach had been very low-key — to a fault, his supporters told us — until about two weeks ago, when the Attorney General wrote a pointed letter to Sen. Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) defending  his decision to charge the alleged Christmas Day bomber in the criminal justice system.

The New York Times today has a story that sheds more light on Holder’s messaging since his November announcement that the self-proclaimed mastermind of the 9/11 attacks, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, and four other alleged conspirators would be tried in federal court in Manhattan. The plan crumbled in the face of intense criticism, but Holder never reemerged to explain himself — by White House design.

The Times reports:

The White House, wanting to move on quickly, overruled Mr. Holder’s request for more public appearances to explain the decision, administration officials said. In the resulting vacuum, critics denounced the civilian trial plan as a soft-on-terror capitulation to liberals.

Two weeks ago, probably just before the Feb. 3 letter to McConnell, Holder met with White House advisers “to discuss how to unite against common foes,” as the Times describes the meeting. The advisers agreed to let Holder speak out more — as we noted, he has not appeared on a Sunday talk show since his confirmation and has given few extended interviews, until this point — and Holder agreed to allow the White House to help sharpen his message.

Holder told the Times in an interview last week that the political attacks were “starting to constrain my ability to function as attorney general.”

“I have to do a better job in explaining the decisions that I have made,” he said, adding, “I have to be more forceful in advocating for why I believe these are trials that should be held on the civilian side.â€�

The Times story begins with an anecdote that highlights Holder’s shifting views of his role as department spokesman. (It also touches on his strained relationship with David Ogden, who stepped down as Holder’s deputy this month.)

After Holder gave a speech last year calling the United States a “nation of cowards” for avoiding discussions on race, President Obama distanced himself the remark. But his advisers went much further. According to the Times:

Rahm Emanuel and Jim Messina, the White House chief and deputy chief of staff, proposed installing a minder alongside Mr. Holder to prevent further gaffes — someone with better “political antennae,� as one administration official put it.

When he heard of the proposal at a White House meeting, Mr. Holder fumed; soon after, he confronted his deputy, David W. Ogden, who knew of the plan but had not alerted his boss, according to several officials. Mr. Holder fought off the proposal, signaling that his job was about the law, not political messaging.

His most important plan — to try Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the self-described architect of the Sept. 11 attacks, in federal court in Manhattan — collapsed before it even began, after support from the public and local officials withered.

A year later, he is no longer so certain.

It appears we’ll be seeing a lot more of the Attorney General.

Eric Holder (DOJ)

White House chief of staff Rahm Emmanuel opposed Attorney General Eric Holder’s decision to try the alleged 9/11 plotters in federal court, arguing that it would alienate Republicans who support closing Guantanamo Bay but favor military commissions,  according to this story by the New Yorker’s Jane Mayer.

Emmanuel was particularly concerned about losing the support of Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), a proponent of military commissions who had been key ally on closing the military-run prison and had lent a hand on other matters, including the confirmation of Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor, Mayer writes.

“There was a lot of drama,â€� an “informed source” told Mayer. “Rahm felt very, very strongly that it was a mistake to prosecute the 9/11 people in the federal courts, and that it was picking an unnecessary fight with the military-commission people.”

The source went on, “Rahm had a good relationship with Graham, and believed Graham when he said that if you don’t prosecute these people in military commissions I won’t support the closing of Guantánamo. . . . Rahm said, ‘If we don’t have Graham, we can’t close Guantánamo, and it’s on Eric!’

A bipartisan group of senators led by Graham unveiled legislation earlier this week that would prohibit the Justice Department from using funds to prosecute 9/11 “mastermind� Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and four of his alleged coconspirators in federal court.

The White House, however, continues to support civilian trials, and Holder said he will press forward with them, though his options are limited by a growing NIMBY mentality.

Last week, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg withdrew his support for holding the trials in city, dealing the plan a fatal blow. Officials in Northern Virginia, where al-Qaeda operative Zacarias Moussaoui was prosecuted, have been outspoken in their opposition to hosting another terrorism trial.

The New Yorker story also documents Holder’s reaction to surging criticism of his decision to leverage the criminal justice system against the Nigerian man accused of trying to blow up a Detroit-bound plane.

“What we did is totally consistent with what has happened in every similar caseâ€� since 9/11, he told Mayer. “There’s a desire to ignore the facts to try to score political points. It’s a little shocking.â€�

Earlier this week, Holder sent a pointed letter to Republican senators in which he accepted responsibility for the handling of the suspect, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab. Holder noted that alleged terrorists apprehended in the U.S. since Sept. 11, 2001, have been detained under federal criminal law. He emphasized that “no agency supported the use of law of war detention� in high-level meetings immediately after Abdulmutallab’s arrest.

The letter was the strongest push-back yet from the Justice Department. Holder’s role was already known, as were his arguments supporting his decisions, but the Attorney General suffered weeks of hammering by Republicans before speaking up. (Several of his supporters praised the move but told Main Justice they wish he would have acted sooner.)

The New Yorker story is full of other great details, a few of which we’ve highlighted below.

Holder on toughness:

Some of Holder’s friends, who call him Mr. Nice Guy, wonder if he is as tough as some of these predecessors. “Attorneys General should be feared,� one legal observer told me. “They have incredible power. Holder makes correct decisions on the law, but he’s not aggressive.� Holder bristles at such characterizations. His Secret Service code name is Fidelity, but he joked, “I’d like something like The Hammer.�

and

Late last month, at home, in Northwest Washington, Holder addressed those who have suggested that he and Obama are too weak to take on terrorism. “This macho bravado—that’s the kind of thing that leads you into wars that should not be fought, that history is not kind to,� he said. “The quest for justice, despite what your contemporaries might think, that’s toughness. The ability to subject yourself to the kind of criticism I’m getting now, for something I think is right? That’s tough.� He paused, and added, “This is something that can get a rise out of me, the notion that somehow Eric Holder and Barack Obama, this Administration, is not tough. We have the welfare of the American people in our minds all the time. We’ll fight our enemies, and we’ll do that which is necessary, and we won’t turn our backs on the values and traditions that have made this country great. That is what is tough.�

The Holder Effect:

As Eric Fehrnstrom, [Scott] Brown’s political consultant, put it to me recently, the “most potent political issue� in the [U.S. Senate] race was voter opposition to the Justice Department’s decision to extend customary legal protections to suspected terrorists such as Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the Nigerian suspect who on Christmas Day attempted to detonate a bomb on a Northwest Airlines passenger plane bound for Detroit.

and

Holder’s unpopular positions on terrorism issues have frustrated Obama’s advisers. The lawyer close to the Administration said, “The White House doesn’t trust his judgment, and doesn’t think he’s mindful enough of all the things he should be,� such as protecting the President from political fallout. “They think he wants to protect his own image, and to make himself untouchable politically, the way [former Attorney General Janet] Reno did, by doing the righteous thing.�

Taking on the Cheney Clan:

Holder tried to address his critics with lawyerly detachment. Dick Cheney had equated Holder’s approach to handling terrorism with giving “aid and comfort to the enemy�—the legal definition of treason. Holder said of Cheney, “On some level, and I’m not sure why, he lacks confidence in the American system of justice.� He added that he had seen documents making clear that Cheney’s office was the driving force behind the Bush Administration’s most controversial counterterrorism policies, especially those sanctioning brutal interrogations. He said of Cheney, “I think he’s worried about what history’s judgment will be of the role that he played in making decisions about everything from black sites to enhanced interrogation techniques.� Holder said that he doesn’t know Elizabeth Cheney, but noted, with a laugh, “She’s clearly her father’s daughter.�

Taking on Rudy Giuliani:

Holder told me that he was “distressed� that people “who know better� were claiming that the courts were not up to the job of trying terrorists. He added that he found it “exceedingly strange� to hear this argument from Giuliani, who had been a zealous prosecutor. “If Giuliani was still the U.S. Attorney in New York, my guess is that, by now, I would already have gotten ten phone calls from him telling me why these cases needed to be tried not only in civilian court but at Foley Square,� Holder said.

Walk With Me:

On January 5th, Obama held a national-security meeting in the White House Situation Room to review how the Administration had failed to detect and prevent the Christmas Day plot. Afterward, Holder said, Obama asked him to walk back to the Oval Office with him. “We talk about these matters,� Holder said. “The decisions are, relatively, mine. I take responsibility for them. But these are things where he is kept in the loop, and the direction he gives obviously has to be factored into any decision I make.� Holder declined to reveal details of their recent discussion but said, “We are on the same page.� He added, “He recognizes that being Attorney General at this time is not the easiest job in the world.�

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder (file photo by Ryan J. Reilly / Main Justice).

A standout new New York Times Magazine story on President Barack Obama’s handling of terrorist threats includes details about the political pressure on U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder as he made the decision to try self-declared Sept. 11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in civilian court.

According to the 8,800-word article by the Times’s Peter Baker, some in the White House, including Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, raised concerns about the “collateral cost” of Holder’s decision, announced in November.

Those concerns were relayed to the Justice Department, Baker wrote. Ultimately Obama declined to intervene and let Holder make the call.

Holder also had disagreements with John Brennan, the president’s counter-terrorism adviser, who initially sided with Holder and then-White House Counsel Greg Craig in an internal battle over whether to release Justice Department memos about C.I.A. interrogation methods.

But Brennan later came to support the C.I.A.’s view, which said that those memos would give terrorists too much information about the agency’s tactics, writes Baker.

Craig was eventually ousted from the White House after months of internal criticism about his handling of national security policies.

Former Vice President Dick Cheney has led a chorus of GOP criticism against the administration’s national security policies, including Holder’s decision to try Mohammed in federal court.

Baker’s story is scheduled to be published in the Jan. 17 print edition of the newspaper. It was updated, edited and posted online early because of relevant news events, including the attempted terrorist attack on a U.S.-bound jetliner on Christmas day, according to Politico’s Michael Calderone.

Two political opposites – the conservative Americans for Tax Reform head Grover Norquist and the liberal Firedoglake editor Jane Hamsher – have co-authored a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder that calls for a Department of Justice investigation of White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel.

Norquist and Hamsher want the DOJ to look into Emanuel’s role on the board of Freddie Mac, where he served from 2000-2001 when he resigned to successfully run for Congress. They allege that the White House has blocked an investigation of the government-sponsored mortgage lender, reports The Atlantic.

Via The Atlantic, their letter is reprinted below:

Attorney General of the United States of America

U.S. Department of Justice

950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20530-0001

Dear Attorney General Holder:

We write to demand an immediate investigation into the activities of White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel. We believe there is an abundant public record which establishes that the actions of the White House have blocked any investigation into his activities while on the board of Freddie Mac from 2000-2001, and facilitated the cover up of potentially malfeasance until the 10-year statute of limitations has run out.

The purpose of this letter is to connect the dots to establish both the conduct of Mr. Emanuel and those working with him to thwart inquiry, and to support your acting speedily so that the statute of limitations does not run out before the Justice Department is able to empanel a grand jury.

The New York Times reports that the administration is negotiating to double the commitments to Fannie and Freddie for a total of $800 billion by December 31, in order to avoid the congressional approval that would be needed after that date. But there currently is no Inspector General exercising independent oversight of these entities. Acting Inspector General Ed Kelly was stripped of his authority earlier this year by the Justice Department, relying on a loophole in a bill Mr. Emanuel cosponsored and pushed through Congress shortly before he left for the White House. This effectively ended Mr. Kelly’s investigation into what happened at Fannie and Freddie.

Since that time, despite multiple warnings by Congress that having no independent Inspector General for a federal agency that oversees $6 trillion in mortgages is a serious oversight, the White House has not appointed one.

We recognize that these are extremely serious accusations, but the stonewalling by Mr. Emanuel and the White House has left us with no other redress. A 2003 report by Freddie Mac’s regulator indicated that Freddie Mac executives had informed the board of their intention to misstate the earnings to insure their own bonuses during the time Mr. Emanuel was a director. But the White House refused to comply with a Freedom of Information Act request from the Chicago Tribune for those board minutes on the grounds that Freddie Mac was a “commercial” entity, even though it was wholly owned by the government at the time the request was made.

If the Treasury approves the $800 billion commitment to Fannie and Freddie by the end of the year, it will mean that under the influence of Rahm Emanuel, the White House is moving a trillion-dollar slush fund into corruption-riddled companies with no oversight in place. This will allow Fannie and Freddie to continue to purchase more toxic assets from banks, acting as a back-door increase of the TARP without congressional approval.

Before the White House commits any more money to Fannie and Freddie, we call on the Public Integrity Section in the Justice Department to begin an investigation into the cause of Fannie and Freddie’s conservatorship, into Rahm Emanuel’s activities on the board of Freddie Mac (including any violations of his fiduciary duties to shareholders), into the decision-making behind the continued vacancy of Fannie and Freddie’s Inspector General post, and into potential public corruption by Rahm Emanuel in connection with his time in Congress, in the White House, and on the board of Freddie Mac.

We also call for the immediate appointment of an Inspector General with a complete remit to go after this information.

We both come from differing political ideologies. One of us is the conservative head of a transparency foundation, and the other is the publisher of a liberal political blog. But we make common cause today out of grave concern for the future of our country in the wake of corruption-riddled bailouts. These bailouts continue to rob Main Street to benefit Wall Street, and because that, we together demand the resignation of Mr. Emanuel, a man who has steadfastly worked to obstruct both oversight and inquiry into the matter. Rahm Emanuel’s conflicts of interest render him far too compromised to serve as gatekeeper to the President of the United States.

We will lay out the details further below, and are available at your earliest convenience to meet with you directly.

Sincerely,

Jane Hamsher Grover Norquist

Firedoglake.com Americans for Tax Reform

Attorney General Eric Holder speaks at the CRS 45th Anniversary (DOJ)

The Attorney General can add another honor to his growing list.

Fresh off of his nomination as finalist for Mustached American of the Year, GQ magazine has named Eric Holder the 13th most powerful man in DC.

Sadly, Holder is only the third most powerful mustachioed politico, behind Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.), who shares the 11th spot with bearded Rep. David Obey (D-Wis.), and President Obama’s adviser David Axelrod at the 6th spot on the list.

GQ credited Holder for his independence from the president, noting:

Holder has pushed back against the wishes of his own team, fighting CIA director Leon Panetta’s attempts to quash the release of the interrogation records and going forward with an investigation, against Obama’s wishes, into the alleged torture that took place during the Bush years. While critics on the left say he’s not going far enough, it’s nice to have a DOJ paying attention to the rule of law again.

The men’s magazine compiled the list to commemorate just how different things in Washington appear to be nine months into the Obama administration. “A whole new power structure has emerged,” the magazine says.

Holder comes in behind super-lobbyists Karen Ignagni (America’s Health Insurance Plans) and Billy Tauzin, (Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America), who jointly occupy the 12th spot, and ahead of House Finance Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-Mass.), at the 14th spot.

Robert Mueller (FBI)

Holder was not the only Justice Department luminary on the list. FBI Director Robert Mueller took the 19th spot, for his efforts to “build a more nimble intelligence division.”

Robert Barnett, attorney at Williams and Connolly LLP, took the 44th spot. Barnett has represented a veritable who’s-who of DC luminaries as they leave office to write their book, earning seven-figure advances for Sarah Palin, Dick Cheney, George W. Bush and Bill and Hillary Clinton.

Who’s at the top of the heap? The cleanshaven Rahm Emanuel, of course.