Napolitano : Tell me, Mr. Holder, why did you not get a court order authorizing you to go in and get the boy (Elian Gonzalez)?
Holder : Because we didn’t need a court order. INS can do this on its own.
Napolitano : You know that a court order would have given you the cloak of respectability to have seized the boy.
Holder : We didn’t need an order.
Napolitano : Then why did you ask the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals for such an order if you didn’t need one?
Holder : [Silence]
Napolitano : The fact is, for the first time in history you have taken a child from his residence at gunpoint to enforce your custody position, even though you did not have an order authorizing it. When is the last time a boy, a child, was taken at the point of a gun without an order of a judge…Unprecedented in American history.”
Holder : “He was not taken at the point of a gun.”
Napolitano : “We have a photograph showing he was taken at the point of a gun.”
Holder : “They were armed agents who went in there who acted very sensitively…”
This “sensitivity” consisted of the INS macing, kicking, and gun-butt their way into Lazaro Gonzalez's house on the morning of April 22, 2000, wrenching a bawling 6-year-old child from his family at machine-gun point and bundling him off to Castro’s Stalinist fiefdom, leaving 102 people injured, some seriously.
Thanks to the ritual MSM-Castroite collusion most people forget (or missed) the crucial legal and ethical details of this circus/tragedy — which were mostly established during the first week after Elian’s rescue at sea, after his heroic mother’s drowning. The “son-belongs-with-his-father” crowd, for instance, “missed” (with the help of the MSM-Democratic complex) that Elian’s father was initially delighted that his motherless son was in the U.S. and in the loving arms of his uncles and cousins.