Attorney General Eric Holder Jr. began on a high note this afternoon by acknowledging that waterboarding is torture — an admission that Mukasey refused to make. However, he did not commit to the obvious implication of that statement: he will enforce federal law and international law that makes torture both a crime and a war crime. I discussed the testimony on this segment of Rachel Maddow’s show.
Holder’s statement was refreshingly simple: “Waterboarding is torture.” What followed was not:
“The decisions that were made by a prior administration were difficult ones. It is an easy thing for somebody to look back in hindsight and be critical of the decisions that were made. Having said that, the president-elect and I are both disturbed by what we have seen and what we have heard.”
What precisely does that mean? The decision on war crimes is not a difficult one. The answer is that you cannot order them. Moreover, it is not really important how “disturbed” Barack Obama and Eric Holder may be about a war crime. The question is whether as Attorney General Holder would enforce the law. The Democrats failed to press that point.
The reason that Mukasey stated (rather implausibly) that he did not know what waterboarding was is that he knew an affirmative answer would commit him to enforce. Holder’s statement sets up a simple question. We now know that the Administration accepts decades of cases defining waterboarding as torture. There is no question that torture is a war crime. So, there is the simple question, will Obama and Holder walk away from a known war crime because it is politically inconvenient to prosecute. If so, they have attain little high ground by acknowledging a war crime and then doing nothing to prosecute the war criminals.
For the full story, click here.
Video
‘Waterboarding is torture’
Jan. 15: Eric Holder answers questions from Sen. Patrick Leahy about torture and the right to bear arms.
MSNBC
Obama has described Guantanamo Bay as a “sad chapter in American history.” He plans to issue an executive order calling for the prison to be closed.
Holder echoed that stance Thursday but said shuttering the prison would be difficult and would take time. Many detainees could be transferred to other countries, he said, and some could be charged in U.S. courts. That is a contentious proposal because many oppose the idea of bringing terrorism suspects onto U.S. soil.
“There are possibly many other people who are not going to be able to be tried but who nevertheless are dangerous to this country,” Holder said. “We’re going to have to try to figure out what we do with them.”
Holder promised to be an independent attorney general, telling lawmakers that he did not believe the attorney general’s job was to serve as the president’s lawyer — a frequent criticism of Gonzales’ tenure under President George W. Bush. He also pledged to restore the independence of a Justice Department where Bush administration appointees used political benchmarks when making hiring decisions.
“One of the things I’m going to have to do as attorney general in short order is basically do a damage assessment,” Holder said.
While the GOP was expected to use the confirmation hearing to demonstrate that the party is still relevant despite a Democratic sweep in November, Holder was largely spared any confrontational questions during the morning hours of the daylong hearing.
Of course no one wants a loose cannon in the office of Attorney General. Who knows what dangerous ideas he might get in his head if he decided to actually prosecute the establishment? It would set a bad precedent.
If America enforces its own laws against the president then the terrorists have won.
MASk,
The fact that you think that anything the President did COULD be illegal means that the terrorists have won.
Simple truth is we would not have Bush if Nixon had been locked in a concrete 6×8 cell. If you don’t punish them, expect a look of non-cooperation from We the People. I, for one, will not pay taxes to a government that will protect Bush and Cheney. Period. Come torture me if you don’t like it. You’ll get nary a dime.
I heard the waffling on Gitmo and I’m sorry to hear of this additional one. “The decisions that were made by a prior administration were difficult ones.”–that’s not true. Some of these decisions were made prior to combat operations. In addition, legal advice telling cheneybush clearly that torture was illegal was given and rejected by them. Experienced interrogators spoke out against torture, saying it was ineffective, illegal and would put our own people in harm’s way. cheneybush wanted to torture as part of expanding executive power and went about finding a way to do it. It was not the result of a gut wrenching decision made “to keep us safe”. It is disturbing that Holder is bringing up a version of the administration’s propaganda as to why he probably won’t prosecute.
Secondly, once he said waterboarding is a torture, it’s worse to not forthrightly say one will investigate this crime. He needs to state he will investigate. He should not be willing to use information that was gained via torture in cases against detainees.
If you have doubts regarding Mr. Holder’s basic fitness for AG, then I suggest that you view the 2h 44 m C-Span video. I will never understand Mr. Holder’s decision regarding his involvement with Marc Rich’s pardon but I can now overlook that problem and his related participation in Mr. Clinton’s pardons.
I now think Mr. Holder can serve as an effective and independent attorney for the citizens of the U.S. through upholding the rule of law and adhering to the U.S. Constitution.
c-span.org/Watch/watch.aspx?MediaId=HP-R-14334
If, as the new attorney general, Holder believes torture has been commited by person over which he has jurisdiction to prosecute, and a decision is made not to prosecute, “so we can deal with the future and not the past” or some such nonsense, then I think I’ll end up having about as much respect for this administration as I do for the one on its way out.
For some reason Americans seem to think that we get a clean slate or a “do over” every time we put a new administration in the White House. That’s not how the rest of the world sees it. The economy doesn’t just fix itself with the new president. The air and the water doesn’t miraculously clean itself up the day Obamam takes office. Just saying,” Yeah, that was some messed up shit those other guys were doing, but we ain’t them and we won’t do it”, doesn’t fucking fix this, it only encourages the next bunch of fascist to come down the pike to do it again.
Asked about President-elect Barack Obama, who has promised to engage more with Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad told a news conference:
Any administration in America that takes office must make two changes in its behavior, the first change is in the field of America’s interference … The circle of interference should be limited to within American borders.” “The second change is the approach of the American government toward Iran,” he said.
!!!!LOL! Mahmoud’ first precondition would mean we would need to become 100% isolationists and withdraw from the world’s problems!!! UNBELIEVABLE, but you know what, Obama just MIGHT GO FOR IT!
http://www.reuters.com/article/vcCandidateFeed2/idUSTRE50E3QB20090115
Geitner for Treasury Sec – new facts up – he needs to withdraw:
UPDATE: Additional facts have come to light that make this situation much more serious. Byron York reports that IMF employees received additional compensation that was earmarked for their portion of FICA taxes. Their incomes were, as the IMF put it, “grossed up.” Thus, Geithner accepted “reimbursement” from the IMF for taxes that he didn’t pay. Not only that, he certified that he would pay the taxes:
The IMF did not withhold state and federal income taxes or self-employment taxes — Social Security and Medicare — from its employees’ paychecks. But the IMF took great care to explain to those employees, in detail and frequently, what their tax responsibilities were. …
The tax allowance has turned out to be a key part of the Geithner situation. This is how it worked. IMF employees were expected to pay their taxes out of their own money. But the IMF then gave them an extra allowance, known as a “gross-up,” to cover those tax payments. This was done in the Annual Tax Allowance Request, in which the employee filled out some basic information — marital status, dependent children, etc. — and the IMF then estimated the amount of taxes the employee would owe and gave the employee a corresponding allowance.
At the end of the tax allowance form were the words, “I hereby certify that all the information contained herein is true to the best of my knowledge and belief and that I will pay the taxes for which I have received tax allowance payments from the Fund.” Geithner signed the form. He accepted the allowance payment. He didn’t pay the tax. For several years in a row.
If Byron’s description is correct (and I’m confident it is), it represents a level of carelessness that is not going to be tolerated in a Treasury Secretary at this moment in history. I expect Obama to withdraw Geithner’s nomination.
Obama: On second thought, it’s not that important to capture Bin Laden
posted at 6:18 pm on January 14, 2009
Remember at the debate when he vowed, “We will kill Bin Laden, we will crush al-Qaeda”? He’s stressed the importance of taking out Osama on other occasions, but never quite as forcefully as that. Why, enter the quote in Google and you’ll find it immortalized in the very first hit .
Anyway, change of plans:
COURIC: How important do you think it is, Mr. President-elect, to apprehend Osama bin Laden?
OBAMA: I think that we have to so weaken his infrastructure that, whether he is technically alive or not, he is so pinned down that he cannot function. My preference obviously would be to capture or kill him. But if we have so tightened the noose that he’s in a cave somewhere and can’t even communicate with his operatives then we will meet our goal of protecting America.
This is the counterterror equivalent of The One promising that he’ll save three million jobs: He “succeeds” merely by maintaining the status quo. If pinning down Osama so that he can’t function is the goal, the goal was met literally years ago.
Who the heck is Rachael Maddow and how much do you get paid?
Sorry lads! Aint’ nobody closing down GITMO, not with over 60 previous detainees out there trying to KILL our US Soldiers again.
Why do you people hate our Military and want to see murder happy inmates at GITMO released so they can kill our sons & daughters in the Military?
Tsk tsk tsk. Trolls never learn.
Buddha, I have more brains in my thumb than you have in your head.
buddha baby: your guy obama is so screwed already. IMPEACH OBAMA!
AP Slammed Bush’s ‘Extravagant’ Inaugural in ’05, But Now It’s Spend, Baby, Spend
January 14, 2009 – 13:51
Four years ago, the Associated Press and others in the press suggested it was in poor taste for Republicans to spend $40 million on President Bush’s inauguration. They calculated the impact that kind of money would have on armoring Humvees in Iraq, helping victims of the tsunami, or paying down the deficit. Lester thought the party should be cancelled.
Fast forward to 2009. The nation is at war and now also faces the prospect of a severe recession and federal budget deficits topping $1 trillion as far as the eye can see.
With Barack Obama’s inauguration estimated to cost – $125 – million is the Associated Press once again tsk-tsking the high dollar cost?
Nope. “For inaugural balls, go for glitz, forget economy,” a Tuesday AP headline advised. The article by reporter Laurie Kellman argued for extravagance.
ben and ken, you same old guy you, you just need to come to terms with the fact you back criminals and traitors to the Constitution. And you’re evil. Just like them. Enjoy being a shit! Because not a single person here cares what you think.
That clear enough for you, troll? Or do I need to dumb it down?
Buddha, Ben is right. I’ve seen pictures of his thumb. It looks like there’s some huge cancerous growth. But it turns out it’s just full of brains. Actually, he might have just been scratching his nuts.
See, unlike you, we’ve read and understand the Constitution. Your bleating and mooing will get you nothing but derision and jokes at your expense. So feel free to stay. I need the entertainment.
rofl seamus
Yeah, that’s the thing with trolls. Just like hookers. You don’t know where they’ve been.
Is it possible that the Obama Administration will not commit to prosecuting members of the Bush administration,U.S. Military and CIA because they do not want President Bush to grant last minute pardons?
President elect Obama and Attorney General designate Holder, should follow the rule of law.
Torture is a crime.
Wow,I just witnessed a troll changing his name almost in mid spam.
I heard most of the Holder hearing and I was impressed for the most part with his responses. I have the feeling that they are playing their cards close to the vest until Obama is sworn in.
That being said, If the Bush crimes are swept under the rug, I will be in the front calling for Holder’s job and we need to hold the Obama administration’s feet to the fire and make him put his money where his mouth is.
Hear, hear, raff!
just because he said it’s torture still don’t mean it is,you know what torture is what all other contries did to our guy’s in all the wars not one of them went along with the ganeva convention they brutilized are guys now that was torture and you never here the far left ever talk about it never so cut with the bull …everybody just wants to get bush on somthing just hateful ideologs …..
I think Rick is one of the ‘Special People’ and so let’s not be mean to Rick.
Good for you, Rick. You are EXPRESSING YOURSELF! Good for you!
C’mon everybody … Good for Rick!
Yeah, Rick!
Yeah, Rick!!!
“just because he said it’s torture still don’t mean it is”
Your homework, Rick – should you choose to accept the assignment – is to find a dictionary. A dictionary is a book that explains the meanings of words. Report back on the meaning of the word “tautology”.
I was impressed by Mr. Holder’s constant refrain of “No one is above the law.”
Perhaps, as has suggested above, the Obama team is waiting for Jan 20th before
issuing warrants.
What did Rick just say? Mike, that is one of the possible theories that I and others have suggested. Although Holder did not say he would go after the Bush felons, he was very blunt that waterboarding is totture and as Mike stated, he was very clear in repeating that “Noone is above the law”. It may get interesting on January 21st. At least that is what I am hoping.
Thanks to this great tool called the Internet, I am finally finding writings that explain Mr. Holder’s involvement in the Marc Rich pardon to the extent I can discount my once-strong opposition of Mr. Holder as AG. Now, if I can just understand the FALN pardon…
___________________________________________________________________
From Salon:
{Quote}”Even now, the true machinations behind the Rich pardon cannot be discussed honestly — perhaps because they implicate the government and the security services of the state of Israel.”
“Meanwhile the fugitive financier, as he is still known, has never returned from his lair in Zug, Switzerland, to the United States. (The mainstream press never mentions that, either.) In other words, he has never used the pardon — perhaps because he would first have to pay up tens of millions of dollars he owes in back taxes, a condition set by Clinton.” {End Quote}
salon.com/opinion/conason/2009/01/16/holder/
Yesterday was a very busy day…
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-cia16-2009jan16,0,7716070.story
‘Departing CIA chief Hayden defends interrogations
‘…These techniques worked,’ says outgoing Director Michael Hayden. He lists Iran’s nuclear ambitions and Mexico’s drug violence as top challenges to be faced by his designated successor, Leon Panetta…
…Hayden is widely credited with restoring stability and morale during more than two years as CIA director. But his ardent defense of the agency’s activities may help explain why he was not asked by Obama to stay in the job…’
Patty C:
“‘…These techniques worked,’ says outgoing Director Michael Hayden.”
*********
This is exactly the Mussolini-esque statement I would expect from a man who vehemently stated publicly that the Fourth Amendment did not contain language requiring “probable cause” for the issuance of search warrants. Trains on time indeed.
Keith:
You are the best, but let us see everyone dig in their heels regarding these illegal executions of the constitution. Your expert quests reinforce the facts water boarding, tourture, WMD lies, this train ride to obtain contracts was devised long before 9/11 let’s get to the bottom of this and it is so true that we are the corrupt individuals if we let this slide we are responsible it’s like the old who killed kennedy song
James
Buddha Is Laughing:
“Simple truth is we would not have Bush if Nixon had been locked in a concrete 6×8 cell. If you don’t punish them, expect a look of non-cooperation from We the People. I, for one, will not pay taxes to a government that will protect Bush and Cheney. Period. Come torture me if you don’t like it. You’ll get nary a dime.”
You’re much too forgiving. Try seeing it the same way Washington saw Arnold & Andre.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/vincent-bugliosi/the-prosecution-of-george_b_102427.html
Sing along:
Y’ Know Death Don’t Have No Mercy In This Land
Death Don’t Have No Mercy In This Land, In This Land
Come To Your House, You Know He Don’t Take Long
Look Up At That Gallows Pole, Right Wing Suckups,
Find Your Neocons Gone.
Mr. Mukasey is ‘a-changin’ his tune:
“Torture is a crime,” Mr. Mukasey said in an interview Friday, adding that he worried “about the effect on…the work of fine intelligence lawyers who are called on to make judgments on questions like that, often under tremendous time pressure — not to mention the pressure of an attack that killed 3000 people [and caused worry that] maybe there was going to be another one.”
online.wsj.com/article/SB123214439576391669.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
Even if we are to believe a felon like Hayden that the torture techniques worked, the fact that can’t be ignored is that it is illegal. Secondly, the experts have told us that torture does not produce good intelligence. Just one example of that is the FBI removed their people from Gitmo when the agents reported the torture to their superiors. So it seems that Hayden is lying about the results of the criminal torture techniques. I wonder why he is lying?
Mespo,
I remember that press conference when hayden was uttering his preposterous 4th amendment statements. Wasn’t a reporter the one who was telling him that he was all wet??
I only recently learnt what waterboarding is (it’s not something we do in the UK) and I was pretty shocked that it’s still going on. Torture doesn’t seem to be a particularly good way of getting reliable information.
That water boarding sounds absolutely awful, can’t believe they still do it in some parts of the world.
Am I the only one who hasn’t heard of waterboarding before? Doesn’t sound like something we’d do here in the UK