A Disk Read Error is fatal. I noticed that FormerFederalNothing said he was a computer guy. I had one DRE, I bought a new computer, and if your old system is over 4-years-old that is what I suggest. I might get a iMac next time myself. Good Luck

I was thinking (like Slartibartfast)about Wright. Also the money to faithbased groups that discriminate in hiring (as I recall he requests from many representatives in the religious community across denoninations asking him to change his criteria regarding open hiring as a prerequisite) and now investigations into torture.

I also see his position on executive compensating as having changed in response to public pressure. As a Senator he was aware of the initial bailout package he voted for and while I can’t be sure, I suspect that he was aware of the bonus money and various incentives (in aggregate) slated to be paid out. If the economy is what occupies center stage with him I imagine he gets regular if not daily updates and unlike Bush, actually asks questions.

It seems to me that his movement to the center (for lack of a better description) has been ongoing for months throughout the later part of his campaign. Most of that movement IMO has been in rsponse to political pressure and the advice of his ‘experts’ such as the military in convincing him to alter his timetable for a pull out in Iraq. I don’t believe the change in position is in any way unusual for a candidate, from my observations. I am disappointed but not surprised of his protection of the power seized for the Executive Branch. Very disappointed.

I am coming to realize though that between Republican obstructionism and Blue Dog Democrats that the change we were waiting for doesn’t have a chance until 2010 or later (if it comes at all.) I’m not unhappy with the Presidents first 100 days- I’m sure McCains would have looked quite a bit different.

**After a gi-normously expensive fix for my ‘puter including a new HD (expected problem) it shot craps again last night ‘DISK READ ERROR – Please insert system disc…’ and I’m on a friends Mac laptop for a few hours again today. My computing days may be seriously curtailed or numbered ;-( **

My image of you has not slipped or faltered, Sir. You fall squarely within the human species by exhibiting many of our species’ frailties and you are simply willing to admit it a bit more openly than others and I do.

“but my wife is calling me to bed to watch Antiques Roadshow, a guilty pleasure.”
___________________

Well Mike, at your age going to bed to watch an Antiques’ Roadshow is like lookin’ in the mirror, isn’t it?

BTW, you definitely highlight your agedness when TV in *bed* becomes more of a guilty pleasure than other such pleasures…

Damn I should proofread better but my wife is calling me to bed to watch Antiques Roadshow, a guilty pleasure.

Spent much of that time camping in national parks and also stopped into small towns, where KFC was the big restaurant open on Saturday night. I was clearly a stranger, yet admittedly accompanied by a good looking. Also spent some time in local bars, where I was also not familiar. In all that time no one said more to me than the usual meeting stranger stuff and I never felt anything other than hospitality, although mixed with curiosity about my background and my own about theirs.

We humans develop different cultures and attitudes, but if you look someone in the eye and see malice or trickery, why then you can relate. I loved the West I saw and the people that populated it. This was even true in Salt Lake City where me and my girlfriend at the time were kinda strange looking for the area. Knowing your intelligence and measured view of the world I’m sure we would have been just fine if we met back then. Now we’re just two old farts, who’ve become wise to the ways of the world through an openness to experience and that’s why I enjoy your comments and relish your point of view. A persons value doesn’t shine through his politics, it is exposed through his decency and openness to reevaluate his premises.

Mike

“Super-thermites, formed by mixing of aluminum and metal oxide nanopowders result in energy release rate by two orders of magnitude higher than similar mixtures consisting of micron size reactants” Page 19

The truth is here:AE911truth

http://jonathanturley.org/latest-column/#comment-49593

Your words are a gift. Man let’s stay open to all the possibilities, now and in the weeks and months ahead. The truth is what we’ve been waiting for and it’s started to flow.

Back in the 1960s/70s you and I were the polar opposites. You with your long hair, beads, marijane, and my cowboy clique would have yelled at you with your protest signs—once we spit out our snuff or chaw in disgust—hey, you buncha dirty, hippy, pinko-commie-draft-dodgin’-anti-Murkan losers, if you don’t love it leave it, go suck on your funny weed, stone-head freaks.

To which your flower child clan would have likely retorted: Peace brothers, we mean you no harm, we shall overcome, mellow-out man, chill, you got your rope we got ours, goat-ropers like ya’ll ain’t such a drag, you’re just wigged-out ‘cause you see us with our cool, outa sight foxy hippy chicks and it gets your goat to know we will be groovin’ the groove with them while you are bad trippin’ out hangin’ with those green-teethed tabaccy chawin’ cowgal skinks! Man, our Old Ladies are groovy! Can ya’ dig it, bummer huh?

Oh, “those were the days, my friend…”. Now, as I read this blawg and listen to some of your life’s story—by the way, you are the most open person posting here—I reflect back on that era and think; what if I had met and associated with a hippy guy like you. All I know now is that you are one decent old man who has done his duty to help improve society, in a much different way than I tried, but we both ended up devoting our careers to this government that is now turning into a pitiful disgrace and a discredit to the soldiers—including my brother, friends, and fellow soldiers I helped to train as medics—who gave their lives in Viet Nam. Then there is Bush’s Inferno that he should stand before a tribunal to answer for his high crimes and the lies that have caused so much death and destruction.

From one old goat-roper Republican to one old Hippy Democrat, Peace Brother…”There is a season, turn, turn, turn…”

Oh, and tell your Old Lady that this square said hello and that he thinks she has a good Old Man…

Well I was once called a lion (as in leo) by a woman, but that was 26 years ago and now that I think back on her comment she might have, in retrospect, called me a liar instead!

Part of my federal career was as a law enforcement officer (LEO is the correct abbreviation)

I’m glad to have exposed you to Hitchhiker’s Guide and hope that you read the book (obviously I’m a big fan). For the record, in real life I’m bald (by choice, not nature (yet)) although I do have a somewhat unruly goatee. Your comment brings up one burning question in my mind: What is a LEO?

Make sure you know where your towel is.

Jill,
I think this tack is somewhat unfair. If the prosecutions started tomorrow these people wouldn’t get out any earlier.
What is being struggled with is how do you let them out, after you’ve driven them perhaps insane. I know that I could not be like Nelson Mandela, who after being tortured and imprisoned for decades manged to maintain himself with composure and direction. If I had been one of those tortured, or now being imprisoned, my hatred towards the US would know no bounds and I would gladly strike back at them even if it meant my death.
The horror that was Bush/Cheney is ongoing and sad to say it must be resolved prudently, not in the stroke of a pen. It is a terrible position to be in, especially if you despise torture as I believe President Obama does. Easy answers usually do not yield good decisions.

You know something AY, I just do not get about 99.9% of your ‘wit’. Most of the time I just think ‘Say What!’ You stated in at least 2 threads to yourself that “I amuse me” and I thought, ‘I wonder why’. However, you do make some intelligent posts and who am I to judge another person’s wit when mine is perhaps often misunderstood. All I know for sure ‘n for certain is that all of the commenters combined cannot even touch ‘fesser Turley’s witticisms and they never will.

Therefore, post away, I am no person’s moderator here and your thoughts that remain on topic are sometimes—no doubt—better than mine are, and more legally valid if legal interpretations are involved. I am a father and I could not imagine what it is like to lose a child as you have had happen, especially if there is doubt and regret for things not done or said.

Finally, I will just say that I look forward to your experienced comments derived from your lawyering and there is no doubt that I will at least smile at your witticisms—the few that I *get*–and those that do not involve minor vulgarisms. I can find that urban language abundantly on the web and the language I seek here is one of law, process, fact, and justice, with some clean wit mixed in for spice and metaphoric humor.

In the final analysis, I gain multitudes more from the commenters here than I could ever repay; I sometimes even get *free* legal opinions and you know what laypersons say about the value of that…Thanks

Snarkey, Hmm, Speak only for yourself. I do not want to have to have you reminded of the netiquette.

Really it is nice to have reasonably intelligent life form here. I try and strive for such. Maybe one day I will figure out that if you don’t put two Male Rabbits in the same cage that you will get more rabbits. Somehow or another the Moral Majority heard about my Abomination at Easter and picketed out front. Something about Breeding Homosexual Rabbits.

You never know about them folks. But then again I do not understand how you can get more rabbits after a lighten storm from a female if she is alone. But do remember that this is Texas and some Republicans have to have something to do.

And Kinky aka Richard Friedman is Running for Governor.

Kinky Friedman and The Texas Jewboys. That are pretty good.

“As a scientist (I’m a mathematical biologist)”
___________________

Well, I am a semi-competent ‘rithmetical genus too; 1 rabbit + 1 rabbit = 1 X 10 to the sixth power widdle wabbits.

Oh, and I done looked up that name of yourn and, dude; man, you are in serious need of a haircut, shave, Just for Men dye, and mega-gallons of Geritol…

Welcome aboard this legal starship as we wade through—or hitchhike across—this vast galaxy of governmental corruption with Professor Turley as the brightest Star in our legal Universe while accompanied by his attorney/lawyer lieutenants posting here who help guide us with their legal interpretations—a fine, shining star-filled blawg indeed.

(snarky, tongue-in-cheek turned-off) Welcome again Slubarfit….oh, whatever!

I must admit I appreciate your perception of the realities that I and a number of others perceive as crucial before this side of the Obama administration commences.

When I was in college I read a number of books and one of them was the US CIA’s prediction of what Adolph Hilter would do and why and what the particular circumstances were for each scenario. I got interested in this because my girlfriend, Fiance, wife, exfriend and exwife, but mother of our children was a first generation American in New York. Her family was from the Ukraine.

Ya want to talk about a History Lesson for a Texas boy whose family moved to Texas with the Specific Intent to Steal the Land from the Mexicans. It was quite a cultural shock for me.

But anyways the book facianted me. I learned a lot about the psycholigical warfare that we played and the role the Ukranians played in Nazi Germany.

So I understand what you are saying and why you are saying it.

I don’t agree that “public opinion is already there”. I haven’t seen any polling on this, but I think that if you divided people into three groups: a) Appoint a special prosecutor; b) have a commission; and c) torture is effective and necessary for national security a majority of the people would fall into groups (b) and (c). Keeping in mind that although the president is very popular he’s also got several other items on his agenda which are equally important (if the economy collapses then war crime prosecutions aren’t going to happen no matter what) and given President Obama’s pragmatic focus (I think he clearly would much rather concentrate on the economy and health care rather than war crimes and I don’t think that’s a bad thing) I don’t think that the time is ripe until group (a) is the majority and group (c) is marginalized. I don’t believe that anyone is currently being tortured, so no one is being adversely effected by waiting. I agree that investigating war crimes is both a legal and moral obligation, but I’m much more concerned that this mess get cleaned up correctly than it get cleaned up quickly.

Thanks, I stumbled onto this blog as I had seen Professor Turley on CKO and RMS* and I was looking for arguments to debunk what I had read on a blog about the natural born citizen issue (which I found here in spades) and liked the polite tone and vigorous debate. As a scientist (I’m a mathematical biologist) I’m always up for a good argument and likely have a very different view of proof and evidence than most posters here and as someone who has no legal training it’s interesting to see what those of you with a much better understanding of the law think of my ideas.

*Countdown with Keith Olbermann and the Rachel Maddow Show for those of you not up on your TLAs (Three Letter Acronyms).

Public opinion is already there. It is the president and the AG who do not want to act, not the public. I also must keep with my point from the Condi Rice thread that asking people who are being tortured to wait for that “perfect” time is morally wrong to me. The president is quite popular. Brave people in our govt. will continue to put out information. Legal investigation into war crimes is the law. It is justice. If we do not clean up our own mess now we may never do so.

Thanks for the link – I’ll check it out. I don’t have a problem with keeping the pressure on (in fact I agree with it) and I also agree that the whole commission idea is a bad one (a way to defuse the pressure and potentially avoid prosecutions). What I don’t want to see is quick official action (as I posted on another thread, I don’t want to see anything out of the White House except for “It’s AG Holder’s decision”) because quick action is much more likely to be a commission rather than a special prosecutor, it would prematurely stop the torrent of information we’re getting right now, and it could be incredibly politically damaging to the administration. I don’t necessarily agree with the thesis that more extreme calls (for prosecution rather than a special prosecutor) would have had a better effect – I think what needs to be done is to move public opinion and the more extreme a voice is the easier it is for the very people we need to persuade to ignore it. I’m all for keeping the pressure on – but remember the goal of the sermon is to reach everyone, not preach to the choir.

That was funny. It means the Center for Constitutional Rights. They feel it’s very important to keep up the pressure for prosecutions. See what you think:

(Michael Ratner from the Center for Constitutional Rights quoted in Jeremy Scahill)

“We have reached a critical political moment on this issue. Obama has been forced or pushed to open the door to prosecutions, an opening I thought would take much longer to achieve. If there was ever a time to push that door open wider and demand a special prosecutor it is now. We have documented and open admissions of criminality. We have Cheney and Hayden admitting what they approved these techniques; and Cheney saying he would approve waterboarding again. We have the Senate Armed Services Report detailing how the torture program was authored and approved by our highest officials in the White House and employed in Guantanamo, Iraq and Afghanistan. And we have thousands of pages of proof. There is public outrage about the torture program and the media in the U.S. and the world are covered with the U.S. misdeeds.

So at this moment, instead of human rights groups getting together and calling for a special prosecutor what do they do? Call for a commission. What this call does and it must be said strongly is take the pressure off what is the growing public push for prosecutions and deflects it into a commission. Outrage that could actually lead to prosecutions is now focused away and into a commission. Think if this list of human rights groups had demanded prosecutions. We would be closer and not farther from the goal.”

Here’s their site:

http://ccrjustice.org/

CCR? I didn’t know Credence Clearwater Revival did political analysis (I’m teasing a little, but I would like to know what you’re referring to so I can check it out). Your point about propaganda was exactly the one I was trying to make: We need to focus on exposing the propaganda, not on applying pressure – as long as the truth wins out the pressure will become overwhelming.

Thank you Sir.

I agree with what you said. What I was pointing out is something different–that is, propaganda is flying thick and fast. We need to be aware of this as citizens so we don’t fall for these lies. There is enormous pressure to stop criminal investigations. The CCR has a very good anaylsis of this pressure if you have time to read it.

Jill

Greetings from East Haven, CT.

If you would please; what evidence would be considered unambiguous proof that the lawyers Bybee, Yoo and Bradbury
deliberately misinterpreted the law against torture

—-
You didn’t ask me, but on its face, that Yoo wrote a memo arguing in favor of the use torture, which is clearly against the federal statute and international treaty, and was signed by his boss, Jay Bybee, regardless, but which was later rescinded when it became public pretty much says it all, I’d say.

And it should. We have had a dysfunctional government for too long and the airing of all of the dirty laundry is absolutely necessary. It cannot be treated as simply a matter of enforcing the law, because the problems are political as well as legal. I view government as a organism. The illness is not limited to the executive branch. The whole purpose of checks and balances is to prevent one branch from dominating the others. The fact that the executive has been out of control for years reflects the failure of the legislative branch to prevent it. Thus when members of Congress insist that we need to forget about “retribution,” what they really mean is that they would prefer not to be held accountable for any of the excesses in the executive branch.

While the legislative branch was ceding authority to the president and essentially abandoning its oversight obligations, the executive was busy corrupting the judicial branch by politicizing the DOJ through ideological screening and purging. That enabled the executive to create a platoon of compliant lawyers who could be counted on to fashion legal opinions supporting whatever policies the White House chose to adopt from time to time. Career lawyers who objected were simply forced out. That is why the question of “good faith reliance” on legal opinions has especial significance in this situation.

The anticipated investigations by both congressional committess and aggressive reporters will gradually expose all of the political failures and simultaneously uncover whatever evidence is out there relating to the violation of criminal statutes. It will then be the responsibility of the legislative branch to reassume its proper constitutional role through established political procedures and of the judicial branch to prosecute those who have committed crimes through established legal procedures.

We have to act with the assurance that the American public has sufficient maturity to examine the facts as they emerge and accept whatever painful truths those facts reveal about our government and our society. This process is not about retribution. It is about restoration. To attempt to accomplish that without uncovering all of the breakdowns would be like trying to rebuild a home without removing all of the hurricane debris from the foundation.

Greetings from East Haven, CT.

If you would please; what evidence would be considered unambiguous proof that the lawyers Bybee, Yoo and Brandbury deliberately misinterpreted the law against torture

And some legal training would help, as well!

p.s. What time was that post from TPM yesterday.
After mine, you say?

Oh…

http://jonathanturley.org/2009/04/22/president-obama-leaves-open-possibility-of-prosecutions-for-torture-while-his-intelligence-director-affirms-that-the-torture-program-was-successful/
In the last few weeks, I notice my comments here are somewhere between a week or two ahead of the pundits and/or their guests. It’s very satisfying when I listen to people like Isikoff saying the very things I’ve just said.

I am complete with my contributions to this blog AND ‘the world’, on this issue – despite the petty jealousy displayed here.

I know what I am talking about and I’m not waiting for kudos from people who echo my words while simultaneously attempting to exclude me from the conversation. It won’t work!

I’m claiming them for myself
- at the risk of ‘tooting my own horn’… Beep Beep

Thank you for your response. I want to wait for Lottakatz before I say anything. I do want to include the latest from Obama according to reporting by TPM.

“Obama: On Second Thought, Scratch That Commission Idea
By Zachary Roth – April 23, 2009, 6:36PM

Is President Obama flipping back again on the subject of how to conduct torture investigations?

His press secretary, Robert Gibbs, told reporters today that Obama had met with congressional leaders, and told them that he no longer favored the idea of a bipartisan commission to probe the issue. “The president determined the concept didn’t seem altogether workable in this case,” said Gibbs.

That follows Obama’s comments Tuesday, in which said that if an investigation was going to happen, he favored the bipartisan commission approach, rather than having congressional hearings.

As for the notion of appointing a special prosecutor — which would seem to be the only way to really hold wrongdoers accountable — that idea doesn’t appear to even be on the table.”

Jill,

No one disagrees with what you are saying. It is how we get there that may take a little while. You don’t till the soil, plant the seeds and expect a crop the next day.
—–
Speak for yourself! I disagree almost daily…
like this morning, in fact…

Patty C 1, April 23, 2009 at 8:28 am

My objection was to the misquote…!

Anybody who pays attention to what I have been saying here for the last year and a half knows where I stand.

In addition, I would suggest a little thought be given to where we want to end up, before jumping head first off this cliff.

Obama said he was not suggesting anything. What he said was ‘given a choice’, his preference would be to have an independent bipartisan panel etc…

And what JT said was ‘the EASIEST thing to do would be to appoint a special prosecutor’ – who, by nature of appointment, outside of the Justice Department, would be non-partisan.

Liz Cheney Defends Father’s Torture Legacy (VIDEO)

“Former State Department official Liz Cheney came on MSNBC to defend her father’s legacy, with regard to the administration’s role in authorizing the torture or terror detainees.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/23/liz-cheney-defends-father_n_190759.html

I can’t speak for LottaKatz (although as a MAC user, I will encourage you to learn how to use the MAC – you might find it’s better…), but the issues that come to my mind quickly are Jeremiah Wright and Blago (not even going to try to spell it). I also think we have seen progress on this issue just this week – starting with what Rham Emanuel said on Sunday about not prosecuting the authors of the memos, to what Robert Gibbs said on Tuesday (watching him try to avoid saying that it was a change in position was amusing , to President Obama saying that he would support a bipartisan commission and that it was the Justice Department’s decision (which I think most of us here would agree is the correct position). I think that you would agree (and please correct me if I’m wrong) that whatever President Obama should do, this issue is a hot potato that could derail his entire agenda at a time when we as a country can ill afford it. That being the case, I certainly can’t fault him for moving in a cautious, deliberate matter. I don’t really care how long it takes (within reason) as long as it is done right in the end. I hope this clears up my position.

This blawg is must reading for people of all occupations who want to understand the nuts-and-bolts, working side of the rule of law, the Constitution, and especially those Bill of Rights be must exercise and uphold to further avoid losing those inalienable rights we all cherish in a free society.

I have learned abundantly from this site. Professor Turley keeps the law interesting and current in a lighthearted, but informative and factual manner. I especially appreciate the attorneys/lawyers who weigh-in with their lifelong experiences in the legal profession while we have contributions from many ‘paralegals’ here who ferret out current events for us all to question, refute, debate, or simply ruminate over when the anger, astonishment, and/or humor subsides.

I can’t spell on my best days! Help me understand your guys position with a few examples. You say:

…”Obama is a smart fighter, a counter-puncher that wil take hits early i a match i order to get an insight into his opponents moves and strategy. He takes a position or refuses to take a position and later bring his position more in line with the public opinion.”

Which issues are you refering to in that statment?

I think the guest on Olbermann’s show that EnioBob referenced at the top of the thread was correct: let the info flow and become part of the pubic record and debate. If it’s public now it can’t be lost or destroyed later and some of the principles are not shy about shooting off their mouth at this point. The more that is revealed now insures that those public statements and documents can be used later. The information also serves ti raise awareness in the pubic and increase pressure for a resolution of some sort.

I was very unhappy with the Libby investigation because appoiting Fitzgerald took the issueit out of the public spotlight and left the direction it would take (and the outcome) entirely in Fitgerald’s hands.

Slartibartfast raises a good point that I have argued on other sites: Obama is a smart fighter, a counter-puncher that wil take hits early i a match i order to get an insight into his opponents moves and strategy. He takes a position or refuses to take a position and later bring his position more in line with the public opinion. He leads in part by following, gets a mountain of political cover, and improves his rating. He’s going to need a mountain of political cover on this issue too so waiting until there is a persistant and loud drumbeat for action is a very smart move.

(yea, yea, I know there are mis-spellings, My ‘puter died, I can’t get a new HD installed until tomorrow and I’m on a Mac- which I don’t know how to use. But I had to have my JTsite fix and couldn’t resist posting.)

I disagree. Glenn Greenwald’s column addresses how many news orgnaizations won’t even refer to what happened as torture. I listened to Diane Rehm this morning and she said,”what some people may refer to as torture”. The propaganda is coming fast and thick. “Moving forward”, “retribution” instead of rule of law, “torture works”, “there’s a lot going on”, etc. These catch phrases are all attempts to turn people away from paying attention to what was really done.

JT has pointed out many times that Obama does not have to be involved in this at all. We have an AG. We have clear national and international law. We have highly qualified attys. who are more than capable of taking on this job while Obama tends to the other pressing issues facing our nation. In fact, by not moving forward on investigations he is guaranteeing a partisan fight. He also keeps himself involved with something that isn’t really his business except to get out of the way and follow the law (per JT). If the DOJ can defend the people who misprosecuted Ted Stevens (which they are doing), if they can offer help to defend CIA interrogators (which they have offered), if they can defend Alberto Gonzales against a detainee (which they are), certainly there are attys. available to help in a war crimes investigation. The evidence is rather clear, even if we do not yet have all of it. A special prosecutor could move forward with the available evidence. Deals could be made to commute or pardon in exchange for the full story from each person.

There is obfuscation about this issue going on right now. In truth, there is a bright line. If we don’t take care of this we are not acting in accord with the highest values of the United States.

Guess the remake would be Remington-Bacon!

Actually Whooliebacon is an obscure reference to Superstition Mountain.

If we don’t clean house now and I mean all of it, what will some future administration be willing to do in the coming Water wars…

I think I can speak for all the regulars on that issue when I say, “There’s no problem with that.”

In fact, many here (including myself) have argued that either the law applies to all or it applies to none. The Rule of Law and Equal Protection are at the heart of this matter. If Obama screws up, then he can go to prison too, but the truly dangerous precedent would be to say the President is above the law because that would make him King. The concept of divine rulers above the law doesn’t fly in this forum. The U.S. was founded as a country of laws not men in part to avoid the abuses of monarchy. King George and Grand Vizier Dick are about to get a wake up call. One way or another.

http://blogdredd.blogspot.com/2009/04/my-lawyer-said-i-could.html

One thing at a time.

And a gift . . .

Your partial namesake has practical application beyond breakfast. Cutting steel! Enjoy.

http://idle.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/04/16/1621250

Appoint a special prosecutor to investigate 9/11 and unwind the whole ball of wax from there.

It goes a lot deeper than torture…