The Washington Post reports that Bush officials are working the halls and telephones of the Justice Department with the formal end of the internal investigation into former Justice officials involved in the Bush torture program, including Ninth Circuit Judge Jay S. Bybee, Berkeley professor John C. Yoo and Steven G. Bradbury. They are reportedly working over former colleagues to soften the language and recommendations of the department. I will be discussing disucssed this and other related stories on this segment of MSNBC Countdown.
An earlier draft report recommended disciplinary action by state bar associations against two former Justice officials — pretty light punishment for participation in a war crime. However, even that recommendation was too much for former Attorney General Michael Mukasey who delayed the report and ordered further examination. Mukasey and then-Deputy Attorney General Mark Filip wrote a 14-page letter rebutting the report of its own investigators before leaving office.
The investigation could, however, disclose new information given the five years of work by the department into the matter. The deadline for the investigation ended on Monday of this week.
Assistant Attorney General Ronald Weich has informed members of Congress that Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. and Deputy Attorney General David W. Ogden “will have access to whatever information they need to evaluate the final report and make determinations about appropriate next steps.”
The Justice Department continues to insist on total control over the investigation of its own attorneys and department in a clear conflict of interest. Not just political appointees but career attorneys were involved in the program. The department is now reviewing whether the department itself facilitated in the commission of a war crime — a finding that would be an embarrassment to the department as a whole. This is like having a hospital review its own doctors to determine if those doctors and the hospital as a whole committed criminal malpractice.
The fact that there is lobbying going on between current and former Justice Department officials shows the highly inbred aspect of this inquiry. These same former officials would not think of trying to influence a special prosecutor, who is supposed to be appointed in such conflicted circumstances. Not surprisingly, a report from the New York Times indicates that the Justice Department will use this report to conclude that its lawyers should not face criminal charges when facilitating such programs.
In this context, discussion of bar charges appears rather laughable. It is not that such action is not warranted, but rather it is treating participating in a possible war crime as something less than a misdemeanor offense.
In the meantime, the Senate Judiciary hearing will reportedly hold an equally offensive hearing that will explore in part whether the torture program was effective in getting information. The clear import is that it is somehow relevant or mitigating if our torturing of individuals yielded information.
For the full story, click here
How many rotten apples spoil a barrel now?
I heard additional information on this during the “blurb break” on NPR. The Spanish Court has demanded a report from the administration as to what action they intend to take. I believe they want the report by tomorrow. If the administration’s actions are minimal then Spain plans to proceed on the prosecutions.
It is absolutely outrageous that anyone being investigated should be contacting people involved in the investigation. It is even more outrageous that their phone calls are being returned. This just doesn’t look inappropriate, it is inappropriate. This is worse than Pete Domenici calling David Igelsias to see if he’d pushed along Pete’s special prosecution plans. This is like having the local mob boss and henchmen give a call to the police before they bring evidence to the prosecutor. There should be no contact.
As to a hearing on torture’s efficacy–propaganda works in changing the issue. That question is irrelevant. The proper question is, did we violate our laws? That hearing can be concluded in about 5 mins.
Also, I found this site yesterday. It has the testimony of the man being tortured in the picture on the right.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=13379
“Torture at Abu Ghraib: “The Man Behind the Hood”
Full Transcript of Ali Shalal’s Testimony”
If you scroll down the page you will get to the actual testimony. It has graphic pictures and descriptions.
Sounds like what they have been doing for years, propaganda:
http://blogdredd.blogspot.com/2009/04/tortured-record-of-bush-ii-torture.html
Thank you Professor Turley for your work on Countdown and Maddow. You’re the only honest person I ever see on TV. Each time you stand up for the rule of law and the constitution.
Thank you for your hard work. Though the term has lost most of it’s meaning, I hope you’ll understand when I say, you’re a great American.
Now, not only do the Bush II crime bosses have a plant in the DOJ, Arlen Specter is saying Norm Coleman should win the court case and be seated in place of Al Franken. Arlen must be a plant too:
http://blogdredd.blogspot.com/2009/04/specter-of-pop-cornyn-saving-america.html
A good assesment of the mentality that makes it all possible and worth the read.
http://www.bradblog.com/?p=7117#more-7117
I fully expected that there would be some intense lobbying by supporters of the recently displaced. I hope someone has the sense to preserve copies of all of the draft versions of the report before the final edition is published. Following the evolution of the document might be very interesting.
Prof., I apologize in advance, but I think anger is appropriate in this situation.
WASHINGTON!
This really is the kind of thing that leads to anarchy and mass disobedience.
This is no joke.
There is no hyperbole.
I have no cute point to make.
You morons in Washington are a hair’s breadth away from making the Federal government illegitimate in toto.
Is that clear enough for you idiots?
If you let the torturers go, our legal system from top to bottom is not only unconstitutional, but the very definition of tyranny that should be resisted and actively so by citizens who value our Constitution and laws more than you value your re-elections and ego worship. If the guilty are not made to pay, you will ALL be made to pay in one way or another – this means your lobbyist and corporate masters too.
You had your chance and your choice is apparently giving We the People the collective finger. Well, sports, that has a consequence too. It’s won’t happen fast, but it will certainly happen. History tells me so. Soon the time for talking will be over. Any blood that results will be on the hands of those of you in Washington providing cover for the criminals.
You are on the shores of the Rubicon. You can still do the right thing, but once you cross? You’ll have killed the America my grandfather’s generation fought for more dead than a terrorist ever could have because you’ll have become the very thing our real enemies desired – torturing lawless authoritarian thugs just like them. You might as well let the House of Saud move into the White House. You in Washington will officially and for all time in future history books be the enemy of We the People of the United States if you give these guys and Bush Co. a walk. “Why yes, Timmy XJ3127, violating the Constitution was blatantly stupid. It was indicative of the greed and shortsightedness of American politicians – often openly purchased by K Street graft merchants and openly acting against the interests of their constituents in favor of the corporations – that at the turn of the 21st Century that led to the fractionation of that country. This was followed by a rather disorganized civil war that ended with everyone in Washington and on K Street being strung up like Christmas hams, or like Mussolini from a lamp post if you’re Kosher, leading to the formation of the Republican Southern Empire which rapidly reintroduced slavery for both people of any color and women. They too had a short lifespan as a sovereign state as soon all the old rich white men in power were killed by angry mobs and lack of procreation. That’s what happens when the governing forget they only rule at the consent of the governed, Timmy. Next question?”
You get the picture yet, Washington hammerheads?
The laws I swore to defend? You know, the same oath you took? I still take that oath seriously, but you are the ones you are blatantly and rapidly destroying the Constitutional basis for government. An oath means more to a man than to you clowns obviously. You are, R & D both, taking a right long piss on the Constitution. And if “your law” doesn’t apply to all? It’s neither mine nor does it apply to me, sport, nor any other American citizen. No one is above the Constitution and anyone who claims they are is the enemy of the United States even if they are an office holder. Does “defend against enemies foreign and domestic” ring a bell? It should. Don’t talk to me anymore about law. Laws? “Your laws”? The ones that apply to everyone but you bunch of “elected” graft weasel scumbags? The Constitution you swore to uphold yet try to circumvent to your personal benefit every chance you get?
I don’t think so. Your right to pontificate about “law” is spiraling down the drain as fast as your credibility. It’s about time for the adults to stand up and administer a whipping.
I’m not a vassal. I’m not a lobbyist whore. I’m not a subject. I’m a free man. The laws this country were founded upon tell me so.
And worse for you, I’m an American in the mold of Jefferson. Don’t tread on me. Well you can try, but you won’t like what happens. Screw you and the horse you rode in on.
My loyalty is to the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. It cannot be bought by any PAC or Halliburton or Exxon or any other sleazy corporate shield acting as a hiding place for the sociopaths and criminals that are ruining not just this country but the world. You sold your souls, but keep your blood money off mine.
You reap what you sow, you greedy self-absorbed bastards. And right now, when you cross that river (are any of you smart enough to know the allusion to crossing the Rubicon?), you are going to be sowing the seeds of your eventual destruction – party affiliation will not save you, your lobbyist graft will not save you, “what does ‘know’ mean” will not save you, “I don’t recall” won’t save you. When the People have had enough, nothing will save you. But you never understood history, in particular French history, did you? Too wrapped up in your little dreams of glory and how special you are to be elected/purchased as a candidate. Marie thought that all the way until the blade fell and she was left with a couple of seconds of consciousness to ponder her headless body.
And this? Letting torturers and war criminals go free while we have the largest per capita prison population on the planet due to your other money making venture, the “War or Drugs”? Prisons full of non-violent offenders who should be in treatment instead of prison and torturers, sadistic killers, get a walk and sometimes a raise and a medal?
I don’t think so.
That’s injustice writ large. That’s a legal poke in the eye. That’s something that WILL NOT BE FORGIVEN. EVER.
Even before the open violence starts, and it will eventually – mark my words, enjoy the huge amounts of subversion and non-compliance coming your way from the populace once people know for a fact that the law is only for “the little people”. If nothing else, you’ll be guaranteeing that every future tax return filed is fraudulent. People will find they can do all kind of business without a license or paying taxes. Why pay the government “protection money” when they aren’t doing the job of protecting the Constitution, much less provide the universal health care every other Western democracy has? Why should we cooperate when billions go to bankers for FAILING TO DO THEIR JOB but you are set to put hundreds of thousands of people out in the streets because you won’t let the courts modify the fraudulent and criminally negligent loans the banks used to get into this situation in the first place?
Let the eat cake, eh?
The little people way out number your lot, but then again, math wasn’t your strong point. Too busy kissing ass and selling out to stay in office to have any common sense. To paraphrase “Fight Club”, “Look, the people you are [screwing over to save your own rotten careers while you violate the Constitution] are the people you depend on. We cook your meals, we haul your trash, we connect your calls, we drive your ambulances. We guard you while you sleep. Do not… fuck with us.”
That plain enough for you idiots to understand?
Did I mention even our allies will stop and have already started to stop cooperating with stated U.S. goals and they’ve done so specifically over the torture issue? It is a SHAME that a Spanish judge has the balls to do what none of you on the Hill does and call a crime a crime and be willing to prosecute it.
Sad when a foreign court has to be relied upon to uphold the letter of U.S. law via international law. So pucker up, Judiciary! It’s not only the Congress and Executive screwing up here.
Tortures go free equals you will pay the price for your weak, evil, craven and illegal behavior. Maybe not tonight. Maybe not tomorrow. But real soon you’ll come to We the People. You’ll want to be re-elected. And we’ll say “No.” You can only rig the elections so many times too, morons, so unless you want to hasten your downfall, go easy on that. People are watching after Bush. Then you’ll be begging for help for some corporate idiot who lost all his money and thinks there should be no consequence for his incompetence and we’ll say, “No.” We don’t care how much money he gave your campaign. You’ll beg us to give you of both parties another chance and we’ll say “No.” You’ll beg us and lie to us to start another war for your personal profit, most likely as a distraction to stay in power, and we’ll say “No.” You’ll tell us “we’re special, laws don’t apply to us, we’ll do as we like!” one too many damn times.
And then it’s going to be on.
We’ll treat you like baby seals.
Except seal hunters don’t use the guillotine when they’ve finally reached a breaking point. We the People might not be that kind either since you insist on backing us into a corner.
This is not a threat. This is a prediction. Ignore it at your peril. My name is not Cassandra and my batting average is way above the norm. Me personally? I prepared for whatever happens, but I’m going to tell you right now – “I told you so.”
Prove me wrong, Washington.
Do the right thing and prosecute. I’d like to be wrong about what I see coming. But I’m not. There is, however, still time to change the road you and We the People are collectively on.
The choice is yours. Return to being a Beacon for Justice or Fall Like Rome.
OPR has been rather a longstanding joke.
This, from the article, is the part I was looking for…
——
” The Office of Professional Responsibility, which has been conducting the investigation, itself has been a focus of criticism from defense lawyers and judges, who say it moves slowly and operates with too much secrecy. Last month Attorney General Holder transferred its longtime leader, H. Marshall Jarrett, to another senior post and replaced him with federal prosecutor Mary Patrice Brown. The report on Yoo, Bybee and Bradbury is now in her court, department sources said.”
Uh, the near BANKRUPT Washington Post? What did they do, copy an article of the BANKRUPT New York Times!
Obama must be in some trouble today so they need to run interference for the ONE from any one of these or others:
Al-Marri’s sweetheart deal
May 5, 2009 Posted by Scott at 7:08 AM
Al-Marri, the terrorist sent to the United States by al-Qaeda to carry out a second wave of mass-murder attacks, was permitted by the Justice Department to plead guilty to a single count of material support to terrorism, maximum sentence 15 years’ imprisonment with the possibility that al-Marri may simply be given credit for time served and released.
The Obama administration has already outright released, with no trial, Binyam Mohammed, an al-Qaeda operative who, like al-Marri, was assigned by KSM to carry out mass-murder attacks in the United States after 9/11. Now, al-Marri has been given a plea agreement that grossly undersells the grave seriousness of his war crimes.
If Holder’s objective was to demonstrate that George W. Bush was wrong to detain al-Marri as an enemy combatant and that the criminal-justice system “works,” this sweetheart deal suggests the opposite.
Jihadists were not impressed by our strategy of fighting them in the courtroom through the 1990s.
Wonder what they’re thinking now.
Just heard on the news that after 12 billion dollars in taxpayer money, another 25 billion that financial firms are being forced to write off and after all that the Union being given 55% ownership of Chrysler; the Union just announced they are going to SELL THEIR 55% and put the proceeds into a Union Trust Fund!
What a con JOB! What a rip off of the American Taxpayer! What a rip off of the creditors that funded Chrysler!
Unbelievable!
House Appropriations Committee Chairman Dave Obey said he was “very dubious” about the chances of success in the region and wants a “fish or cut bait” assessment in a year’s time that will determine how long the U.S. continues on this path. “It gives the president one year to demonstrate what he can do.” said the Wisconsin Democrat.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0509/22083.html
NOTHING LIKE TELLING THE ENEMY IN AFGANISTAN THAT DEMOCRATS AREN’T EVEN BEHIND THIS PRESIDENT IN STRIVING FOR VICTORY, EH GARY???!!!!!!
LIBERALS IN CONGRESS WILL DO ANYTHING TO MAKE US LOSE A WAR IF THEY THINK IT GAINS THEM POLITICALLY NO MATTER HOW MANY LIVES IT COSTS.
PHANTOM AIR FARCE PICTURES
By JEREMY OLSHAN
AP
May 5, 2009
The $328,835 snapshots of an Air Force One backup plane buzzing lower Manhattan last week will not be shown to the public, the White House said yesterday.
“We have no plans to release them,” an aide to President Obama told The Post, refusing to comment further.
The sole purpose of the secret photo-op, which sent thousands of New Yorkers running for cover, was to take new publicity shots of the presidential jet over the city.
“The photos . . . are classified — that’s ridiculous,” Councilman Peter Vallone Jr., said.
New Yorkers said they could not understand how a president who shares intimate snapshots from the White House could justify classifying these.
“So we’re not gonna see the fruits of this cruel joke?” said Frank Antonelli, 39, one of the Wall Street traders spooked by last week’s flyover.
The CIA’s war against President Bush was motivated by ass covering, or by political partisanship. But with President Obama, it’s personal.
Many are furious about Obama’s disclosure of explicit details of the interrogation methods used on some al Qaida bigwigs, and his waffling on whether or not those who employed them will be subject to prosecution.
Others are incensed by his decision to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay, and to let some of those incarcerated there loose in the United States.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi held two hush hush meetings with CIA Director Leon Panetta and Democratic members of the Intelligence Committee last week.
“Her fear and frustration have apparently given way to panic after word reached her of the CIA’s reaction to the damage she, President Obama and other Democrats have done to the spy agency in the last three months, wrote Jed Babbin, a former Deputy Undersecretary of Defense, in Human Events May 1. “Pelosi learned that her actions and those of President Obama have so damaged CIA morale that the agency’s ability to function could be in danger.”
The upshot of the meetings was an unprecedented letter from House Intelligence Committee Chairman Silvestre Reyes (D-Tex) to Mr. Panetta, making a quasi-apology. Rep. Reyes asked the CIA director to “disseminate it to the CIA workforce as soon as possible.”
But the CYA nature of the letter, and Mr. Reyes’ pledge of more oversight are unlikely to mollify many at Langley. Other Western intelligence services regard the Obama administration with contempt and rising concern as an officer of the DGSE, France’s military intelligence agency, informed the CIA last week.
“All of us in our little community are worried — us, our friends in Berlin, London, Tel Aviv,” the DGSE officer said. “It is not like the barbarians at the gates. It is every barbarian horde in the world being told there are no gates.”
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/05/05/the_cias_fight_with_obama_96333.html
What a shame that as a country we have become so corrupt to break international law and then turn a blind eye to justice. The iconic statues of blind justice have now been replaced with the three monkeys, hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil.
I think we can say the constitution reflected an enormous blind spot in this culture that carries on til this day and the framers had this same blind spot. I don’t think the two views are contradictory to say that the constitution was a remarkable political document that paved the way for where we are now and to say also that it also reflected the fundamental flaw in this country that continues until this day.
Uh, the near BANKRUPT Washington Post? What did they do, copy an article of the BANKRUPT New York Times!
Obama must be in some trouble today so they need to run interference for the ONE from any one of these or others:
.
.
.
Al-Marri’s sweetheart deal
May 5, 2009 Posted by Scott at 7:08 AM
Al-Marri, the terrorist sent to the United States by al-Qaeda to carry out a second wave of mass-murder attacks, was permitted by the Justice Department to plead guilty to a single count of material support to terrorism, maximum sentence 15 years’ imprisonment with the possibility that al-Marri may simply be given credit for time served and released.
The Obama administration has already outright released, with no trial, Binyam Mohammed, an al-Qaeda operative who, like al-Marri, was assigned by KSM to carry out mass-murder attacks in the United States after 9/11. Now, al-Marri has been given a plea agreement that grossly undersells the grave seriousness of his war crimes.
If Holder’s objective was to demonstrate that George W. Bush was wrong to detain al-Marri as an enemy combatant and that the criminal-justice system “works,” this sweetheart deal suggests the opposite.
Jihadists were not impressed by our strategy of fighting them in the courtroom through the 1990s.
Wonder what they’re thinking now.
.
.
.
.
Just heard on the news that after 12 billion dollars in taxpayer money, another 25 billion that financial firms are being forced to write off and after all that the Union being given 55% ownership of Chrysler; the Union just announced they are going to SELL THEIR 55% and put the proceeds into a Union Trust Fund!
What a con JOB! What a rip off of the American Taxpayer! What a rip off of the creditors that funded Chrysler!
Unbelievable!
.
.
.
.
House Appropriations Committee Chairman Dave Obey said he was “very dubious” about the chances of success in the region and wants a “fish or cut bait” assessment in a year’s time that will determine how long the U.S. continues on this path. “It gives the president one year to demonstrate what he can do.” said the Wisconsin Democrat.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0509/22083.html
NOTHING LIKE TELLING THE ENEMY IN AFGANISTAN THAT DEMOCRATS AREN’T EVEN BEHIND THIS PRESIDENT IN STRIVING FOR VICTORY, EH GARY???!!!!!!
LIBERALS IN CONGRESS WILL DO ANYTHING TO MAKE US LOSE A WAR IF THEY THINK IT GAINS THEM POLITICALLY NO MATTER HOW MANY LIVES IT COSTS.
.
.
.
.
PHANTOM AIR FARCE PICTURES
By JEREMY OLSHAN
AP
May 5, 2009
The $328,835 snapshots of an Air Force One backup plane buzzing lower Manhattan last week will not be shown to the public, the White House said yesterday.
“We have no plans to release them,” an aide to President Obama told The Post, refusing to comment further.
The sole purpose of the secret photo-op, which sent thousands of New Yorkers running for cover, was to take new publicity shots of the presidential jet over the city.
“The photos . . . are classified — that’s ridiculous,” Councilman Peter Vallone Jr., said.
New Yorkers said they could not understand how a president who shares intimate snapshots from the White House could justify classifying these.
“So we’re not gonna see the fruits of this cruel joke?” said Frank Antonelli, 39, one of the Wall Street traders spooked by last week’s flyover.
.
.
.
.
The CIA’s war against President Bush was motivated by ass covering, or by political partisanship. But with President Obama, it’s personal.
Many are furious about Obama’s disclosure of explicit details of the interrogation methods used on some al Qaida bigwigs, and his waffling on whether or not those who employed them will be subject to prosecution.
Others are incensed by his decision to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay, and to let some of those incarcerated there loose in the United States.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi held two hush hush meetings with CIA Director Leon Panetta and Democratic members of the Intelligence Committee last week.
“Her fear and frustration have apparently given way to panic after word reached her of the CIA’s reaction to the damage she, President Obama and other Democrats have done to the spy agency in the last three months, wrote Jed Babbin, a former Deputy Undersecretary of Defense, in Human Events May 1. “Pelosi learned that her actions and those of President Obama have so damaged CIA morale that the agency’s ability to function could be in danger.”
The upshot of the meetings was an unprecedented letter from House Intelligence Committee Chairman Silvestre Reyes (D-Tex) to Mr. Panetta, making a quasi-apology. Rep. Reyes asked the CIA director to “disseminate it to the CIA workforce as soon as possible.”
But the CYA nature of the letter, and Mr. Reyes’ pledge of more oversight are unlikely to mollify many at Langley. Other Western intelligence services regard the Obama administration with contempt and rising concern as an officer of the DGSE, France’s military intelligence agency, informed the CIA last week.
“All of us in our little community are worried — us, our friends in Berlin, London, Tel Aviv,” the DGSE officer said. “It is not like the barbarians at the gates. It is every barbarian horde in the world being told there are no gates.”
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/05/05/the_cias_fight_with_obama_96333.html
Mr. T, I liked the simile you used on Olbermann’s show regarding the information we currently have about the governments torture policy: ‘it’s like taking a tour of a crime scene and nobody arresting the murderer who’s standing in the same room.’ Considering how many people died under interrogation (16 I think) it could also be a metaphor. It was a good segment, well done.
FORMER DEM:
YOU NEED TO STOP POSTING, I DONT EVEN READ WHAT YOU WRITE AND I VOTED FOR BUSH. I JUST SCROLL THROUGH. EVERYONE ELSE JUST SCROLLS THROUGH AS WELL. NO ONE IS READING YOUR POSTS, WHY ARE YOU WASTING YOUR TIME. IS THIS SOME SORT OF FRATERNITY HELL WEEK REQUIREMENT?
AS MIKE A SAID DO YOU HAVE AN ORIGINAL THOUGHT?
As Morgan Freeman said in the Shawshank Redemption and I am paraphrasing “if you ever decided to shoot yourself, that bullet would be the first original thing to enter your skull in quite awhile”
I am not suggesting you kill yourself, so don’t get all puffed up with righteous anger.
WASHINGTON — An internal Justice Department inquiry into the conduct of Bush administration lawyers who wrote secret memorandums authorizing brutal interrogations has concluded that the authors committed serious lapses of judgment but should not be criminally prosecuted, according to government officials briefed on a draft of the findings.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/06/us/politics/06inquire.html?_r=1&hp
THE CIA HAS HAD IT WITH OBAMA WORLD:
.
.
The CIA’s war against President Bush was motivated by ass covering, or by political partisanship. But with President Obama, it’s personal.
Many are furious about Obama’s disclosure of explicit details of the interrogation methods used on some al Qaida bigwigs, and his waffling on whether or not those who employed them will be subject to prosecution.
Others are incensed by his decision to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay, and to let some of those incarcerated there loose in the United States.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi held two hush hush meetings with CIA Director Leon Panetta and Democratic members of the Intelligence Committee last week.
“Her fear and frustration have apparently given way to panic after word reached her of the CIA’s reaction to the damage she, President Obama and other Democrats have done to the spy agency in the last three months, wrote Jed Babbin, a former Deputy Undersecretary of Defense, in Human Events May 1. “Pelosi learned that her actions and those of President Obama have so damaged CIA morale that the agency’s ability to function could be in danger.”
The upshot of the meetings was an unprecedented letter from House Intelligence Committee Chairman Silvestre Reyes (D-Tex) to Mr. Panetta, making a quasi-apology. Rep. Reyes asked the CIA director to “disseminate it to the CIA workforce as soon as possible.”
But the CYA nature of the letter, and Mr. Reyes’ pledge of more oversight are unlikely to mollify many at Langley. Other Western intelligence services regard the Obama administration with contempt and rising concern as an officer of the DGSE, France’s military intelligence agency, informed the CIA last week.
“All of us in our little community are worried — us, our friends in Berlin, London, Tel Aviv,” the DGSE officer said. “It is not like the barbarians at the gates. It is every barbarian horde in the world being told there are no gates.”
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/05/05/the_cias_fight_with_obama_96333.html
Former Dem.
You can state the obvious by looking within your soul. Apparently you nor your fodder fool have that much less a conscience. So were you teased because of some glaring defect which is obvious to many on this list?
Former Dem: What you should do is follow the example above, copy paste the first paragraph, provide the link, then comment. I used to do the exact same thing you do. It’s the whole copy paste thing that people get annoyed at because anybody can do that.
A Bully In the White House
May 5, 2009
Barack Obama’s lawless conduct in connection with the Chrysler bankruptcy is sending shock waves through the business community. It is important to understand what is happening here. Many think that Obama is merely engaging in crony capitalism, favoring his political supporters (most notably the Auto Workers Union) at the expense of others. That’s true, of course, but it is much worse than that: Obama has tried to bully those who have not bought his favor–Chrysler’s non-TARP secured creditors–into giving up their legal rights by threatening to use the powers of the White House to damage their businesses. This sort of lawlessness is common in some of the more corrupt Third World countries, but it is brand new to the United States.
Business Insider headlines: “Hedge Funds Outraged At Obama Bullying But Also Cowering In Fear.” It reproduces a letter written by Cliff Asness, managing partner of AQR Capital Management. Here are some excerpts:
The President has just harshly castigated hedge fund managers for being unwilling to take his administration’s bid for their Chrysler bonds. He called them “speculators” who were “refusing to sacrifice like everyone else” and who wanted “to hold out for the prospect of an unjustified taxpayer-funded bailout.”
The responses of hedge fund managers have been, appropriately, outrage, but generally have been anonymous for fear of going on the record against a powerful President …. Furthermore, one by one the managers and banks are said to be caving to the President’s wishes out of justifiable fear. …
Here’s a shock. When hedge funds, pension funds, mutual funds, and individuals, including very sweet grandmothers, lend their money they expect to get it back. However, they know, or should know, they take the risk of not being paid back. But if such a bad event happens it usually does not result in a complete loss. A firm in bankruptcy still has assets. It’s not always a pretty process. Bankruptcy court is about figuring out how to most fairly divvy up the remaining assets based on who is owed what and whose contracts come first. The process already has built-in partial protections for employees and pensions, and can set lenders’ contracts aside in order to help the company survive, all of which are the rules of the game lenders know before they lend. But, without this recovery process nobody would lend to risky borrowers. Essentially, lenders accept less than shareholders (means bonds return less than stocks) in good times only because they get more than shareholders in bad times.
The above is how it works in America, or how it’s supposed to work. The President and his team sought to avoid having Chrysler go through this process, proposing their own plan for re-organizing the company and partially paying off Chrysler’s creditors. Some bond holders thought this plan unfair. Specifically, they thought it unfairly favored the United Auto Workers, and unfairly paid bondholders less than they would get in bankruptcy court. So, they said no to the plan and decided, as is their right, to take their chances in the bankruptcy process. But, as his quotes above show, the President thought they were being unpatriotic or worse.
Let’s be clear, it is the job and obligation of all investment managers, including hedge fund managers, to get their clients the most return they can. They are allowed to be charitable with their own money, and many are spectacularly so, but if they give away their clients’ money to share in the “sacrifice”, they are stealing. …
The President’s attempted diktat takes money from bondholders and gives it to a labor union that delivers money and votes for him. … Shaking down lenders for the benefit of political donors is recycled corruption and abuse of power. …
Last but not least, the President screaming that the hedge funds are looking for an unjustified taxpayer-funded bailout is the big lie writ large. Find me a hedge fund that has been bailed out. Find me a hedge fund, even a failed one, that has asked for one. In fact, it was only because hedge funds have not taken government funds that they could stand up to this bullying. The TARP recipients had no choice but to go along. The hedge funds were singled out only because they are unpopular, not because they behaved any differently from any other ethical manager of other people’s money. The President’s comments here are backwards and libelous.
Bullying, lying and lawless: President Obama has achieved a sort of trifecta of dishonor in connection with the Chrysler cram-down.
Good lord, in 3 months Obama has turned us into a third world upside down country.
Obama will go down in history as the worst President America has ever had!
He is going to throw race relations back 25 years, he is bankrupting us, he is setting us up for a terrorist attack, he seems intent on usurping the US Constitution.
and yet Mr. Turley, our “Constitutional Expert” here is SILENT!
Mr. Turley, what say you about bankruptcy laws and Obama STEALING secured creditors money and in effect handing it to his voting block?
Trolls show the fear of their masters. It looks like they think they may have a fight on their hands despite their best efforts. Thank you for sharing the fears of the powerful. It’s one of the few ways to know.
JT is right. It is very bizarre to have so much evidence and no investigation into obvious crimes. They bar has kicked people out for much less, and war crimes ought not to be remedied by the bar. It will be a slap in the face of the rule of law if little comes of lawyers breaking faith with the Constitution. This has resulted in deaths (as lottakatz and others have pointed out). It has resulted in unspeakable crimes dressed in sterile language, describing one monstrosity after another. If the DOJ will not move on this evidence they are engaged, as is their boss, in the perpetuation of the monstronsity. Spain will prosecute if we do not.
I’m wondering — where has our morality gone?
Regardless of how our standards for behavior and the morals that guide them are formed and informed by growth, development and experience, are we so jaded as a people, so cynical as a nation that a president overwhelmingly elected on a platform of change and transparency and responsibility can overlook the ideals of the people who brought him into office and who should be running away like rats off a sinking ship?
The Obama administration was supposed to do things differently, and instead it took only 100 days for them to compound the criminal abuses and atmosphere of distrust generated by Bushco.
I still like to think that Obama is too young and I never thought I’d say this — not because I am an old crank, although I am getting older and crankier, but because his inexperience and this was a concern in his campaign against Secretary Clinton, is showing. If hubris was the watchword of the Clinton years, inexperience is guiding us into morally murky waters from which we may not emerge with our national integrity intact.
Prof Turley on Countdown this evening alluded to something I wrote a few days ago….not so much the distaste that we had for the Nuremburg trials but the responsibility we had to conduct them. In so doing, we went after everyone we could find: the lawyers who wrote the Nuremburg Laws for Racial Purity (with the help of centuries of Christian inspired Jew hating and ancient Canon law) but the judges who enforced them and the ordinary German citizens who committed the atrocities.
What this really means is that we can find legal precedent for almost any point of view regardless of how heinous or how morally illuminating it may be. This may be a new chapter in creating the heinous and it is sad that it comes with the vulgarity of moving into the future. I’m not sure that this is a future that I can find inspirational or worthwhile.
Sad
Prof Turley does not appear here as a participant, probably for many reasons, but mainly, I think, because he does not have endless hours to read countless posts to his blog.
He is, however, far from silent.
YOu just have to know where to go to hear his views.
Good luck to you.
The trolls are going nuts over any thread dealing with the torture program. Dear Mr. and Ms. Troll, the only issue that is viable here is whether the Bush Administration authorized and ordered Toture. Since they admit to waterboarding and the memos that were released authorized many other torture methods (especially when they were combined), the question of whether they authorized torture is already answered. As has been already stated, it is sad that Spain has to do our work for us.
GWLSMom,
You’d be surprised. The Prof is a busy guy, but he does stop by fairly often and as time permits. I was rather flattered when he took time from his schedule to wish me a happy birthday. Most of us know JT lurks a lot and speaks when he can (or occasionally when he has to). You might want to cut him some slack if he can’t be here for every thread. He’s got court, classes, assort school activities, family with childrens (always more work than it looks), family activities, TV/Radio appearances, and blogging on his plate that I know of and probably a lot more. I’m thinking the man hasn’t slept since 1066. I kid! It’s a law joke. He hasn’t slept since 1986. But keep posting. You’ll run into him eventually.
Buddha:
When the cats away …. He’ll mosey on up with some smiling goat photo or some Bogie reference eventually. As the barkeeper at our cyber bar, he need only break up the fights, say howdy to the patrons, and keep up the flow on those topics with a good head on them. Like most bartenders he mostly listens and doesn’t say much, but when he does its worth paying attention to. Set ‘em up JT!
http://music.aol.com/video/the-secret-of-life/faith-hill/1358871
I have seen a few government cover-ups, up close. If the Obama Administration allows this injustice, I am done caring anymore about trying to fight the government. If you do, “win,” the result is only temporary—at best—and the years-long process destroys just about everything for which you hold sacrosanct; honor, ethics, dignity, trust…
Ergo, lawyers will always be assured a job and law professors/scholars such as Prof. Turley will always have good Constitutional Law lecture topics and material to write several good law textbooks.
It all seems like one big, choreographed game or play for everyone but the common, downtrodden, citizen pawns.
FFLeo:
“I have seen a few government cover-ups, up close. If the Obama Administration allows this injustice, I am done caring anymore about trying to fight the government. If you do, “win,” the result is only temporary—at best—and the years-long process destroys just about everything for which you hold sacrosanct; honor, ethics, dignity, trust…”
***********
“Great men are almost always bad men, even when they exercise influence and not authority: still more when you superadd the tendency or certainty of corruption by full authority. There is no worse heresy than the fact that the office sanctifies the holder of it. ”
–John Emerich Edward Dalberg-Acton, 1st Baron Acton
“How much more grievous are the consequences of anger than the causes of it.”
–Marcus Aurelius
Remember FFLeo, Cicero said “Dum spiro, spero,” and I say cheer up!
Sad I voted for Obama has established three facts through his comment: (a) He doesn’t understand the third world; (b) He hasn’t a clue about race relations; and (c) He is completely ignorant about bankruptcy law. Of course, he also didn’t vote for Obama.
Buddha
Gee,I thought I was cutting The Prof some slack for not posting often. I’m pretty sure that I get how hard he works, what some of his many activities are and where his off-campus commitments may take him.
Dig: GW Law School Mom means that one of my offspring attends the Law School where Prof Turley teaches and while I was a fan before she was in his Torts class I became a much bigger admirer of his work both inside and outside the classroom.
One of the highlights of me recent past was getting to meet him a few months ago. It was like meeting Elvis or maybe Jerry Garcia and along with Keith Olbermann and Dr House (the TV character not the actor who plays him) is currently one of three men I’d be most tempted to leave my husband for. I like the braniacs. Always did. Especially the ones who tell a good story and have a sense of humor.
All that said I do look forward to a future appearance in this or some other post area.
I met a woman the other day who said, “I don’t care how much they pour some water in some terrorist’s mouth; if we can protect one American by getting information, then any type of torture or death is worth it.” It shocked me that she holds one potential loss of life as more important to protect against than not only another’s severe pain and psychological death, but the fear generated in this country and others that the United States might have no discretion in harming individuals, including US citizens.
C.L., you’re right, but it’s even worse than that. What she means is that she views one American life as more valuable than that of someone not of this country. It is all about runaway, irrational fear that has been perpetuated by terrified leaders.
C.L:
“I met a woman the other day who said, “I don’t care how much they pour some water in some terrorist’s mouth; if we can protect one American by getting information, then any type of torture or death is worth it.”
***********
I would ask her how many American boys and girls is she willing to lose to protect Iraq. I suspect her protection theory only goes so far. I would also like to know how many American POW’s she is willing to sacrifice to the exact same type of torture to wallow in her fear or sadism.
FFLEO,
There are lawyers in China trying to bring the rule of law to their country. Those working in this cause are turning up dead. The law partner of one of the recently deceased is going to keep going. He fully expects to be killed himself. He said China’s rule of law is a 100 story building. There are only 30 or 40 stories built now and some of those keep getting torn down. He said, after he dies there will be other people to build the other stories because the rule of law must replace the rule of men. I don’t mean that people who have tried really hard to bring about justice in the US need to keep doing that. Everyone has a point where they know they have done their part and it’s time for others to take over. But I hope you keep adding your strong voice to condemn our rule of men and to demand our own rule of law.
GWLawSchoolMom
1, May 5, 2009 at 9:19 pm
I’m wondering — where has our morality gone?
It’s been buried by talk of law, treaty, precedent, ticking time bombs and effectiveness. It’s why the CIA destroyed tapes, the Red Cross wasn’t allowed visit our gulag and no photographs of our dead troops or dead Iraqi civilians were allowed and those that were taken surreptitiously couldn’t get published. It was hidden in a debate framed as political and driven by relentless fear mongering, secrecy and lies.
The issue(s) has been sanitized by 6 years of distraction from the central issue of morality and the nature of a country’s soul and masked with a debate over what should be peripheral matters. That there has been no real debate over the morality of torture and a false war and the complete destruction of the Bill of Rights is not an accident. It’s what avoids the need to stare into a mirror and see an accurate reflection that makes one ask ‘is this who I want to be?’ and goes on to this day.
I see the virtue of arguing the issue from a legal point of view as a way to drag the country into a moral response and respect the people that do so but we as a country made a mistake by not bringing the argument down to its fundamentals immediately and keeping it there as the first thing out of the mouth of anyone taking a public position on the matter. It’s never been about law because the law isn’t justice or morality, it’s a framework for the equitable execution of public morality. When that point got lost, actually suppressed, the justice in these matters was doomed. IMO.
I never argued the war, the Homeland Security statutes or torture from any of these 2nd, 3rd or 4th tier positions and would refuse to let a verbal opponent do so; I always argued and answered ‘because it’s un-American’, ‘because it’s immoral’, ‘because it’s about becoming the monsters you oppose,’ ‘you’re a Christian, are you willing to damn your soul over a political expedient?’. I would throw the Christian question out just to watch the rabid Christian’s I argued with go crazy trying to justify their politics with their religion- I’m not a Christian so I didn’t have a dog in that fight, it was a personal indulgence
I fear our morality has died of engineered neglect.
Very good post Lottakatz. It’s still being engineered and that’s scary. Our govt. both was and is effective with its propaganda. I just linked to a story about murder of our prisoners. It seems like no matter what information comes out, it’s not enough to take action on. Why is that. It can’t be because the actions aren’t worth of being acted on, that’s for sure.
My formula for the predictability of an appropriate response to a criminal act (committed by a politician) as being the inverse of the amount of time spent dithering over the definition of ‘is’. I see absolutely nothing coming out of the current ‘debate’ regarding the crimes of the last 6 years. Nada. Zip. I’d like to be proved wrong but it’s one of those things I won’t hold my breath until.
It’s the same with the Administration arguments in support of the the previous Administration’s power grab under the theory of the “Unitary Executive’. I have not been surprised one iota. Power never divests itself. Never. People kill and die to accrue power and those in power send others to kill and to die to accrue more of it in their name. Power is never given, given to or given up- it’s taken, wrested, ripped from others, protected and guarded as the most precious of things. Power is the ability to control the future. It’s as close to immortality as one gets individually or collectively. The Unitary Executive is here to stay IMO.
Wow! I’m bringing myself down; I’m not sure if it’s my innate cynicism or that it’s been raining here for a week and I’m just withering without any sunlight ;-(
Lotta
I worry about this: I worry about our morality and our civility because it isn’t only my kid who is in the midst of law school and who plans to work in government. We have law schools filled with young people who hope to make a contribution and if they cannot depend on the rule of law, equal protection under law then what’s the point of their devotion to the law?
The example being set by Bushco and now being excused by the Obama administration saddens me nearly to the point of cynicism.
Power never divests itself, you wrote and sadly that appears to be true. Is it narcissism or entitlement or perhaps something a bit more pathological that leads one to seek the presidency? Clearly one cannot win an election without charm, charisma and a very thick skin. Does something happen once one takes up residence in the White House? Maybe having servants pick up one’s dirty clothing and never cleaning gutters or carrying keys or a wallet does something to change one. Maybe it’s the plane or being able to call anyone in the world and have them respond. Bush grew up with that kind of privilege, Obama did not. Both seem corrupted to me and yet I still have hope for Obama because he is raising young children and there is something about teaching them by example that ought to guide his decisions.
I have a friend who loves to say that it doesn’t matter who holds office… that they are all crooks and I argued that she was wrong, that it did matter and that we would be seeing that this administration was going to be different, that we’d be uplifted by its integrity and clarity of purpose.
I like to think that my kid’s legal thinking is being shaped by some of the sharpest minds in the country and that those profs communicate the necessity for them to find the will to consult their personal as well as professional ethics with every decision that they eventually make when in the service of the law.
GWLawSchoolMom:
“We have law schools filled with young people who hope to make a contribution and if they cannot depend on the rule of law, equal protection under law then what’s the point of their devotion to the law? … Maybe it’s the plane or being able to call anyone in the world and have them respond. Bush grew up with that kind of privilege, Obama did not. Both seem corrupted to me and yet I still have hope for Obama because he is raising young children and there is something about teaching them by example that ought to guide his decisions”
——————————
Yours is an eloquent comment and touches an aspect of the Obama good/bad debate that is not generally a matter for discussion. How deeply many of us in this country need Obama to be a moral President and lead a moral Administration. After what we have become nationally Obama lifted the collective spirit. I fought against it but even I couldn’t manage a sneer when he talked about hope and a new beginning. It sounded real.
I started believing that we could, through sheer force of will craft a new and better future that brought forward the best we had been and realized the best we could yet be. It was the possibility of Camelot fulfilled that captured many of us on some deeply personal level. For a whole different younger segment of the electorate it was the possibility of remaking the country into a place they had never glimpsed but knew was possible.
For these reasons we need the law and justice to be restored. It is the least a citizen can expect or a valid government must provide. Many of us believe that our country now meets the accepted definition for a fascist state but that there is a possibility it can be restored to a Democratic Republic. Fascist-lite, for now, but like you I am deeply concerned about what the future holds if we no longer have the rule of law. We are looking for a revolution without the need for cities to burn. That’s what our political system was set up to do, we played by the rules and endured at least one stolen election and now we want our country back. What about that do the politicians not get?
Perhaps our love for the law as a vehicle for that revolution is misplaced but in a society built entirely around the secular principles embodied by our founding documents and laws what are we to make of a future without them? I would also like to have that answer.
The sense of entitlement observation is sound. Obama’s lack thereof was what pushed me over to the Obama camp. Having watched his mother bicker with a recalcitrant insurance company while having a terminal illness leaves its mark. That and his children (as you also found persuasive) put me in his camp. I believed he would do right by the campaign promises he made on health care at least. I believe that’s what’s behind his embracing an (IMO) opportunistic bottom feeder like Specter and even Lieberman. He wants a health care bill.