This has been a uniquely bad week for civil libertarians. The Obama Administration appears to be rushing to dispel any notions that Obama will fight for civil liberties or war crimes investigations. After Eric Holder allegedly assured a senator that there would be no war crimes investigation and seemed to defend Bush policies, Harvard Law Dean Elena Kagan, Obama’s Solicitor General nominee, reportedly told a Republican senator that the Administration agreed with Bush that we are “at war” and therefore can hold enemy combatants indefinitely. In the meantime, Obama himself seemed to tie himself in knots when asked about investigating war crimes and leading democrats are again pushing for a symbolic “truth commission.” I discussed these issues in this segment of Countdown this week.
Sens. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) both raised the issue with Kagan. Both supported Bush’s policies. Graham asked Kagan: “Do you believe we are at war?”
“I do, Senator,” Kagan replied.
One would have hoped that a solicitor general nominee would ask if he meant a constitutional war or a policy war. We have declared wars on everything from illiteracy to inflation. However, the framers treated war as a more serious matter that required a declaration (though Congress has effectively gutted that requirement through the use of resolutions). If we are at war, when does it end? Terrorism will continue for centuries. Will we remain at war with war time powers being exercised? Since the Solicitor General is required to apply the law with precision, Kagan’s reply is extremely alarming.
Graham then asked “If our intelligence agencies should capture someone in the Philippines that is suspected of financing Al Qaeda worldwide, would you consider that person part of the battlefield?” “Do you agree with that?”
Kagan replied, “I do” and the marriage with the Bush policies was complete. So much for change. Both Holder and Kagan have now taken such a vow with Senators in order to secure their confirmations. The message appears to be a uniquely English approach to government. We will continue policies and laws that can do great harm to civil liberties, but we will use them in a beneficent way. Your “change” is not that we will get rid of the policies. Your change is that you get us. This “trust us we’re the government” approach to civil liberties was precisely what Madison and other framers rejected. To have a well-respected academic voice such views is a terrible disappointment for civil libertarians, who are being offered a meaningful commission as a type of air kiss toward war crimes.
For the full story, click here.
Bron,
No apology needed, but thank you for the thought. We’re all here to contribute, to learn and to educate. I’ve said before that I first realized I was on the beginning of the long road to wisdom, when I realized how little I knew. Yes there are a lot of smart people here in JT’s merry band, but we are all learning to help each other try to puzzle things out. In the end though an open minds trumps IQ points every time.
Mike
Patty,
Oh yeah. It’s marked. To me, that’s the day the batters can really tell if they might to have to charge the mound.
(: zing 🙂
Patty,
I can only speak for myself and not as a formally trained scientist like yourself, but I always try to practice sterile lab protocols. But by the same token, there is that whole Alexander Fleming thing . . .
—–
Indeed. Fleming counseled early on against creating antibiotic resistance as a result of prescribing too little, too much,
and/or unnecessarily. It’s preferable to know what your dealing with first – before reaching for the big gun broad-spectrums…
p.s. I trust you have Feb 18 marked on your calendar as the day
the Obama WH is expected to clarify its position on the Bush era retroactive immunity claims.
CCD,
That was funny and the idea is great!
CCD,
Indeed what mespo said. I was thinking your slip was showing too.
CCD:
“President Obama will be hoe in Chicago this weekend.”
*************
Love the Freudian!
The damn font is so tiny on the reply box. S/B home for the weekend. Near vision is off.
President Obama will be hoe in Chicago this weekend.
the address is here:
5046 South Greenwood Ave,
Chicago, IL 60615
Gong forward this might be a way to keep the constructive pressure up on the executive branch.
Bron,
Wow.
For my part, apology accepted. You must have taken two of the red pills. Also, for my part, I’m sorry I had to put on my war face. I’d rather talk this way, it’s more productive and less incendiary. I keep my demon on a leash for a reason and I really don’t enjoy using him. That’s why I chose Buddha Is Laughing instead of Shiva Is Angry. Good show, man. A sincere apology is a sign of character. There’s hope for you yet.
MikeS:
thank you for taking time to educate me. I actually do see your points and I understand. And I agree that human nature is a very difficult force to control. I think your point about need driven ego is very good and I think I understand it to a point.
Namely that they are externally motivated, they need the big car, fancy house, cute girlfriend, big wads of cash and control of others lives is the ultimate motivation. I am sure it is more complex than that.
I have to say that I wish I would have come in here a little differently, the issues analysis is very interesting and the perspective is certainly different to what I am used to.
Please accept my sincere apologies for my bad and boorish behaviour.
Patty,
I can only speak for myself and not as a formally trained scientist like yourself, but I always try to practice sterile lab protocols. But by the same token, there is that whole Alexander Fleming thing . . .
Jill 1, February 12, 2009 at 1:32 pm
“I’m not certain what’s going on here.”
——
Breakthrough!!! Whew…
Civics 101: Separation of Powers
The legislative branch makes the laws
The executive branch enforces the laws
The judicial branch interprets the laws
Rule of Law: No one is above the law.
Probably the most accessible part of the equation is the legislative branch which is why I keep advocating for constituents in their respective states to contact their Senators and Representatives in Congress.
My credibility remains intact. Nice try, though.
I don’t need to have my news cut n’ pasted from other blogs only to have it folded, spindled, mutilated and regurgitated on my shoes.
Original thoughts and factual information, on the other hand,
are welcome.
Turlees should strive to maintain sterility – prior to inserting
foot in mouth.
meistre,
I really think flooding the WH with “the evidence” might have some chance of getting attention. Obama said is there was evidence of war crimes then he would investigate. So, let’s send the evidence! Here’s some now from the CCR:
“February 12, 2009, New York and Washington, DC—Documents obtained through a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit confirm Department of Defense involvement in the CIA’s ghost detention program, revealed three prominent human rights groups today. The groups—Amnesty International USA (AIUSA), the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR), and the Center for Human Rights and Global Justice (CHRGJ)—today released documents obtained from the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) and U.S. Department of State (DOS), resulting from their lawsuit seeking the disclosure of government documents that relate to secret detention, extraordinary rendition, and torture. At a public press conference, the groups revealed that these documents confirm the existence of secret prisons at Bagram and in Iraq; affirm the DOD’s cooperation with the CIA’s ghost detention program; and show one case where the DOD sought to delay the release of Guantánamo prisoners who were scheduled to be sent home by a month and a half in order to avoid bad press.”
http://ccrjustice.org/newsroom/press-releases/rights-groups-release-documents-obtained-foia-case-relating-secret-detention
I think the whole idea of the “war on terror” is the linchpin for most other abuses of executive authority. It justifies domestic spying, renditions, torture, indefinite detention and every other abuse of the rule of law. That Kagan, and by extension Obama supports it is a real sign of danger.
Really great stuff, thank you. I don’t think its just egos for these “neo-Bolsheviks”. Who is backing them and why? There is huge money being made from our ruinous “western trade/wars/money borrowing/lending policies”. We have been importing debt and exporting jobs at home and creating huge destruction and instability abroad. Why? An old Chinese saying is “stir up water to catch fish”,….. Who is getting the fish? The only ones that can save us now are the Lawyers. There must be full INDEPENDENT judicial investigations and then prosecutions if required or, our entire systems creditability is universally shot. The only alternative is a revolution at some point, which must be avoided at all costs.
What should we do? I just received Senator Leahy’s email request to sign his online petition. Luckily, the wisdom of Prof. Turley has kept me from supporting Leahy’s Truth Commission (obviously).
Still, if the Senator is unable to collect a significant number of signatures, is it going to look like Americans aren’t interested in pursuing investigations?
Worse, is this a ploy to derail the accountability movement? Call me cynical…
Damn Buddha,
I didn’t want to reveal anything about the movies ending.
Mike,
I’ll have to check that out. If I didn’t wish to protect my true identity, I have a personal Krupp’s story about how far the mighty have fallen. I’ll just say it involves alcoholism and drug addiction, possibly prostitution. If by chance we get to have a beer together some day, I’ll tell you the story.
Buddha,
Thanks for the geek note I will check out Ubuntu. I already use Firefox and Open Office and they far surpass Explorer and Office. Infinitely less annoying.
Loved your comment where the following came from, i’m so there with you in that thinking:
“It is this arrogance and ego worship that is their true Achilles’ heel. They cannot see the throats they are cutting are their own, blinded by dreams of unlimited power and avarice that are just ego induced delusion.”
Causes me to mention another great movie from 1969 called “The Damned(Gotterdammerung)” by the great Italian director Luccino Visconti. This movie was rated X in the US less for the sex than for its’ political commentary. It was a fictional following of the fortunes of the Krupp(armaments)Family as they descended into a hell of their own making. The film starts with this all powerful family latching onto Nazism, with the belief that they could control it with their money and power. It comes to its conclusion as the family is destroyed by its’ hubris. Long movie, great direction, acting and writing.
It lays out fictionally what you lay out factually regarding the Neo-Cons and their belief that they will be in power. Fools like Wolfowitz, et al. believe they’re kingmakers, but wind up as pawns/courtiers, fawning over the behinds of the ruthless bastards that seize power. It is the common error of the politically involved pseudo-intellectual. The problem is they usually cause a ton of death and destruction with their provision of dogma for the punditocracy and the gullible. The USSR and China are great reference points for this. In both instances there were intellectual apologists promising all power to the people, in the end both countries wound up and remain fascist.
I have always agreed with the reasoning of Mr. Turley on this issue and why not investigating and prosecuting these war crimes sends a very bad message not to mention involves those in not doing so in obstruction of Justice. That said the two best means I can think of to do this are either 1. The Justice Dept appointing a Special Prosecutor or 2. The House reissuing the Independent Counsel act, which was allowed to expire because it was poisoned by Ken Starr. The reason these two methods would be preferable is because neither are partisan or even would have to involve partisan appointees.
The difficulties I see is that there doesn’t seem to be enough Dem support for either nor enough support coming from the Obama Admin and I would claim if anything the Obama Admin is trying to prevent these investigations by not making it clear to Holder that he should appoint a Special Prosecutor to look into these very serious charges. What’s worse is the Obama Admin thru its Justice Dept just invoked “State’s Secrets” to block the release of documents in the civil cases of five foreign detainees that has been winding its way thru the Federal Court system. This was the same abuse of power objection used by the Bush Admin.
The only other legal remedy I am aware of that might be employed to force the Obama Administration to investigate these Bush crimes would be a writ of mandamus but not sure if a sitting President would be immune from a civil action like this or who would have standing to sue for this remedy and even if those tortured would have standing, it still isn’t a method that has a good track record with issues as substantial as these are. But even if mandamus got shot down by the courts it might create enough of a shot to jolt the Obama Admin into upholding the rule of law. It certainly would be something I would consider attempting if I thought I have standing and could create a damage to allege.
RJ Crane, topplebush.com