Here Comes The Whirlwind
12 May 2009 2:11 pm by ogenec
http://www.taylormarsh.com/2009/04/25/david-broder-joins-peggy-noonans-keep-walkin-campaign-2/
Well, that didn’t take long, did it? A short while ago, yours truly predicted that the rush to investigate “torture” would not end with the Republican administration, but would ensnare Democrats as well. In fact, I said this:
If you think Holder’s inquiry can be confined to the past administration, you are kidding. Once it appears that Holder will investigate, there will be clarion calls from Republicans that, in the interest of fairness, all CIA techniques should be investigated. There will be disclosures to sympathetic journalists that will be emblazoned on the front page. And it will come to light that under both Bush the elder and Clinton, and with the support of both administrations, the CIA engaged in some bad acts as well…….
You sow the wind, you reap the whirlwind. If this prosecution goes forward, it will not be just the Bush/Cheney folks who find themselves in a heap of trouble.
I got pilloried for writing this. TM suggested I hang my head in shame for agreeing with “Dean” David Broder. JimK compared me to Sean Hannity. And not to be outdone, GeoT savaged my “twisted” legal logic as being worthy of the Dark Lord himself, Dick Cheney 
My feelings were hurt. But it appears that my vindication is at hand. Pelosi is firmly in the cross-hairs, and her ax (ass?) is about to get gored. First they was the equivocation that she was told of techniques that would be used prospectively, not as of the time of the report. (I am alone in seeing the similarity to the argument that it depends on what the meaning of “is” is?) She also argued that she was not advised about specific techniques, notwithstanding that the caption read “description of the particular [Enhanced Interrogation Techniques] that had been employed.” Very Orwellian.
Now we know. She was advised by no later than February 2003. Unlike Jane Harman, who promptly wrote a letter questioning the CIA’s ability to engage in this kind of activity, Pelosi stood mute. Now she claims it would have been inappropriate for her to respond, out of deference to “proper” legislative channels. Suuuuure, Madam Speaker. Which explains why Jane Harman promptly wrote a letter questioning the CIA’s ability to engage in this kind of activity.
Meanwhile, Lamar Alexander is promising to skewer Eric Holder, among others, over what they knew and when they knew it. Eric has promised to get back to him on whether he was involved in any rendition/torture discussions. Expect the same prevarications when he eventually responds.
And therein lies the point I was trying to make. Maybe it’s getting clearer now that this thing will only get worse, not better, if the push to prosecute continues. A whole bunch of folks, including Clintonites, will find themselves in severe legal jeopardy.
This post was submitted by ogenec.
No tags for this post.
And here is a post that gets closer to the truth than many others on the topic: http://jonathanweiler.com/?tag=eric-holder
TM suggested I hang my head in shame for agreeing with “Dean” David Broder.
This is an overt misrepresentation of what I said, because you imply above I was talking about you personally. That is absolutely false.
Here’s my actual post:
http://www.taylormarsh.com/2009/04/25/david-broder-joins-peggy-noonans-keep-walkin-campaign/
I said anyone who wants to “keep walkin’” on the torture issue is wrong.
That’s because I don’t care where it leads. Dems or Rep., anyone involved should be called out. Period.
TM, I was speaking partly in jest. I commented that I “completely agreed” with David Broder. You responded: “Agreeing with the Dean of the Villagers, David Broder, is not exactly something of which to be proud.”
On this, it’s not, my friend.
We need to know the whole truth. Again, I couldn’t care less who gets caught up in it. They should have thought of that before they sacrificed themselves to torture.
Sorry, forgot to add the most important point. Taylor, you are to be commended for your consistency. As long as folks take the position that let the chips fall where they may, Dem or Repub, then that’s okay with me. What I dislike is the rush to prosecute Repubs while completely absolving Dems.
Plenty of shame to go around.
In the event I attended this morning, Foreign Minister Brad Milibran was asked today about whether he thought the US tortured or not. He laughed, rolled his eyes, then said he wasn’t going to step into that one. Then segued to talking about Obama saying that US policy has changed.
I’m not sure what we’ve learned. Dick Cheney’s tour teaches that lesson.
I’m with Taylor, let the chips fall where they will. Anyone that was involved should be brought to task whether they are reps or dems. The question for me is “why are we torturing when we clearly know it’s against our laws”. Or are we as a nation “holier than thou” and can interpret the laws which ever way we want to. I don’t know, but I prefer to think we are better then that.
And if these people don’t think waterboarding isn’t torture just ask someone who has gone through SERE, or worse ask someone who almost drowned. Which by the way, my best friend almost did, and what she says is not pretty.
Several people actually drown in SERE every year.
Fry ‘em all, whatever the party.
We do not know if Nancy has the mental capacity to understand what waterboarding is. She can’t be blamed for that.
That’s interesting justlen. And the government keeps it quiet. I am so sick of people who have NEVER been waterboarded seem to think it’s no big deal. I agree with Taylor, it is both morally and legally wrong. I think that Cheney is a big liar and a very evil man. As I’ve said before, thank goodness Bush never died in office.
And by the way, wasn’t it Cheney who was put in the position to select Bushes VP, and came forward and said he would. Ulterior motives? I’m beginning to think so.
Jesse Ventura was on Larry King night before last. He’s been through SERE and had been waterboarded. He said “let me waterboard Cheney and I’ll have him confess to the Sharon Tate murders.”
Good grief I just played the section of Morning Joe with Liz Cheney. I am so totally disgusted with the lack of honesty coming out of all the Cheney mouths, and if they truly believe it isn’t torture they need to have it done to them and see how they feel.
So, is Ventura saying that they will say anything, or is he saying they will admit and tell the truth.
justlen says:
12 May 2009 at 5:30 pm
Jesse Ventura was on Larry King night before last. He’s been through SERE and had been waterboarded. He said “let me waterboard Cheney and I’ll have him confess to the Sharon Tate murders.”
__
A young Cheney does bare a striking resemblance to Tex Watson…
Quick question and I hope for an answer.
Didn’t Lt. Gen. Stanley McChrystal authorize and use “enhanced interrogation techniques” in Iraq?
I’m really hoping that they will now investigate. When I hear Liz Cheney and Joe Scarborough say that the Obama people are cherry picking, I become enraged.
justlen my husband said you are right about soldiers and sailors dying at SERE.
My next question is going to be, what do they tell the families of these men/women. I’d love to hear the rationale.
Betsy -
The point of my question above is this. The Obama administration just replaced the commander in Afghanistan with someone who used the same interrogation methods that we are all objecting too. No wonder Dick Cheney was full of praise on this decision today.
Raises questions in my mind about the administrations real position on all of this.
Don’t know kris. Maybe someone else reading here knows.
First of all,it was Gates that replaced him with McCrystal. According to the press conference Petreus(?) was the one that picked him. But I never heard that he used the interrogation methods that we all are objecting to. Where did you ever hear that.
I understand Betsy that Gates announced the replacement, but last thing I knew he was a part of the administration. As Commander in Chief I am certain Obama would have some input.
As for where did I ever hear this? Press reports this morning and I also did some research. I’ll go get you some links if you like.
That’s fine, but just because he carried out what the Bush admin ordered him to do, doesn’t mean he’s going to do it again. Remember, he’s under the orders of the CIC.
Man, reading this back, I promise never to post diaries while stuck on conference calls. Whole lotta typos.
Ogenec…I think this country might be morally bankrupt. When you think of all the shocks we have had in the last few years. People in positions of power and influence whose job it was to look out for the Americanpeople have failed us on so many levels. From Enron to food safety to Katrina to Wall Street.Our institutions are broken, our regulatory agencies are broken,our healthcare system is broken,our newspapers are failing,our car companies are failing,journalism is dying,television is balkinized our political parties are full of corruption.
I say we stop being shivering cowards and start standing for something.If our Constitution and Bill of Rights are the works of genius they are reputed to be it is time we drag them back out and reread them and recommit to them as a nation,as a people.Otherwise we stand for nothing as a country and American Exceptionalism is a myth.
If we are ever to get back to the path we veered off over 30 years ago people have to be held accountable!
kris says:
12 May 2009 at 6:03 pm
Quick question and I hope for an answer.
Didn’t Lt. Gen. Stanley McChrystal authorize and use “enhanced interrogation techniques” in Iraq?
____
he has his detractors, that’s for sure:
Tillman’s parents want general’s record reviewed
“WASHINGTON – The parents of slain Army Ranger and NFL star Pat Tillman voiced concerns Tuesday that the general who played a role in mischaracterizing his death could be put in charge of military operations in Afghanistan.”
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090512/ap_on_go_ot/us_afghanistan_general
more on General McChrystal”
AP Analysis: Why Obama Fired The Top US Commander In Afghanistan
“Yet it seems unlikely the switching of commanders portends a new U.S. war strategy. Obama announced a revised plan just two months ago. Instead the administration is hoping that a military command shake-up will lead to a more effective implementation of the existing strategy, which is aimed at defeating al-Qaida terrorists in Afghanistan and Pakistan and preventing their return to either country.”
con’t
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h2xZuUlRfBdBCSvql_v6sxyyu9-wD984VB280
LL, I have no conceptual problem with what you suggest. Like I said, I’m only against selective outrage. That was the point of the hypothetical I posted in the thread I linked to.
I believe that the Clinton administration engaged in rendition to places where they KNEW the detainees would be tortured. That much seems clear from the NYT story fron 2005. We didn’t want to get our hands dirty, so we outsourced the wet work to the Egyptians. Read the Weiler post I linked to, which has choice excerpts from the NYT article and an embedded link to the entire article.
I didn’t hear much of a rush to prosecute Clinton et al in the wake of the NYT expose. And perhaps that was because we were still in the grips of 9/11 fervor. Or maybe it was because the program was very limited and targeted. Maybe it was both these things.
Things have changed now, however. In many ways, Bush/Cheney brought this on themselves by pushing the envelope so hard and so indiscriminately. But if we are to stand on principle, differences of degree should not matter. If we want to clean out the Aegean stables, no one’s horses should be spared. So let’s pick up the gauntlet the Republicans have thrown down and investigate EVERYBODY.
Taylor Marsh says:
12 May 2009 at 2:20 pm
That’s because I don’t care where it leads. Dems or Rep., anyone involved should be called out. Period.
____
agree 100% Taylor and that is THE principled position on this subject as opposed to the legal mumbo jumbo that was the framework of the torture memos in the first place and is now morphing into tortured legal logic as to why we shouldn’t prosecute… let the drag nets do their work.
I keep saying NYT when I mean New Yorker. Sheesh. Just not my day.
I’ll post my thoughts on Zelikow and Pelosi here, because I’m too lazy to start a new thread
On Pelosi, it simply strains credulity to insist that she was not briefed on waterboarding back in 2002, when the summary said “description of the particular [Enhanced Interrogation Techniques] that had been employed.” That’s “had been” as in past tense, not future. So I think Pelosi is lying through her false teeth to contend that she was only briefed on what would happen in the future.
Not that it matters, because there is no question she was told a scant six months later, in February 2003. She didn’t do jack then either. Oh, she says, she couldn’t. But Harman did. That would be Jane Harman, the supposed Bush/neocon enabler. Real profile in leadership, that Pelosi.
Turning to Zelikow, I agree with virtually everything he’s written. It’s particularly encouraging to see his legal analysis of the torture definitions, which no one else (to my knowledge) has attempted. But his most important point is that we are asking the wrong question. The question is not, is/was it legal? It is, is/was it moral? I think he’s absolutely right to say that lawyers have little business answering the second question. Which is why I think the effort to prosecute lawyers who answered the first question in the affirmative is doomed to fail. Lawyers are not priests. They can only counsel you on what is “possible,” not what is “right.” Hard as it may be, it is important to maintain that distinction.`
I absolutely agree with ogenec on Pelosi. She has certainly been quiet on this issue the last few days and rightfully so. Every time she speaks she lies.