Speaking in San Francisco this week, Mukasey demanded that the President be given new warrantless eavesdropping powers and that lawbreaking telecoms be granted amnesty. To make his case, Mukasey teared up while exploiting the 3,000 Americans who died on 9/11 and said this:
"...We knew that there has been a call from someplace that was known to be a safe house in Afghanistan and we knew that it came to the United States. We didn't know precisely where it went."
If what Muskasey said this week is true -- and that's a big "if" -- his revelation about this Afghan call that the administration knew about but didn't intercept really amounts to one of the most potent indictments yet about the Bush administration's failure to detect the plot in action. Contrary to his false claims, FISA -- for multiple reasons -- did not prevent eavesdropping on that call.
...
"...think about what Mukasey is actually saying. His argument means that government officials must be free to break the law in a classified intelligence setting with impunity, because we can't risk subjecting them to a court of law since, presumably, we can't trust our country's federal judges with classified information and so it's preferable to allow lawbreaking by our highest government officials. That's a pretty extraordinary -- and pretty reprehensible -- argument for a former federal judge and current Attorney General to be making. I hope Dianne Feinstein and Chuck Schumer are very proud."
I wish more in the media would relate the nightmare in Iraq to the very policies as advocated by Hillary. If anyone has blood on their hands, she does. What truly disgusts me is that the Hillbots stood by as he perpetrated her negative ads in which she photo-shopped Obama's image to make his skin darker and his nose bigger. Can anyone be more deceitful than that?
Nigel Elliott
· 1 year ago
Bush's DoJ memo: The president is above the Constitution
In the March 14, 2003 memo, Yoo says the Constitution was not in play with regard to the interrogations because the Fifth Amendment (which provides for due process of law) and the Eighth Amendment (which prevents the government from employing cruel and usual punishment) does "not extend to alien enemy combatants held abroad.": http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news/politics/b...
Sarah B.
· 1 year ago
Nigel
The WaPo, too, is covering this story regarding the outing for public view, at long last, of John Yoo’s reprehensible 2003 torture memo advocating immunity for CIA interrogators.
I would like to believe that there might be some impact on Yoo in the form of accountability for his craven aiding and abetting of criminal behaviors that violate the U.S. Constitution, the federal statutes, the Uniform Code of Military Justice, and the Geneva Conventions, to name but a few. But, perhaps, that would be a consummation too devoutly to be wished, and I’m sure to be disappointed yet again.
The Justice Department sent a legal memorandum to the Pentagon in 2003 asserting that federal laws prohibiting assault, maiming and other crimes did not apply to military interrogators who questioned al-Qaeda captives because the president's ultimate authority as commander in chief overrode such statutes.
Martin S. Lederman, a critic of John Yoo, nails it:
Martin S. Lederman, a former lawyer with the Office of Legal Counsel who now teaches law at Georgetown University, said the Yoo memo helped create a legal environment that allowed prisoner abuses at Abu Ghraib.
"What else could have been the source of belief in Iraq that the gloves were off and all laws could be disregarded with impunity?" Lederman asked. "It created a world in which everyone on the ground believed the laws did not apply. It was a law-free zone."
It’s a rhetorical question, but why is John Yoo still enjoying a prestigious position as a law professor at UC Berkeley and not residing in a maximum security federal prison?
It’s just incredible. Perhaps, what saddens me most is the fact that many Democrats on the Intelligence and Judiciary Committees knew about the contents of these secret memos and should have been well-aware of their gross illegality and yet chose to do nothing but remain silent.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
aquarius2
· 1 year ago
TruthCounts
Yes, I believe the Republicans in the forthcoming general election will be more deceptive than Hillary. Carville said on TV last Sunday on some TV show for Obama supporters to quit crying. He said "I know James?Black, do you think he cares what you think or even what the NYT thinks? No, he doesn't" (Not quite an exact quote but close) So what he was saying is that Hillary could care less about what lies she tells, as long as it resonates enough to be believed.
Sarah B.
· 1 year ago
Well, this is about politics -- and it is HUGE!
Obama Wins Backing of 9/11 Commission Co-Chairman Lee Hamilton
(Bloomberg) -- Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama won the support of one of his party's top foreign policy figures, Lee Hamilton, a former U.S. House member from Indiana, where an important primary vote occurs May 6.
Lee Hamilton is a very highly-respected Democratic Party elder and Superdelegate, and this endorsement will not fail to impress his fellow Superdelegates who remain uncommitted and on the fence.
Good on you, Barack Obama! :) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
zerba
· 1 year ago
Its nice to see you add some nice upbeat music to your morning reads Thanks....
janethanks
· 1 year ago
More about the video!!!! Who is he?
Millames
· 1 year ago
ah mais c'est mignon çà !!! et dire qu'en France je suis et je ne connaissais pas !!!
godless
· 1 year ago
Holy crap! They're speaking an indescernible "furrign" language! What are they saying?? Are they plotting a TARA-ist act aginst Amehricuh? DAMN Furrighners!!!! They MUST be TARA-rists!!!!!
All Comments
Glenn Greenwald
Speaking in San Francisco this week, Mukasey demanded that the President be given new warrantless eavesdropping powers and that lawbreaking telecoms be granted amnesty. To make his case, Mukasey teared up while exploiting the 3,000 Americans who died on 9/11 and said this:
"...We knew that there has been a call from someplace that was known to be a safe house in Afghanistan and we knew that it came to the United States. We didn't know precisely where it went."
If what Muskasey said this week is true -- and that's a big "if" -- his revelation about this Afghan call that the administration knew about but didn't intercept really amounts to one of the most potent indictments yet about the Bush administration's failure to detect the plot in action. Contrary to his false claims, FISA -- for multiple reasons -- did not prevent eavesdropping on that call.
...
"...think about what Mukasey is actually saying. His argument means that government officials must be free to break the law in a classified intelligence setting with impunity, because we can't risk subjecting them to a court of law since, presumably, we can't trust our country's federal judges with classified information and so it's preferable to allow lawbreaking by our highest government officials. That's a pretty extraordinary -- and pretty reprehensible -- argument for a former federal judge and current Attorney General to be making. I hope Dianne Feinstein and Chuck Schumer are very proud."
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/03/...
In the March 14, 2003 memo, Yoo says the Constitution was not in play with regard to the interrogations because the Fifth Amendment (which provides for due process of law) and the Eighth Amendment (which prevents the government from employing cruel and usual punishment) does "not extend to alien enemy combatants held abroad.":
http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news/politics/b...
The WaPo, too, is covering this story regarding the outing for public view, at long last, of John Yoo’s reprehensible 2003 torture memo advocating immunity for CIA interrogators.
I would like to believe that there might be some impact on Yoo in the form of accountability for his craven aiding and abetting of criminal behaviors that violate the U.S. Constitution, the federal statutes, the Uniform Code of Military Justice, and the Geneva Conventions, to name but a few. But, perhaps, that would be a consummation too devoutly to be wished, and I’m sure to be disappointed yet again.
Memo: Laws Didn't Apply to Interrogators -- Justice Dept. Official in 2003 Said President's Wartime Authority Trumped Many Statutes
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wpdyn/content/art...
The Justice Department sent a legal memorandum to the Pentagon in 2003 asserting that federal laws prohibiting assault, maiming and other crimes did not apply to military interrogators who questioned al-Qaeda captives because the president's ultimate authority as commander in chief overrode such statutes.
Martin S. Lederman, a critic of John Yoo, nails it:
Martin S. Lederman, a former lawyer with the Office of Legal Counsel who now teaches law at Georgetown University, said the Yoo memo helped create a legal environment that allowed prisoner abuses at Abu Ghraib.
"What else could have been the source of belief in Iraq that the gloves were off and all laws could be disregarded with impunity?" Lederman asked. "It created a world in which everyone on the ground believed the laws did not apply. It was a law-free zone."
It’s a rhetorical question, but why is John Yoo still enjoying a prestigious position as a law professor at UC Berkeley and not residing in a maximum security federal prison?
It’s just incredible. Perhaps, what saddens me most is the fact that many Democrats on the Intelligence and Judiciary Committees knew about the contents of these secret memos and should have been well-aware of their gross illegality and yet chose to do nothing but remain silent.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Yes, I believe the Republicans in the forthcoming general election will be more deceptive than Hillary. Carville said on TV last Sunday on some TV show for Obama supporters to quit crying. He said "I know James?Black, do you think he cares what you think or even what the NYT thinks? No, he doesn't" (Not quite an exact quote but close) So what he was saying is that Hillary could care less about what lies she tells, as long as it resonates enough to be believed.
Obama Wins Backing of 9/11 Commission Co-Chairman Lee Hamilton
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/newspid=20601070&...
(Bloomberg) -- Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama won the support of one of his party's top foreign policy figures, Lee Hamilton, a former U.S. House member from Indiana, where an important primary vote occurs May 6.
Lee Hamilton is a very highly-respected Democratic Party elder and Superdelegate, and this endorsement will not fail to impress his fellow Superdelegates who remain uncommitted and on the fence.
Good on you, Barack Obama!
:)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Thanks....