Comments (17)

Gary wrote on December 12, 2007 12:25 PM:

Time to send an extra $100 to the ACLU!

Seriously, everyone who reads these blogs should be forking over some cash to groups like ACLU, EFF, POGO, and CREW.

Member since 2001.

DelicateMonster wrote on December 12, 2007 12:34 PM:

I agree with Gary. Are we a country of laws or not?

A few lifetimes ago, when I thought I'd be a paralegal or even a lawyer for I worked as a volunteer for the Denver ACLU. Top rate folks there (at the time anyhow--and probably still) and great humans--many of whom did lots of pro-bono work. $100 Christmas bonus on its way!

Thanks, ACLU.

TheraP wrote on December 12, 2007 12:43 PM:

We are a country of "laws" and hidden puppeteers!

That's the problem.

I'm delighted about the ACLU.

But here's the problem as I see it. The "good guys" seem unable to get control of the ball. All they get to do is complain that the umpires are calling things for the other side. Meanwhile, the game goes on.

I'm not a sports person, so that may not be exactly correct... but I think the gist comes across.

The problem is, they're "creating the new realities" (as they even told us they were doing)... while we're busy questioning the things they've already done!

Does anybody else see this extra problem?

MrJJ wrote on December 12, 2007 1:06 PM:

The new and improved DOJ ??? Dont't think so....

MuKasey.."I think the Justice Department is capable of doing whatever it appears needs to be done," Mukasey said. "The question of a special prosecutor is the most hypothetical of hypotheticals, and that isn't going to be faced until it happens. And if it has to be, it will be."

Mukasey may have a conflict of interest problem already, and may have to call upon a Special Prosecutor.

Jose Padilla’s lawyers argued before the Florida Federal Court that Abu Zubaydah was tortured into saying Padilla was an al Qaeda associate. The DOJ dismissed Padilla’s allegations as “meritless,” asserting Padilla’s legal team could not prove that Abu Zubaydah had been tortured. Well, it’s clear now that they certainly COULD have, if the tapes of the interrogations of Abu Zubaydah had been made available!

Now here is where Mukasey’s role comes into question. U.S. District Judge Mukasey, now attorney general, was the one who signed the warrant used by the FBI to arrest Padilla in May 2002. Court records show the warrant relied in part on information obtained from Abu Zubaydah’s interrogation. So we have a problem Houston.

The Attorney General can only issue a warrant based upon legally obtained evidence, and confessions under torture are certainly not “legally obtained”. So either Mukasey was misrepresented the evidence, and would be liable to be potentially a party in those who were presented with “perjured evidence”; or he knew that torture was used in obtaining the confession and ignored it.

In either case he is unsuitable to run an investigation, as it will, inevitably, involved himself. Thus a Special Prosecutor is necessary.

Presstitute. wrote on December 12, 2007 1:34 PM:

I agree with Gary. Are we a country of laws or not?

Of course; of "l'état c'est moi" Bush.

FMArouet wrote on December 12, 2007 1:49 PM:

Kudos to MrJJ above at 1:06 p.m.

MrJJ has connected some important dots here: AG (then Judge) Mukasey, Joseph Padilla, Abu Zubaydah, torture, and the current credibility of U.S. jurisprudence in general and of Mr. Mukasey in particular.

Is anyone in the MSM or on a Congressional staff smart enough to crib this information from MrJJ and start running with it?

Perhaps at least Glenn Greenwald at Salon will take note?

SPENCER wrote on December 12, 2007 2:09 PM:

I think that Porter Goss has some explaining to do, as it was under his watch. In fact, there might be other controversial projects hiding within the CIA bureaucracy just waiting to be discovered.

danger wrote on December 12, 2007 2:18 PM:

Kiriakou was also consulting on "The Kite Runner". Interesting that he's doing consulting on Hollywood films, and it makes me wonder just what other films he or other CIA agents have consulted.

The Bourne Trilogy? The Saw movies? 24??Somebody here with better Hollywood contacts than I do who reads this should be able to find out the nature of such consulting. Find movies that specifically deal with CIA related topics, then find the people who worked on those movies. If it's even remotely possible that someone in the CIA slipped up and showed someone the Zubaydah (or any torture tape, for that matter), that person has to be in Hollywood or in the film/TV industry. It's a whole different matter anyway if there's been extensive CIA consulting in Hollywood, but finding a copy of the tape or someone who does would almost certainly go down this path. I just hope that if this is the case we can get to them before they do.

A copy of those tapes have to exist. Someone out there, now is your time to be a true patriot.

danger wrote on December 12, 2007 2:29 PM:

MrJJ - for some reason while I was reading your post I was thinking of Johnny Walker Lindh.

Walker Lindh was captured in Afghanistan and faced an actual court here in America. He wasn't sent to any secret prisons from what I recall back in 2001-2002. Walker Lindh would have absolutely have fallen under the administration's guidelines for what classified prisoners as 'enemy combatants.' He got a trial here in America and is only spending a decade or so in prison. Bush even went so far to describe Lindh as a 'misguided fellow.'

Yet, someone like Jose Padilla, captured here in America, isn't being afforded the right to a fair trial; nor is Zubaydah, who from many accounts seems to have provided information that would have proven embarassing to the administration/government. That seems to be the big qualifier here as to who becomes an enemy combatant.

John Doe #2, anyone?

Heart of the Rockies wrote on December 12, 2007 2:30 PM:

Don't know when you were associated with the Denver ACLU, but they are certainly top notch now. We have had their director, Cathy Hazouri, speak twice to our local humanist chapter here in the central Colorado mountains.

We need to support the ACLU in any way we can.

Vulture Breath wrote on December 12, 2007 5:45 PM:

ACLU is on my Christmas list.

DoJ Memo On Waterboarding wrote on December 12, 2007 6:08 PM:

The link "DoJ Memo on Waterboarding" goes to Turley's blog, which links to the DOJ Memoranda. DoJ opinion includes a case which discusses water boarding, and it's classification as torture.

- HOw does this fit in with the Mukassey confirnmation: Any plan of the public/Congress/media/blogs to follow-up with Mukassey: He's now AG; does he still stand by this DOJ opinion?

pasco wrote on December 12, 2007 7:44 PM:

this looks like another case for the state's secrets defense. No one will be held to account.

Anonymous wrote on December 12, 2007 9:00 PM:

If US government will not review these alleged war crimes, send it to the ICC.

Anonymous wrote on December 12, 2007 9:20 PM:

State AG's also have jurisdiction to defend and enforce the Constitution -- the US treaty obligations under Geneva -- against Members of Congress, the President, and VP.

Goldspinner wrote on December 13, 2007 8:16 AM:

danger,

Don't forget Syriana!

Dennis wrote on December 13, 2007 12:50 PM:

From the beginning there has been one consistant message to the American people from the Bush administration, "Laws are for suckers!"

You don't have to be a blind conservative not to see it, just an ignorant one to deny it.