TPMMuckraker
Zachary Roth

Who Are the Torture Memo Authors?

Zachary Roth | April 17, 2009, 4:59PM

For all the (justified) clamor over the Bush administration's torture memos that were released yesterday, there's been surprisingly little attention paid to the two authors of those documents.

As officials in the department's Office of Legal Counsel Jay Bybee and Steven Bradbury authored the four memos. The first was written in 2002 by Bybee, and the latter three in 2005 by Bradbury. So: who are Bybee and Bradbury?

PERMALINK | COMMENTS (17) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (18)
Topics: George Bush, Harriet Miers, Jay Bybee, Justice Department, Steven Bradbury, Torture, U.S. Attorneys

George Bush

Sleep Expert "Surprised And Saddened" To Find Research Twisted In Torture Memo

Zachary Roth | April 17, 2009, 2:03PM

A British professor whose research on sleep was cited in one of the just-released Bush administration torture memos has expressed outrage that his work was used to justify extreme sleep deprivation, including keeping subjects awake for up to 11 days.

In an interview with TPMmuckraker, James Horne, a leading authority in the field of sleep research, said he was "surprised and saddened" to see Bush officials "misrepresent" his research to argue that such sleep deprivation does not cause serious harm to its subjects.

PERMALINK | COMMENTS (31) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (47)
Topics: George Bush, Justice Department, Steven Bradbury, Torture

Media

Scarborough: Torture Opponents Want "Washington DC And Los Angeles To Be Obliterated By A Nuclear Blitz"

Zachary Roth | April 17, 2009, 12:36PM

MSNBC's Joe Scarborough went on quite a rant this morning, attacking President Obama's decision to release the torture memos.

He ended up by calling for an honest (kind of) debate: "If you'd like Washington DC and Los Angeles to be obliterated by a nuclear blitz [rather than permitting the use of waterboarding], I respect your opinion."

Watch:

Good old liberal MSNBC.

PERMALINK | COMMENTS (22) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (7)
Topics: Barack Obama, Media, Torture

Norm Coleman

Coleman Again Won't Say Whether He's Heard From Feds On Kazeminy Probe

Zachary Roth | April 17, 2009, 11:21AM

Losing his Senate seat may be the least of Norm Coleman's worries.

It's looking more and more like the former Minnesota senator has heard from federal investigators who are investigating the Nasser Kazeminy allegations.

Asked by the Minneapolis Star Tribune editorial board whether he had been contacted with the FBI in connection with the probe, Coleman refused to say, instead pivoting to attack the paper:

PERMALINK | COMMENTS (9) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (4)
Topics: FBI, Nasser Kazeminy, Norm Coleman

Justice Department

Torture Memo: Detainees Can Be Naked In Front Of Women, Causing "Pyschological Discomfort" For "Modest" Detainees

Zachary Roth | April 16, 2009, 6:25PM

From one of the May 2005 OLC memos by Steven Bradbury:

Nudity. This technique is used to cause psychological discomfort, particularly if a detainee, for cultural or other reasons, is especially modest ... [I]nterrogators can exploit the detainee's fear of being seen naked. In addition, female officers involved in the interrogation process may see the detainees naked; and for purposes of our analysis, we will assume that detainees subjected to nudity as an interrogation technique are aware that they may be seen naked by female.

PERMALINK | COMMENTS (5) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (6)
Topics: George Bush, Justice Department, Sex, Torture

George Bush

Torture Memo: Waterboarding Is "Simply A Controlled Acute Episode," Not Torture

Zachary Roth | April 16, 2009, 5:21PM

Here's the official Bush legal rationale for waterboarding -- which Eric Holder recently confirmed was torture -- from that 2002 memo by Jay Bybee.

Finally, you would like to use a technique called the "waterboard." In this procedure, the individual is bound securely to an inclined bench, which is approximately four feet by seven feet. The individual's feet are generally elevated. A cloth is placed over the forehead and eyes. Water is then applied to the cloth in a controlled manner. As this is done, the cloth is lowered until it covers both the nose and mouth. Once the cloth is saturated and completely covers the mouth and nose, air flow is slightly restricted for 20 to 40 seconds due to the presence of the cloth. This causes an increase in carbon dioxide level in the individual's blood. This increase in the carbon dioxide level stimulates increased effort to breathe. This effort plus the cloth produces the perception of "suffocation and incipient panic," i.e., the perception of drowning. The individual does not breathe any water into his lungs. During those 20 to 40 seconds, water is continuously applied from a height of twelve to twenty-four inches. After this period, the cloth is lifted, and the individual is allowed to breathe unimpeded for three or four full breaths. the sensation of drowning is immediately relieved by the removal of the cloth. The procedure may then be repeated. The water is usually applied from a canteen cup or small watering can with a spout. You have orally informed us that this procedure triggers an automatic physiological sensation of drowning that the individual cannot control even though he may be aware that he is not in fact drowning. You have also orally informed us that it is likely that this procedure would not last more than twenty minutes in any one application.
As we understand it, when the waterboard is used, the subject's body responds as if the subject were drowning -- even though the subject may be well aware that he is in fact not drowning. You have informed us that this procedure does not inflict actual physical harm. Thus, although the subject may experience the fear or panic associated with the feeling of drowning, the waterboard does not inflict physical pain. as we explained in the Section 2340A Memorandum, "pain and suffering" as used in Section 2340 is best understood as a single concept, not distinct concepts of "pain" as distinguished from "suffering".... The waterboard, which inflicts no pain or actual harm whatsoever, does not, in our view, inflict "severe pain and suffering". Even if one were to parse the stature more "finely" to attempt to treat suffering as a distinct concept, the waterboard could not be said to inflict severe suffering. The waterboard is simply a controlled acute episode, lacking the connotation of a protracted period of time generally given to suffering.

Of course, thanks to today's announcement by DOJ, CIA officers can't be prosecuted for this.

PERMALINK | COMMENTS (16) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (4)
Topics: CIA, George Bush, Justice Department, Torture

Torture

Torture Memo: As Long As You Don't Keep The Guy Awake For More Than 11 Days, It's Fine

Zachary Roth | April 16, 2009, 4:41PM

Here's a taste of the Bush administration's legal rationale, exemplified in one excerpt from the 2002 OLC memo written by Assistant Attorney General Jay Bybee, about the interrogation of Abu Zubaydah, a high-ranking al Qaeda member:

Sleep deprivation may be used. You have indicated that your purpose in using this technique is to reduce the individual's ability to think on his feet and, through the discomfort associated with lack of sleep, to motivate him to cooperate. The effect of such sleep deprivation will generally remit after one or two nights of uninterrupted sleep. You have informed us that your research has revealed that, in rare instances, some individuals who are already predisposed to psychological problems may experience abnormal reactions to sleep deprivation. Even in those cases, however, reactions abate after the individual is permitted to sleep. Moreover, personnel with medical training are available to and will intervene in the unlikely event of an abnormal reaction. You have orally informed us that you would not deprive Zubaydah of sleep for more than eleven days at a time and that you have previously kept him awake for 72 hours, from which no mental or physical harm resulted. (our itals)

If you have time, comb through the memos yourselves (they're here) and let us know what else you find.

PERMALINK | COMMENTS (37) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (12)
Topics: George Bush, Justice Department, Torture

Torture

Rights Group Decries Waterboarding Immunity

Zachary Roth | April 16, 2009, 4:20PM

It's worth making sure we don't lose sight of the apparent price that the Obama administration paid to the intelligence community to mollify them over the release of the torture memos: a pledge not to prosecute agency personnel for waterboarding.

Here's a statement from the Center for Constitutional Rights, which has led the fight against torture, calling the decision "one of the deepest disappointments of this administration".

CCR Decries Immunity for Torture, Secrecy
April 16, 2009, New York - In response to President Obama's decision to guarantee immunity to CIA officials who carried out the drowning torture known as waterboarding, which his attorney general has classified as torture, the Center for Constitutional Rights issued the following statement:

"It is one of the deepest disappointments of this administration that it appears unwilling to uphold the law where crimes have been committed by former officials. Whether or not CIA operatives who conducted waterboarding are guaranteed immunity, it is the high level officials who conceived, justified and ordered the torture program who bear the most responsibility for breaking domestic and international law, and it is they who must be prosecuted. In the president's statement today, the most troubling contradiction is the contrast of the words, 'This is a time for reflection, not retribution,' followed shortly by, 'The United States is a nation of laws.' Government officials broke very serious laws: for there to be no consequences not only calls our system of justice into question, it leaves the gate open for this to happen again."

Since the first days of the public revelations regarding the Bush administration's torture program, the Center for Constitutional Rights has made efforts to hold high level officials and their lawyers accountable for their crimes. CCR, along with the European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights (ECCHR) and the International Federation of Human Rights (FIDH), has tried three times, twice in Germany and once in France, to bring criminal cases in Europe against former Defense Secretary Rumsfeld, former CIA director George Tenet, and former White House Counsel/Former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales as well as the other lawyers who were part of the conspiracy that authorized the torture program in Guantanamo, Iraq, secret CIA sites, and elsewhere. The German case is still pending. CCR also has torture cases pending in U.S. courts.

PERMALINK | COMMENTS (8) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (1)
Topics: Barack Obama, Justice Department, Torture

Barack Obama

Torture Memos Released

Zachary Roth | April 16, 2009, 4:03PM

Here are the OLC torture memos just released by the Justice Department...

An 18-page memo [PDF], dated August 1, 2002, from Jay Bybee, Assistant Attorney General, OLC, to John A. Rizzo, General Counsel CIA.

A 46-page memo [PDF], dated May 10, 2005, from Steven Bradbury, Acting Assistant Attorney General, OLC, to John A. Rizzo, General Counsel CIA.

A 20-page memo [PDF], dated May 10, 2005, from Steven Bradbury, Acting Assistant Attorney General, OLC, to John A. Rizzo, General Counsel CIA.

A 40-page memo [PDF], dated May 30, 2005, from Steven Bradbury, Acting Assistant Attorney General, OLC, to John A. Rizzo, General Counsel CIA.

Go to it!

PERMALINK | COMMENTS (14) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (15)
Topics: Barack Obama, Justice Department, Torture

Wiretapping

Bush Intel Chiefs: Wiretapping Was Legal

Zachary Roth | April 16, 2009, 3:22PM

Earlier today, two former Bush intelligence chiefs -- John Negroponte, who was director of national intelligence, and Michael Hayden, who was CIA director -- went on MSNBC to push back against that New York Times report about wiretapping by the NSA.

Negroponte said "I have no question about the legality" of the program. Hayden used a different formulation: "National Security Agency follows the law." For whatever it's worth, those claims contradict the Times' report.

Watch:

PERMALINK | COMMENTS (3) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (4)
Topics: CIA, Wiretapping

Barack Obama

Obama Releasing Four Torture Memos

Zachary Roth | April 16, 2009, 3:05PM

In a statement from President Obama, the administration announced that it would release four of the Bush Justice Department memos justifying harsh interrogation techniques that had been sought in an ACLU lawsuit.

One of the memos is from 2002, the other three are from 2005.

According to the AP:

One memo specifically authorized a method for combining multiple techniques, a practice human rights advocates argue is particularly harmful and crosses the line into torture even if any of the individual methods do not.

...

The methods include keeping detainees naked for long periods, keeping them in a painful standing position for long periods, and depriving them of solid food. Other tactics included using a plastic neck collar to slam detainees into walls, keeping the detainee's cell cold for long periods, and beating and kicking the detainee. Sleep-deprivation, prolonged shackling, and threats to a detainee's family were also used.

Among the things not allowed in the memo were allowing a prisoner's body temperature or caloric intake to fall below a certain level, because either could cause permanent damage, the officials said.

The techniques were applied to 14 suspects considered very senior terrorists.

In addition, the Justice Department announced in a statement that CIA employees won't be tried for waterboarding.

Here's the full statement from the White House. The statement from DOJ follows it.

Statement of President Barack Obama on Release of OLC Memos
The Department of Justice will today release certain memos issued by the Office of Legal Counsel between 2002 and 2005 as part of an ongoing court case. These memos speak to techniques that were used in the interrogation of terrorism suspects during that period, and their release is required by the rule of law.

My judgment on the content of these memos is a matter of record. In one of my very first acts as President, I prohibited the use of these interrogation techniques by the United States because they undermine our moral authority and do not make us safer. Enlisting our values in the protection of our people makes us stronger and more secure. A democracy as resilient as ours must reject the false choice between our security and our ideals, and that is why these methods of interrogation are already a thing of the past.

But that is not what compelled the release of these legal documents today. While I believe strongly in transparency and accountability, I also believe that in a dangerous world, the United States must sometimes carry out intelligence operations and protect information that is classified for purposes of national security. I have already fought for that principle in court and will do so again in the future. However, after consulting with the Attorney General, the Director of National Intelligence, and others, I believe that exceptional circumstances surround these memos and require their release.

First, the interrogation techniques described in these memos have already been widely reported. Second, the previous Administration publicly acknowledged portions of the program - and some of the practices - associated with these memos. Third, I have already ended the techniques described in the memos through an Executive Order. Therefore, withholding these memos would only serve to deny facts that have been in the public domain for some time. This could contribute to an inaccurate accounting of the past, and fuel erroneous and inflammatory assumptions about actions taken by the United States.

In releasing these memos, it is our intention to assure those who carried out their duties relying in good faith upon legal advice from the Department of Justice that they will not be subject to prosecution. The men and women of our intelligence community serve courageously on the front lines of a dangerous world. Their accomplishments are unsung and their names unknown, but because of their sacrifices, every single American is safer. We must protect their identities as vigilantly as they protect our security, and we must provide them with the confidence that they can do their jobs.

Going forward, it is my strong belief that the United States has a solemn duty to vigorously maintain the classified nature of certain activities and information related to national security. This is an extraordinarily important responsibility of the presidency, and it is one that I will carry out assertively irrespective of any political concern. Consequently, the exceptional circumstances surrounding these memos should not be viewed as an erosion of the strong legal basis for maintaining the classified nature of secret activities. I will always do whatever is necessary to protect the national security of the United States.

This is a time for reflection, not retribution. I respect the strong views and emotions that these issues evoke. We have been through a dark and painful chapter in our history. But at a time of great challenges and disturbing disunity, nothing will be gained by spending our time and energy laying blame for the past. Our national greatness is embedded in America's ability to right its course in concert with our core values, and to move forward with confidence. That is why we must resist the forces that divide us, and instead come together on behalf of our common future.

The United States is a nation of laws. My Administration will always act in accordance with those laws, and with an unshakeable commitment to our ideals. That is why we have released these memos, and that is why we have taken steps to ensure that the actions described within them never take place again.

Here's the statement from Attorney General Eric Holder:

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE RELEASES FOUR OFFICE OF LEGAL COUNSEL OPINIONS
In connection with ongoing litigation, the Department of Justice today released four previously undisclosed Office of Legal Counsel ("OLC") opinions - one that OLC issued to the Central Intelligence Agency in August 2002 and three that OLC issued to the CIA in May 2005.

"The President has halted the use of the interrogation techniques described in these opinions, and this administration has made clear from day one that it will not condone torture," said Attorney General Eric Holder. "We are disclosing these memos consistent with our commitment to the rule of law."

Holder also stressed that intelligence community officials who acted reasonably and relied in good faith on authoritative legal advice from the Justice Department that their conduct was lawful, and conformed their conduct to that advice, would not face federal prosecutions for that conduct.

The Attorney General has informed the Central Intelligence Agency that the government would provide legal representation to any employee, at no cost to the employee, in any state or federal judicial or administrative proceeding brought against the employee based on such conduct and would take measures to respond to any proceeding initiated against the employee in any international or foreign tribunal, including appointing counsel to act on the employee's behalf and asserting any available immunities and other defenses in the proceeding itself.

To the extent permissible under federal law, the government will also indemnify any employee for any monetary judgment or penalty ultimately imposed against him for such conduct and will provide representation in congressional investigations.

"It would be unfair to prosecute dedicated men and women working to protect America for conduct that was sanctioned in advance by the Justice Department," Holder said.

After reviewing these opinions, OLC has decided to withdraw them: They no longer represent the views of the Office of Legal Counsel.

PERMALINK | COMMENTS (31) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (5)
Topics: Barack Obama, Justice Department, Torture

Torture

Greenwald On Torture Memos: These Aren't Intel Docs, They're Legal Docs

Zachary Roth | April 16, 2009, 2:16PM

A great point from Salon's Glenn Greenwald, to keep in mind as we wait for more information about the possible release of those torture memos:

I want to underscore one vital point about this controversy that is continuously overlooked and will be undoubtedly distorted today in the event of non-disclosure: these documents are not intelligence documents. They are legal documents and, more specifically, they constitute what can only be described as secret law under which the U.S. was governed during the Bush era. Thus, the question posed by the release of these OLC memos is not whether Obama will release to the public classified intelligence programs. The question is whether he will release to the public the legal doctrines under which the U.S. Government conducted itself regarding interrogation techniques he claims are no longer being used.

PERMALINK | COMMENTS (0) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)
Topics: Barack Obama, Justice Department, Torture

Torture

Report: Obama to Release Torture Memos

Zachary Roth | April 16, 2009, 2:02PM

The New York Times is reporting that the Obama administration has decided to release the "torture memos" written by the Bush Department of Justice, that justify harsh interrogation techniques.

It's not clear from the Times's unsourced report whether this is a compromise, in which only some of the memos will be released, or whether they all will.

Today is the deadline for the administration to weigh in on a lawsuit filed by the ACLU, which is seeking the memos.

We'll have more as things become clearer.

PERMALINK | COMMENTS (2) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (3)
Topics: Barack Obama, Justice Department, Torture

Rod Blagojevich

Judge: Blago Trial Won't Start For Two Years

Zachary Roth | April 16, 2009, 1:47PM

Those of you eager to see Blago getting his day in court may be waiting a long time.

At a hearing today, U.S. District Judge James B. Zagel said that the former Illinois governor's trial "will take six months, and likely will not begin for two years," reports CBS.

PERMALINK | COMMENTS (1) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)
Topics: Pat Fitzgerald, Rod Blagojevich

Bailout

Eilzabeth Warren On Daily Show

Zachary Roth | April 16, 2009, 1:01PM

Last night, Elizabeth Warren, the Harvard Law professor who chairs the Congressional Oversight Panel for the bailout, talked to Jon Stewart on the The Daily Show.

Here's part 1:

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart

M - Th 11p / 10c

Elizabeth Warren Pt. 1

thedailyshow.com

Daily Show
Full Episodes

Economic Crisis

Political Humor

And here's part 2:

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart

M - Th 11p / 10c

Elizabeth Warren Pt. 2

thedailyshow.com

Daily Show
Full Episodes

Economic Crisis

Political Humor

PERMALINK | COMMENTS (3) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (11)
Topics: Bailout, Elizabeth Warren, Financial Crisis, Wall Street

Russ Feingold

Feingold: NYT Report Shows We Need To Fix Wiretapping Laws

Zachary Roth | April 16, 2009, 11:06AM

Prompted by that New York Times report that the NSA "went beyond the broad legal limits established by Congress" in intercepting Americans' communications in recent months, Russ Feingold -- who has been the point man in the Senate for efforts to rein in warrantless wiretapping -- has released a statement :

Since 2001, I have spent a lot of time in the Intelligence Committee, the Judiciary Committee, and on the floor of the Senate bringing attention to both the possible and actual effects of legislation that has dangerously expanded the power of the executive branch to spy on innocent Americans. Despite these efforts, Congress insisted on enacting several measures including the USA PATRIOT Act, the Protect America Act, and the FISA Amendments Act, embarking on a tragic retreat from the principles that had governed the sensitive area of government surveillance for the previous three decades. Congress must get to work fixing these laws that have eroded the privacy and civil liberties of law-abiding citizens. In addition, the administration should declassify certain aspects of how these authorities have been used so that the American people can better understand their scope and impact.

PERMALINK | COMMENTS (1) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (5)
Topics: Barack Obama, Russ Feingold, Wiretapping

Wiretapping

Report: NSA Tried To Wiretap Member of Congress

Zachary Roth | April 16, 2009, 10:07AM

Check out this passage buried at the end of a pretty shocking New York Times report on out-of-control wiretapping by the National Security Agency:

And in one previously undisclosed episode, the N.S.A. tried to wiretap a member of Congress without a warrant, an intelligence official with direct knowledge of the matter said.
The agency believed that the congressman, whose identity could not be determined, was in contact -- as part of a Congressional delegation to the Middle East in 2005 or 2006 -- with an extremist who had possible terrorist ties and was already under surveillance, the official said. The agency then sought to eavesdrop on the congressman's conversations, the official said.

The official said the plan was ultimately blocked because of concerns from some intelligence officials about using the N.S.A., without court oversight, to spy on a member of Congress.

Who was this mystery congressman? Which "extremist" was he in contact with? And how does he feel about almost having been spied on by his own government?

Seems worth finding out...

PERMALINK | COMMENTS (40) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (42)
Topics: Barack Obama, Wiretapping

Alaska

Justice Unit Being Probed For Contempt In Stevens Trial Brought Similar Case In 2006

Zachary Roth | April 15, 2009, 4:02PM

Are the Ted Stevens prosecutors in line to get a taste of their medicine?

As we've reported, six federal prosecutors from the Stevens case -- members of DOJ's Public Integrity unit, including its head, William Welch -- are now being investigated for knowingly withholding evidence, a potential criminal act.

Prosecutions for this offense -- known as a Brady violation -- are exceedingly rare. But it turns out that in 2006, an Assistant US Attorney was tried on the charge -- and acquitted amid allegations that his prosecution was over-zealous. In fact, the prosecutors who argued the case against the AUSA were with -- you guessed it -- the Public Integrity unit. And for part of that time, they were supervised by Welch himself. (For more on the Stevens Six, go here.)

PERMALINK | COMMENTS (2) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (2)
Topics: Alaska, Justice Department, Ted Stevens, William Welch

AIG

Source: SEC (Unlike DOJ) Cooperating With Congress's Request For AIG Docs

Zachary Roth | April 15, 2009, 12:17PM

Earlier this morning, we reported that the Justice Department is dragging its heels on a demand from Congress to hand over information compiled by a highly placed government monitor at AIG.

But DOJ's recalcitrance is underlined by the approach of the SEC, which was also asked to turn over the monitor's information. According to a source on the House Oversight committee, the SEC has said it's complying with the request, and is expected to turn over the information shortly.

PERMALINK | COMMENTS (1) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (1)
Topics: AIG, Edolphus Towns, Financial Crisis, House Oversight, Justice Department, Securities and Exchange Commission, Wall Street

AIG

Justice Dragging Heels On Congress's Request For AIG Docs

Zachary Roth | April 15, 2009, 9:50AM

Last month, as we noted at the time, House Oversight committee chair Ed Towns formally asked the Justice Department for records kept by a government monitor, who since 2004 has had access to high-level internal deliberations at AIG.

But DOJ seems to be dragging its heels.

PERMALINK | COMMENTS (0) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (4)
Topics: AIG, Financial Crisis, Joseph Cassano, Justice Department, Wall Street

AIG

AIG Responds On PR Expenses: We'll Give Congress What It Wants, And Then Some

Zachary Roth | April 15, 2009, 9:06AM

AIG has responded to the letter from Rep. Ed Towns requesting information about the company's PR expenses, that we first reported on yesterday -- and which has now been picked up by Reuters, Bloomberg, and ABC News, among others.

Here's the statement they sent us:

In more than 30 media appearances since the beginning of the year and elsewhere, Mr. Greenberg and his lawyers have made false and misleading statements about AIG, including his role in creating AIG Financial Products and its credit default swap business, as well as the circumstances surrounding his forced departure from AIG during an accounting fraud investigation. We look forward to providing Congressman Towns with background on why it has been necessary to correct these and other misstatements, which are both misleading to the American public and damaging to AIG and its ability to repay taxpayers.

This issue is not about AIG's corporate public relations expenditures, which are down sharply since last year. It is about correcting Mr. Greenberg's false and damaging statements.

PERMALINK | COMMENTS (4) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (4)
Topics: AIG, Bailout, Edolphus Towns, Financial Crisis, House Oversight, Wall Street

Jack Abramoff

Sweeney To Enter Rehab, Says Lawyer

Zachary Roth | April 14, 2009, 5:41PM

Eagle-eyed reader B.K. passes along this tidbit which we missed from late last week.

As we told you, former New York GOP congressman -- and Jack Abramoff buddy -- John Sweeney last week was charged with a felony DUI after he told officers who stopped his car that he was in "big trouble" and refused to take a roadside sobriety test. But later in the week, a local New York news channel reported that Sweeney's court appearance, scheduled for last Friday, had been postponed.

PERMALINK | COMMENTS (4) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (2)
Topics: Jack Abramoff, John Sweeney

Barack Obama

Biden Mum On State Secrets Bill He Once Supported

Zachary Roth | April 14, 2009, 2:15PM

Et tu, Joe?

Last year, while trying to win the Democratic nomination for president, Joe Biden co-sponsored a bill to restrict the use of the "state secrets privilege" by the Department of Justice. But today, asked by the Huffington Post for Biden's current stance on the legislation, a spokesman for the vice president replied: "No comment on this from here." That "no comment" follows a similar tight-lipped stance from the White House itself.

PERMALINK | COMMENTS (9) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (11)
Topics: Arlen Specter, Barack Obama, Joe Biden, Justice Department, Pat Leahy, State Secrets, Wiretapping

Alaska

Stevens Rejected No-Jail Plea Deal Last Summer

Zachary Roth | April 14, 2009, 1:40PM

You can say one thing for Ted Stevens -- he's got cojones.

Court records that were just unsealed show that the former Alaska senator last summer turned down a plea deal with prosecutors that would have resulted in no jail time.

PERMALINK | COMMENTS (1) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (2)
Topics: Alaska, Justice Department, Ted Stevens

AIG

Congress Probing AIG Spin Shop

Zachary Roth | April 14, 2009, 12:57PM

Congress is demanding information from AIG about reports that the bailed-out insurance giant has four PR firms on its payroll -- and about its recent PR blitz aimed at discrediting former CEO Hank Greenberg.

In a letter sent this morning to AIG chief Ed Liddy and obtained exclusively by TPMmuckraker, House Oversight committee chair Ed Towns requests detailed information on AIG's PR expenses, specifically mentioning Hill & Knowlton, and Mark Penn's Burson-Marsteller, two high-priced experts in Washington spin that have signed on to represent the firm.

PERMALINK | COMMENTS (10) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (7)
Topics: AIG, Bailout, Edolphus Towns, Financial Crisis, House Oversight, Wall Street

Bailout

SEC Reviewing Whether B of A Broke Law On Merrill Bonuses

Zachary Roth | April 14, 2009, 11:37AM

Ever since AIG's bonus shenanigans exploded onto the national scene last month, Merrill Lynch's own outrageous payouts have kind of gotten short shrift. We've felt this was unfair to the Thundering Herd, since at an around $3.6 billion, its bonuses dwarfed those of AIG. Granted, its role in bringing down the financial system may not have been quite as central as that of AIG's financial products unit, but it's not like Merrill, which needed rescuing last fall by Bank of America, was squeaky clean. Where's the respect?

But luckily, the Merrill bonuses are back. The SEC is looking at whether Bank of America broke the law by not disclosing, in filings last year, the fact that it was planning to pay those bonuses, reports the Washington Post.

PERMALINK | COMMENTS (1) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (1)
Topics: Bailout, Bank of America, Financial Crisis, Mary Schapiro, Merrill Lynch, Securities and Exchange Commission, Wall Street

Bob Ney

Ney's New Role? Right-Wing Radio Talk Show Host

Zachary Roth | April 13, 2009, 5:25PM

A second act for our old friend Bob Ney.

Starting today, the former Ohio GOP congressman will be hosting a midday chat show on a right-wing West Virginia radio station, WVLY AM 1370, according to the station's web site.

PERMALINK | COMMENTS (9) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (2)
Topics: Bob Ney, Jack Abramoff, Lobbyists, Media

Vito Fossella

Fossella Pleads Guilty To DUI

Zachary Roth | April 13, 2009, 3:59PM

Vito Fossella, the former GOP congressman from Staten Island, NY, has pleaded guilty to DUI charges, the Associated Press reports -- and according to his lawyer, the decision was prompted in part by the death of a Major League Baseball player last week.

Fossella was arrested May 1, 2008, and charged with driving while drunk. The arrest led to revelations that he had fathered a child as part of an extra-marital affair. He served out his term, but did not run for reelection this fall. He was convicted in October, but was appealing his conviction.

PERMALINK | COMMENTS (2) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (1)
Topics: Sex, Vito Fossella

Barack Obama

Obama Admin Fighting To Block Detainees From Challenging Detentions In Court

Zachary Roth | April 13, 2009, 2:58PM

On Friday, we reported the comments of a lawyer for four Gitmo detainees, who told us that, in his view, the Obama administration is continuing the Bushies' policy, by stonewalling efforts by detainees to appeal their detentions in federal courts.

And that same day, another data point emerged suggesting the new administration is taking a hard line on detainee policy.

PERMALINK | COMMENTS (13) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (5)
Topics: Barack Obama, Detainees, Guantanamo, Justice Department

Bernard Madoff

WaPo's Kurtz Takes No Position On NYT's Merkin/Madoff Op-Ed

Zachary Roth | April 13, 2009, 1:30PM

One final note on the great New York Times Merkin/Madoff op-ed disclosure brouhaha, which we've written about here and here.

The Washington Post's Howard Kurtz covered the controversy in today's column. Here's the entirety of what he wrote:

When the New York Times published a March 21 op-ed column sympathetic to a "quintessential nice guy" -- stock swindler Bernie Madoff -- contributing writer Daphne Merkin noted that she had "a sibling who did business with him."

That turned out to be J. Ezra Merkin, former chairman of GMAC, now accused by New York authorities of defrauding clients by funneling more than $2 billion of their money to Madoff. Was the vague "sibling" reference really enough?

Ombudsman Clark Hoyt wrote yesterday that many readers thought "the disclosure was so limited as to be disingenuous," but Op-Ed Editor David Shipley defended it, saying that paper approached Merkin "in some respect because of her brother."

PERMALINK | COMMENTS (5) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (3)
Topics: Bernard Madoff, Financial Crisis, Media, Wall Street

Bernard Madoff

Report: Shana Madoff Contacted Prison Consultant

Zachary Roth | April 13, 2009, 12:05PM

A female relative of Bernard Madoff -- identified by the New York Post as Madoff's niece, Shana Madoff -- called a "federal prison consultant" to ask how much jail time she might be facing, the consultant told TPMmuckraker.

Larry Levine -- a former federal prisoner who now runs a company, Wall Street Prison Consultants, that gives advice to future inmates on how to survive prison time and win an early release -- said that a woman had called him about three weeks ago, saying that she might face conspiracy charges. At first, said Levine, the woman was hesitant to divulge any specific information, but, when pressed by Levine, said that she was a relative of Bernard Madoff, explained the basics of her situation, and asked how much jail time she might be facing. "No money changed hands," said Levine, describing the call as "exploratory".

PERMALINK | COMMENTS (4) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (16)
Topics: Bernard Madoff, Securities and Exchange Commission, Wall Street

Barack Obama

White House Won't Say Whether It'll Back Effort To Roll Back State Secrets Privilege

Zachary Roth | April 13, 2009, 9:51AM

A good advance on the state secrets story, from Greg Sargent over at the Plum Line.

Greg reports that the White House declined to tell him whether it would support a Democratic effort to roll back the use of the state secrets privilege.

PERMALINK | COMMENTS (7) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (4)
Topics: Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, Justice Department, Pat Leahy, State Secrets

Bernard Madoff

NYT Public Editor: It's "Obvious" There Should Have Been "A Lot More" Disclosure On Merkin-Madoff Op-Ed

Zachary Roth | April 12, 2009, 1:17PM

Andrew Rosenthal, the editor of the New York Times editorial page, may not think the issue of disclosure in Daphne Merkin's op-ed about Bernard Madoff is "substantive". But it looks like the paper's public editor disagrees.

To explain: Last month, the Times published an op-ed by Daphne Merkin, a contributing writer to the Times Magazine, in which she argued that Madoff's victims weren't really victims because "no one was holding a gun to anyone's head."