20 Questions for David Addington
By John Amato Tuesday Jun 24, 2008 5:00pm
Here's John Yoo's infamous defense of torture: 
Download | play
Cassel: If the president deems that he's got to torture somebody, including by crushing the testicles of the person's child, there is no law that can stop him?
Yoo: No treaty
Cassel: Also no law by Congress - that is what you wrote in the August 2002 memo...
Yoo: I think it depends on why the President thinks he needs to do that.
And the memo's author - John Yoo, then a deputy in the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel - was a longtime ally and notoriously pliant scribe for the radical legal views of Vice President Cheney and his chief enforcer, David S. Addington. Yoo's memo is a historic document. It is the ultimate expression of Cheney's belief that anything the president or his designates do - no matter how illegal, barbaric or un-American - is justifiable in the name of national self-defense.
I've written about David Addington many times. He's Dick Cheney's "resident evil" and chief enforcer in the administration. Murray Waas wrote a great piece on Addington a while ago. "Addington's Role In Cheney's Office Draws Fresh Attention"
Where there has been controversy over the past four years, there has often been Addington. He was a principal author of the White House memo justifying torture of terrorism suspects. He was a prime advocate of arguments supporting the holding of terrorism suspects without access to court…
Well, he's going to testify and Froomkin sends an important message to Congress.
David S. Addington, Vice President Cheney's formidable and reclusive chief of staff, is scheduled to appear before the House judiciary committee Thursday for a hearing on how the Bush administration developed its interrogation policies. Signs are that he actually intends to show up.
It's essential that members of the committee not blow the best chance the public has yet had to understand how the United States came to adopt torture as an acceptable interrogation technique and, in so doing, found itself among the world's pariah nations. A compelling and well-supported (if partly circumstantial) narrative casts Addington as the dominant figure in the interagency push to step up the pressure on terror suspects. This is not surprising, as Addington is thought to have been at the red-hot center of pretty much every one of President Bush's most extreme assertions of unfettered executive power. The 51-year-old lawyer is Cheney's most able and devoted henchman, his sharpest knife, his lead loyalist among the legion salted throughout the executive branch. Indeed, he is widely thought to have ghost-written memos and public statements ascribed to better-known figures such as Alberto Gonzales, John Yoo, and William Haynes.
The judiciary committee's sole aim on Thursday should be to keep Addington at the table until he provides answers to some essential questions. Here's a draft script to that end...read on
Thank you Dan Froomkin. He hits on all the points that need to be asked. I expect Addington to show as much contempt as he possibly can for these proceedings.
White House lawyers and the torture tapes
At least four top White House lawyers took part in discussions with the Central Intelligence Agency between 2003 and 2005 about whether to destroy videotapes showing the secret interrogations of two operatives from Al Qaeda, according to current and former administration and intelligence officials.
Those who took part, the officials said, included Alberto R. Gonzales, who served as White House counsel until early 2005; David S. Addington, who was the counsel to Vice President Dick Cheney and is now his chief of staff; John B. Bellinger III, who until January 2005 was the senior lawyer at the National Security Council; and Harriet E. Miers, who succeeded Mr. Gonzales as White House counsel.
Login or Register to post comments.
He may show up but I'm betting he'll have less a memory of the events than Gonzo had when he testified. Perhaps if his testicles were in danger of being crushed, his memory might be a bit better.
Addington is a wortless piece of sh)t who should already be in jail. JMHO peace
In case anyone else doesn't know, JMHO stands for Just My Humble Opinion. I didn't know what it meant in comment #2, so I sneaked around and found out for you and me. :)
Let's bring YOUR child in and start crushing some testicles! Maybe you'll be inclined to remember something?
Nah, they'll do the ol' Executive Priviledge dodge at the last moment.
you forget that john conyers is chairing that committee.
the questions will be disjointed, members playing to the cameras, wasting their precious limited minutes kissing the asses of the honorable, the most reverred, the highly accomplished who appear before him. oops, there's a vote, gotta break for a half-hour; oops, it's lunchtime -- back in two hours; oops, another vote. imagine that. recess for another hour.
oh look, time to go home. thanks, mr addington, i'm sure you can provide the answers to the questions we didn't have enough time to put forth during this hearing.
meeting adjourned!
John Yoo is the keynote speaker at a conference I'll be attending this weekend, and there was massive talk of a boycott by a huge percentage of the historians set to attend. To placate them, there will be a rebuttal by someone, but this has never happened before at this conference. There is some serious bad-blood for this Yoo character, much of it warranted for sure. Just thought i'd pass that along.
It may just be MHO but I believe it's correct. Treason is a felony or at least it used to be.....BWTFDIK?
but WTF do I know
It is a horrible answer. However he is a lawyer giving his opinion of the law. Justice Scalea may well agree with him on the point. It was legal in Germany to cremate Jews by the train car load at one time, and in compliance with American laws to have slaves and liquidate Indian villages as well.
[Deleted. Off topic. Take it to an Open Thread. Thank You]
Is testicle crushing an executive privilege or would it extend to Congress. If they felt that crushing Yoo's testicles or any of the other Bushies was justified to get them to answer a question with an honest answer would it be equally moral?
He will play don't remember games like the rest.
The corporate Senate on voting on a motion to proceed to cave on Fisa on C-Span2.
80-15 to proceed to cave on Fisa.
The usual spineless dems united with the gop for corporate amnesty.
There's a lot of wingnut angst today, regarding the SCOTUS decision that child rape can't be punished by the death penalty. In light of the above quote, I'm wondering whether they would agree or disagree that it was constitutional for the president to order someone to rape a terrorist's child?
.
linda @ 6:
That hits the nail on the head. We're at the point where it would be politically smart to do what Nancy & the leadership have always said they can't do because it'd be political suicide:
Impeachment is off the table because there are more important legislative matters that require action.
Except that any legislative action the democrats ran & won the 2006 mid-term elections on will be filibustered in the senate by the republican minority.
We are on the verge of the point, if it has not already been passed, where a majority of voters view impeachment favorably. Simply initiating Impeachment Hearings would drive massive democratic base voter turn-out in an already enthused electorate.
However, impeachment must not be initiated, not because of political repercussions arising from the unpopularity of impeachment, but because of the political repercussions of such investigations revealing democratic party leadership collusion in all of the highest crimes looked into.
Impeachments must not begin because Speaker Pelosi, Senator Reid & other leaders know that if Impeachments were to start they would not end & would find them as surely as the guillotine found Robespierre.
Peter G @ 12:
Congress does not exercise its constitutional power anymore...therefore your question is moot.
milquetoast @ 16:
Congress does not know what testicles look like because they do not have any of their own.
However, impeachment must not be initiated, not because of political repercussions arising from the unpopularity of impeachment, but because of the political repercussions of such investigations revealing democratic party leadership collusion in all of the highest crimes looked into.
Impeachments must not begin because Speaker Pelosi, Senator Reid & other leaders know that if Impeachments were to start they would not end & would find them as surely as the guillotine found Robespierre.
absolutely right. any investigation will reveal the extent of the collusion by pelosi, harman, reid, rockefeller and likely very many others. additionally, any efforts by dems to hold idiot son and president cheney responsible for crimes against humanity will include bill clinton, as he's the one who made extraordinary rendition possible. idiot son just expanded on an existing program implemented by clinton.
David Addington will be sitting in prison by the year 2010. This man is just as criminally complicit as the Bush/Cheney team and their surrogates. The public will never rest until each and every one of these Bush sycophants and overt criminals get the justice they deserve. And David Addington is perhaps THE most twisted sociopathic of them all.
fairness is as fairness does...life is a box of fairness...unless of course you are a republican and believe fairness is a commodity to be bought and sold and then it's ok.
linda @ 18:
This is clearly looking frightfully like a case of "collusion due to blackmail" and soon the people will find out all about it.
who needs fairness when propaganda and lies sell so well and make so much money.
[Deleted. Off topic. Site Monitor]
Addington and Yoo... What a pair... Another time, another place, different clothes... Yea, they'd be part of that crew awaiting the verdict at Nueremberg....... I had an art project idea to photo-shop pictures of the Bush admin into that famous long shot of all the nazis in the docket...you know the one, Keitel in dark glasses, Fatass Goering at the end of the line looking bored or dejected, along with the rest of leftovers of Hitlers gang...sitting around waiting to be sentenced. These two assholes faces would definitely be a part of that art project.................JD
wldj @ 22:
What we have today is propoganda masquerading as truth, justice and the american way. Total and complete BS at every level save for pockets of the internet.
[Deleted. Off topic. Site Monitor]
Jack Damage @ 23:
Jack Damage @ 23:
Hague Trials '09. No doubt we'll see both freaks - Addington and Yoo - with their butts on the grill and sinking fast. Can't wait!
[Deleted. Off topic. Site Monitor]
geazer @ 4:
It wouldn't have any effect on this cold hearted asshole.
I'm gonna tune in to see what evil looks like, IF he does indeed show up and IF he says anything of substance. Two very big if's.
However, impeachment must not be initiated, not because of political repercussions arising from the unpopularity of impeachment, but because of the political repercussions of such investigations revealing democratic party leadership collusion in all of the highest crimes looked into.
Impeachments must not begin because Speaker Pelosi, Senator Reid & other leaders know that if Impeachments were to start they would not end & would find them as surely as the guillotine found Robespierre.
That's a reason TO have impeachment hearings. Let the chips fall... I don't want criminals running the country, even (moreso) if they belong to my own party.
osiris@28;
I hope you're right on that Hague prediction... On FISA? I just got an email from Barbara Boxer with a little 11 minute vid included wherein she talks about that situation.. I think she should've taken a stronger stance against it, but bottom line? She indicates on film in the senate that she will vote against the new FISA bill as it currently stands.... I gotta give her a little love on that one, even though I think she should have been a little more forceful. Pretty much at this point, Babs and Jackie Spiers are about the only two California reps I have any respect for... to hell with the rest of em... I'm so disgusted about this FISA situation I can't even comment anymore about it... And yes that disgust includes Obama's current position on it.... It appears the guys blowing it big time, WTF is up with him lately.........JD
Timmy_D11 @ 11:
I'd be glad to.
Can you open one since the most recent ones are quite buried by now?
[Sorry, the site monitors don't have control over such things. Here's the latest Open Thread. The next one is set to drop at 8:30pm PDST/11:30pm EDST. Contrary to your belief, people both read and post at the previous night's Open Thread far into the next day. Thank you. Site Monitor]
The actions taken by the Bush Administration violated the precedents laid down at the Tokyo and Nuremberg War Crimes trials. That's right, the nation that thinks it won WWII single-handed committed the same types of torture that members of the Nazi and Imperial Japanese governments were hanged for. Fairness would dictate that this Adminstration be brought to trial under that precedent, as I believe International Law operates on a precendence basis, does it not?
Jack Damage @ 32:
whaddya mean lately? ..Obama voted to re-authorize the patriot act like 2 yrs ago! ...where have you been?
John Yoo should be thrown out of his cosy job at UC Berkeley. Why don't the so called liberals of Berkeley rise up and toss this wanker in the gutter where he belongs?
ciloisin @ 36:
Who cares about the so called Liberals of Berkeley? (although I do respect The Berkeley Institute)
I'm concerned about why the so called Liberals in congress are'nt standing up and tossing all the "elected" and appointed Neo-con wankers in the gutter where they belong.
I still think it's stupid (and of course hypocritical and immoral) for the US to torture anyone anyway. Have we not learned from the douche bag terrorist that was sent to Egypt, had the shit kicked out of him and he gave them bogus info just to get them to stop?
Bismarck @ 38:
Yeah, kinda makes me wonder about Khalid Sheik Mohammed and the confession he apparently gave about masterminding 9/11...after they waterboarded his ass.
may he rot in hell.... if i believed in hell....
may he just rot
milquetoast@35;
(Sigh) Oh good grief, look I-- oh nevermind, I know about the reauthorization vote '2' years ago... One of the reasons my support for him has been lukewarm to begin with.... If I had my druthers, we'd be looking at a Kucinich/Edwards ticket or vice versa.... But you go ahead and jump in and give me a ration of shit over a choice of wording.. It's no biggie to me.. At this point, I don't fucking care either way... The guy is losing me and that's fucked up because, who the hell else am I gonna vote for that doesn't end up helping McCain???? Huh? Got any answers for that one?? It's not like Kuch or Edwards or Feingold or anyone whom I could feel ligitimately good about is even running now.. Or maybe you like McCain???.... How would I know anyway on that..... whatever...JD
so does this mean to support national security
we can stomp the sh*t out of bush and cheney's
balls to get them to admit to all the crimes they
have committed? they are in fact enemy combatants........
#21 If the post 9/11 world created the need for these enhanced techniques for terrorism suspects, why weren't even the most basic techniques used to question members of the Bin Laden family who were in the United States after the attacks? Why were they flown from the country without even a cursory interview? Do you not believe any of them should have been asked if they maybe knew where he might be?
theWalrus @ 32:
You're quite right that rationally & in a properly functioning system the impeachments would be flying fast & furious, but i wrote that from the political perspective of those who hold the power to actually initiate impeachment at the present time. but then again i usually don't have much conflict w/party affiliation, being a communist. For the chips to fall where they may we'd have to replace both houses of congress w/honest citizens, a tall order.
Jack Damage @ 42:
Hang in there JD. A lot of us are in the same boat.
Matt in Texas @ 5:
Goodness, how clairvoyant. Do you have some stock tips, too? Actually, he might be arrogant enough to show to try to outsmart the committee.
dadams @ 43:
We can, congress won't...
...all enemies foreign and domestic
As soon as he sits down at the big table... somebody should turn out the lights, throw a hood over his head, drag him outside to a waiting black SUV, then RENDITION HIS ASS to DJIBOUTI where he could be properly "interrogated" without the possibility of those pesky American CIVIL RIGHTS LAWS popping up out of the woodwork.
Just glad to see this vampire dragged into the sunlight.
Be careful, it sounds like Yoo is being quote-mined here.
For all the constantly touted anti-terrorism credentials of the Republicans, what if terrorist organizations in the past eight years have been taking advantage of the "Enron loophole," playing the unregulated overseas oil futures trading market, filling their terrorist coffers with their winnings, with plans to use this money generated through the "Enron loophole" for their terrorist operations?
The so-called "Enron loophole" was the brainchild of former Sen. Phil Gramm (R-TX) in 2000, a provision he snuck into a bill in late 2000 without any committee hearings or debate.
Within months of this loophole becoming law, deregulating electronic energy trading and overturning 70 years of regulations, Kenneth Lay and his Enron gang gamed the energy markets out West, causing rolling blackouts in California and doubling/tripling monthly utility bills.
Some Democrats felt it was imperative to completely close this "Enron loophole," but over the past six years, Republicans have blocked attempts, with the latest attempt (in the Farm Bill) falling short because while the domestic end of the "Enron loophole" is being closed, the foreign end will still remain unregulated and open, which I'm certain the right-wing terrorist organizations will drive a truck through...a suicide truck.
Thus, since I assert that terrorist organizations, given the lack of oversight and the huge amount of money involved in electronic energy trading overseas, have more than likely made some money because of the "Enron loophole," then any terrorist attacks anytime soon, whether inside the United States or overseas, will be the sole responsibility of all members of the Republican Party, but especially those that created this loophole (Phil Gramm) and have continually resisted Democratic Party efforts to completely close it.
If Yoo had lived in England during the Middle Ages, that country might never have become a Constitutional monarchy. To the extent Yoo was listened to, England would have remained a simple monarchy, because Yoo is basically arguing for the divine right of kings. Merely substitute the word "president" for "king."
And I'll bet the Presitard has the torture of children video recorded, so he never runs out of whack-off material.
Anyone _still_ think Christians aren't terrorists? Anyone?
Bad attitudes about Yoo? Imagine that! The fellow who willingly destroyed the rule of law?
I can not believe that the man has not yet been booted out of the UC system and the Bar Association.
That he is still being accepted as a member of those associations makes it clear that they have no interest in law, just posturing about "justice."
They have stolen from us something that people have been fighting for since the magna carta.
And what do we do?
Not a thing.
Login or Register to post comments.