TOPICS

Podesta makes the case for Judge Bybee's removal

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!
DOWNLOADS: (1833)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (3099)
Play WMV Play Quicktime

On CNN's "State of the Union" program today, John Podesta of the Center for American Progress took a seemingly middle-of-the-road position on the torture memos: He indicated that he thought pursuing potential prosecutions of the torture-regime architects was a bad idea -- but at the same time, called for the impeachment of Judge Jay Bybee for his role in authoring them:

Podesta: The one thing I disagree with you and David [Gergen] about is I do think there's a distinction between going back and prosecuting in criminal courts the actors who were involved in these memos and letting Judge Bybee continue to sit on a court one step removed from the Supreme Court. He's acting and listening to cases, making judgments of others, and we know he authorized things that were illegal under U.S. law and violated the U.S. obligations under international treaties.

If he would do the right thing, he should just simply resign. If he doesn't, I think this is one matter where he continues to sit -- he doesn't have the moral or legal authority to continue to do that. And I think a simple matter would be to remove him from office.

King: We need to move on, but do your friends at the White House agree with you on this?

Podesta: You'd have to ask them. But I suspect they don't.

The Village may shake its collective finger at Podesta, but this is just the beginning of the effort to remove Bybee. As DDay reports, the California Democratic Party is preparing a resolution calling for his impeachment as well.

Still, it's amazing how the Beltway Villagers -- particularly the political-media pundit class -- seem to have wholly absorbed the Rovean idea that the fight over the torture memos and the calls for investigation are about "revenge" and partisan recrimination, that this is about "criminalizing politics."

That was the entire context of the discussion of the memos in this show, not to mention most of the discussions I've seen on Fox and MSNBC too. It's the context of David Broder's recent blatherings on the subject.

You have to wonder when these people will wake up to the reality that judging these kinds of political endeavors by the ostensibly dark motives of the people behind it is simply blithering nonsense. It's also worth noting that, within the confines of the Village, this kind of judgment is only ever to be raised against liberals and the Left generally. It's "partisan" to do that with the Right, you know (see, e.g., the Clinton impeachment brouhaha).

These are, of course, the same people who dismissed those same Dirty Freaking Hippies when they warned that invading Iraq would turn into a disaster -- because, of course, they only opposed the war out of Bad Motives (i.e., they reflexively hated Bush).

Of course, this narrative -- liberals proceed from knee-jerk, visceral motives -- constantly repeated is also a very comforting and self-serving one for the established classes of the Village. It's also been repeatedly proven wrong -- to very little notice inside the Village.

This isn't about Right and Left. This is about Right and Wrong. Not that the Village would ever get such alien concepts.



Login or Register to post comments.

26 comments

I get the effect of mass media poison like 24 and the corporate media's spin, but still I find this shocking and distressing.

CNN did a poll recently that showed 48% of Americans want Gitmo to remain open.

Simply astonishing.

The results are determined by the framing of the questions, and who and how they are asked.

I don't trust the media or the pollsters from beginning to end, top to bottom.

I don't trust them either, but there are a substantial number of people who want to keep that hellhole open.

...I am losing patience and sympathy for our side: So long as we refuse, now that we have the authority and ability to make it happen,to reform the FCC or to direct the DoJ to pursue both corporate fruad and anti-trust actions against the corporate media, we have no one to blame but ourselves. Mr. Obama could direct that the FCC restore itself to integrity and once again begin respresenting the interests of the Public. He could direct the DoJ to investigate and prosecute instances of the corporate media's defrauding the public. He could order that the DoJ investigate and act upon anti-trust issues. He has as yet declined to do any of these actions, and things are not going to get any better until he does.

Free speech and free press are essential, protected features of a free society. Exploiting the ability to defruad the public is not. Neither is the exercise of monopolistic power that is used to the detriment of the public. It is inherent in the Constitution that protecting the existence of a free press is soley for the point of informing a public, so that it can come to its own nformed judgements; manipulating the public in order to deny it the capacity to arrive at informed judgements is not. Mr. Obama would be on solid Constitutional grounds, if he acted to clean up this mess. The ball is, and has been, in his court. He needs to put it in play.

Obama's pick for FCC chair, Julius Genachowski, is good as far as a net-neutrality-friendly pick goes. That's a good start, but there is a hell of a lot of work to do. We are at a cross roads as a nation, and if we choose the wrong path, free democracy isn't going to fare very well. The first step taken in every free nation that has fallen to totalitarianism was to subvert and co-opt the free press. No nation can remain free without a free press that functions independently and without strict integrity. We, clearly, no longer have that, which means that the clock is ticking.

The whole rotten mess needs to come down.

Here is my previous comment.

overall your right and i have a feeling i know that you know it won't happen. there's too much at stake
maybe beyond BUSH/cheney/rumsfeld's fate. i do believe obama should take this as far as he can. he will have to hand it off though otherwise other issues will not be addressed. thanks for your post(s). some interesting reads/vids today.

Are you saying buschCo is too big to fail? We're talking about the future.

Don't forget the DOJ is becoming derilect in it's duty just about now...

it's not up to Obama psst. pass it on...

If jack the ripper were a republican cia operative, would his prosecution be considered partisan? I am getting fed up to HERE with injection of 'partisanship' accusations into what is clearly an international war crime/crime against humanity, spelled out in treaties that we actually haven't repudiated yet.

Watching these mentally disturbed psychopaths on TV defend torture,murder and war crimes after all the years they have been spewing "It's the Rule of Law" to the rest of us is giving me stomach problems.

Makes me want to go up there and bitch slap them all to near death

I'm in!
Of course I'd really like to see Gonzales, Rumsfeld and Cheney under oath as well.

This is the Information Age where every Joe sixpack can get on a blog and learn the truth about the lies spewed on tv. You would think a quaint notion like "the village" would have died long ago.

to the same mischief in front of the same clueless audience.

That right wing whiners haven't ruined? I mean, let's see:
America's reputation
The state of journalism
rule of law
elections, etc.

and even when I try to get away from it all they come in and ruin
Star Trek threads, (trekweb.com, trekmovie.com)
Harry Potter threads, (mugglenet.com)
even a thread on Bea Arthur's death. (imdb.com)

It's like roaches! Isn't there a spray or something for these vermin?

Because I live in Japan, I am not bombarded with this issue as I'm sure most people living in the U.S. are. Being retired from the military does make this an important issue on a personal level. It seems odd that after spending all those years serving what I thought was a country that lived by a standard that set us apart, only to see that it was just a mirage.

Regardless of how corrupt the inner workings of the U.S. government are and pretty much always have been, I never would have believed that our government would have supported torture. I am not so naïve to have been unaware that clandestine services may use torture but that would not have been sanctioned by our president.

I've spent most of my adult life living abroad before and after retiring from the military and I'm fully aware of the 'ugly American' image that many of us leave in our wake. But there is also no mistaking that America was a place where people could make a difference in their destiny. No tin-pot dictator would ever be able to hold us back because we would rise up.

The entrance of Bush onto the world stage with his swagger and bullying approach touched everyone. In a harmful way. You can probably count the number of countries that would have allowed the outing of torture policy on your left hand. Which causes me to wonder if Bush thought that his swagger and bullying approach would protect him and his unimaginative cabal from prosecution after the fact.

It doesn't matter who gets prosecuted for breaking the law provided that it is the person responsible for breaking that law. If it is Bush who is ultimately responsible, then he needs to be held accountable. It would be nice to see that my 23 years in the military were not a complete waste of effort. I would still rather believe that I could have ended up in a place and have been tortured by an enemy combatant but my country would never stoop to that level. We were too proud and strong to do that and it just wasn't necessary. We were America. It won't be like that ever again if we don't put whoever broke the law in jail.

Liberals will have to wear stars on their clothes for ID...

)O(

Well, we already wear spangles.

...

are those like suspenders?

)O(

In the American sense

Or the British?

Actually I think it was the name of a Glitter Rock band.

that we must even debate this...

I feel as though I am witnessing the inmates taking over the asylum.

)O(

In the Air Force, I could go through a case and a half over a weekend.

$$$

My assumption is that a political revenge narrative creates more headlines and talking points than covering a criminal act. Simple equation of revenue. Which story generates more chatter and thus more interested parties.

Asides, the criminal act (torture) was reported on previously in a somewhat of a positive light. Why would they go back on that now.

Like the cyst on limpball's ass?

Too Bad the MSM doesn't read C&L! They might not be so stupid and harmful. Stupid, stupid MSM, never learns a thing - perfect companion for the republicans.

MSM and Republicans are BFF because neither will ever, ever change without outside intervention. the MSM needs an intervention. Hmm..

When is someone, ANYONE, going to clue in the republicans and the MSM that effectiveness doesn't determine legality? When? Anyone?

When Podesta says:
" we know he authorized things that were illegal under U.S. law and violated the U.S. obligations under international treaties." he ignores the definition of authorize - which is key to his overlooking the folks who implemented the illegal "policy"
The Supreme Court ruled early (1954) about school segregation.That didn't end practice of or force correction of it .Probably not the perfect case for my point.
Some one is needed to enforce or engage or implement the readings of law.Or the breaking of said law.
As to politicising torture - How often, when pulled over for a traffic infraction, has a policeman asked if you were a democrat or republican? We wouldn't stand for it from a policeman - why put up with it from politicians from either party or TV talking heads?

26 comments

Login or Register to post comments.