Destroying the Furniture: This Week's roundtable gagglers gag on the possiblity of torture hearings
By John Amato Monday Jul 13, 2009 8:30am
(h/t Heather)
The Villagers were up in arms Sunday morning over on the set of ABC's This Week about the possibility that Eric Holder might appoint a special someone to look into the Bush/Cheney torture practices. Watch in awe and see how the Villagers feel about trying to get accountability from the Bush years.
Why, an investigation would just trash the place. Oh, the bitterness in D.C. would be too much to handle, all because those other people (that is, non-Villagers) would like to get to the truth.
Bob Woodward, who's trying to be the next David Broder by living off his long-degraded rep as the man who uncovered Watergate, wonders how we will ever be able to keep secrets again if there is some inspection. Um, isn't that what the Bob Woodwardses are supposed to do? Uncover stuff? Nope, not anymore. He's appalled that there might be a frakking investigation.
And he was all a-giggle with the thought that the CIA could actually lie. What a joke. I didn't hear him open his mouth when Newt Gingrich went all whiggy on Nancy Pelosi.
Cokie goes "Cokie" on us for a while and then after much trepidation comes down on the rule of law. Good for her, but she better take some R&R if it happens.
ROBERTS: I must say, I have very mixed minds about this. Because on the one hand, the whole idea of a prosecution gets Washington into that kind of horrible slog where everybody hates each other and the poison just gets very thick.
DONALDSON: Unlike at the moment, right?
ROBERTS: Well, no, it hasn’t been as bad lately as it was in the last 16 years.
STEPHANOPOULOS: And it seems like they’re trying to avoid at least in the design of this, criminalizing of policy.
ROBERTS: And just the whole atmosphere of getting that way again. On the other hand, the rule of law is terribly important. And we have to have it -- you know, we cannot operate in this country without the rule of law.
DONALDSON: So which hand do you come down on?
ROBERTS: I’d probably come down on the rule of law.
Digby writes much more:
Stephanopoulos reported on This Week that the possible Holder investigation is going to be very narrow and will not pursue policy makers or anyone who took orders directly from the policymakers. He's going after "rogue interrogators" who inflicted more torture than was strictly allowed.
The Village roundtable all gasped in horror anyway because who knows where such an investigation might lead and as Cokie complained, it would mean that the whole town would be mad at each other again and nobody wants that! "Everybody hates each other and the poison gets very thick." She did finally come down on the side of following the rule of law even though it would make her uncomfortable at cocktail parties, but it was a close thing.
Bob Woodward was very upset at the idea that the government can't keep secrets because "we need them!" Besides, Holder shouldn't be like Janet Reno and just initiate investigations willy nilly. (He seems to think that Reno authorizing independent counsels to investigate her own president for trivial political reasons is the same thing as investigating whether the previous administration tortured prisoners.) They all chuckled at the notion that Holder was really independent and if he is, that means he's a rogue interrogator himself.
George Will thought it was all just a bunch of balderdash because nothing bad ever happened during the Bush administration. Sam Donaldson said that reporters should probably pursue stories and Donna Brazile added that these things were coming out anyway so they might as well be investigated.
They all snorted and giggled and laughed throughout the whole segment about how silly it was to be upset that the CIA lied because well, that's what it does. And they all thought it was a ripping good joke that Cheney kept everything secret because well, everyone knows that's what he does. Hahahahaha.
Full transcript below the fold.
STEPHANOPOULOS: George, let me bring you in on these investigations. This headline this morning in “The New York Times” about Vice President Cheney ordering the CIA not to tell Congress about the secret program begun in 2001. We don’t really know what the program was, some kind of a counterterrorism program but we know it never got it off the ground.
WILL: Here’s what Bob Woodward’s “Washington Post” says about the program. It quotes a former senior intelligence official, speaking on the condition of anonymity says “the program remains hardly secretive.” He said “the program remained in the planning stages and never crossed the agency’s threshold for reporting to the administration and congressional overseers.”
But furthermore, the law, to which Cokie referred, 1947, establishing the CIA says indeed Congress must be kept informed unless -- and there’s a huge asterisk. It says unless, “to the extent consistent with due regard for the protection from unauthorized disclosure of classified information relating to sensitive intelligence sources.”
WOODWARD: I can’t tell you how shocked I am, the idea that the CIA would withhold disclosing something.
STEPHANOPOULOS: On direct orders of the vice president?
WOODWARD: Well, it had to be on the authority of Bush. I mean, the vice president, powerful as he was, was not the president. And they would not do it unless Bush backed them up on this. The question here is, how do you keep secrets? You know, if you look at the news, this, and Eric Holder is going to have an investigation of interrogations now.
STEPHANOPOULOS: A very narrow prosecution in the investigation.
WOODWARD: Well, still, you know, so much of what we are talking about and living through now is the overhang from 9/11. It just doesn’t go away.
STEPHANOPOULOS: The irony here, Sam, is that President Obama is threatening to veto the intelligence authorization bill because the Democrats in the House want to expand the number of people who are briefed. And the president is saying, nope, I don’t want to go down that road.
DONALDSON: Once again, candidate Obama has met President Obama and has discovered maybe he needs to do different things. I think the key here is the words “planning.” What does planning mean? A bunch of people sitting around, blue skies, let’s have this study. You’re right, I guess under the law, that doesn’t need to be reported.
But was there ever any execution? Let’s have a pilot program in the field and try this. On real people. Needs to be reported. And if they didn’t do that, they need to be brought to task. They need to be brought to justice.
ROBERTS: What’s so interesting is that it was people in the CIA who apparently brought this to the attention of the CIA director, Leon Panetta, because obviously, they wanted that out of there.
STEPHANOPOULOS: From the minute he heard about it, he shut it down.
ROBERTS: And went to Congress.
BRAZILE: So why don’t we just put it all out on the table? There’s already investigations. Many of them will be revealed this summer. So there’s no reason why the attorney general should not have a special prosecutor.
DONALDSON: The president doesn’t want to do that.
BRAZILE: Well, you know, the attorney general is a little bit independent of the president.
WOODWARD: After all those independent counsels that Janet Reno when she was attorney general appointed and Clinton would go purple each time.
STEPHANOPOULOS: And there has been some tension there between the attorney general and the White House. But based on my reporting overnight, George, the way this has been described, one, no final decision is made yet. Number two, it’s not going to be a broad investigation. Not going to be an investigation of policymakers like Secretary Rumsfeld or Vice President Cheney. Not going to be an investigation of anyone who followed the instructions they were given. This is designed to go after rogue interrogators who just weren’t following the guidance they were given.
ROBERTS: How do you even find those people?
STEPHANOPOULOS: The CIA inspector general report has already got a lot of the specific charges.
WILL: beyond that, is this going to be independent counsel? Because independent counsels have to be independent. Look at the example of Ken Starr. Ken Starr did not want to go all the places he went, but he was drawn by the logic of his unfolding investigation. And if they think they can control the parameters of this, they are very much mistaken.
WOODWARD: Whether it’s an independent counsel or whether it’s just a prosecutor within the -- there’s a momentum that gets going and these things tend to unravel.
DONALDSON: You’re shocked that the CIA keeps secrets. I’m shocked that Vice President Cheney would, you know, give orders, if in fact, he did. It’s unlikely.
ROBERTS: I must say, I have very mixed minds about this. Because on the one hand, the whole idea of a prosecution gets Washington into that kind of horrible slog where everybody hates each other and the poison just gets very thick.
DONALDSON: Unlike at the moment, right?
ROBERTS: Well, no, it hasn’t been as bad lately as it was in the last 16 years.
STEPHANOPOULOS: And it seems like they’re trying to avoid at least in the design of this, criminalizing of policy.
ROBERTS: And just the whole atmosphere of getting that way again. On the other hand, the rule of law is terribly important. And we have to have it -- you know, we cannot operate in this country without the rule of law.
DONALDSON: So which hand do you come down on?
ROBERTS: I’d probably come down on the rule of law.
WOODWARD: OK. And that’s where Panetta landed by going to the Congress and saying, look, this was not disclosed. The element in this that’s very important is he stopped it. He said we’re not going further. I don’t think it was particularly sinister. I also think, you’re exactly right, Sam, that candidate Obama has met President Obama and he says I don’t want wide disclosure of our secrets because we need them.
WILL: and here’s why. When someone went to Panetta in the CIA and told him about this and Panetta went to the Congressional Committee, what then happened? It leaked.
WOODWARD: Actually, they wrote letters publicly and the letters circulated.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Part of the reason they wrote those letters was in defense of the speaker, Nancy Pelosi who had said --
DONALDSON: Do you know what the program we’re talking about? I don’t.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Not what the problem is, but they had said they had been misled and the speaker has said the CIA has lied to us on many occasions. I think she said they lie all the time. So this is a measure of vindication, I suppose, for the speaker, even though she doesn’t want to claim it.








Login or Register to post comments.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=prLCYeKMNPU
Very funny.
Your post reminds me of a film I happened to watch the other night on TCM that I had never seen. "The Mouse That Roared" with Peter Sellers.
At one point the ragtag "army" from the tiny country of Fenwick go to NYC and "capture" a general and some NYC police, then return with them to Fenwick to hold them as prisoners.
The American General reminds the Fenwick military that according to International Law and the Geneva Conventions that they must give him a decent place to sleep, that his food must be served on "a 9 inch tin plate" and they may not torture him.
Here's a link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Or9C-gt4TpA
And here is a link regarding an individual who has seen 1200 torture photos that are currently being held by the U.S. military:
http://www.mediachannel.org/wordpress/2009/07...
Of course I think it is very safe to assume that the Senate and House Intelligence Committee members, the C.I.A. chief Leon Panetta, Attorney General Eric Holder and President Obama have already seen the same photos. It's time they be presented to the rest of the world for viewing. It's time for atonement.
The panel mentioned above should have been doing more than simply "gagging" over the possibility of torture investigations/trials. They should have been excusing themselves to run to the bathrooms to vomit.
Lucky furniture...
I saw the Mouse that Roared years ago, and read the book.
Wayne Madsen says that an investigation into the torture program would be a 'horror' to Cheney.....................I would say, especially to Cheney. Which, if I were God, I would already have done, and that walking, snarling, evil, face of the Cheney gang would never happen again on this earth.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ueuauKKjPZI
She said she'd "probably" come down on the rule of law. WTF?? She just said if she had to choose between the Cons and DEms getting along and the rule of law, she might pick everyone getting along over the law.
Now that is elite!
More like the village idiots you mean.
Good God the US is getting dumber by the hour!
Having a vantage point outside the country does wonders for ones perspective, and let me tell you folks something: the view may be good but the sights are appalling.
You watch, lotsa talk about maybe they should do something and lotsa reasons on why they should wait until after the next election (...next election ...next election ...next election ...next election ...next election ...never).
In other words just stay tuned in, be entertained and try not to expect anything to really happen because you know, they could really care less what you or anyone else really thinks as long as they are still getting those contributions and votes.
............the Iron Curtain of Propaganda the view is indeed much differet. The only thing that King Geo did manage is the dumbing down of the Amerikan public by taking over all communications, just like Honduras is doing right now.
"WILL: beyond that, is this going to be independent counsel? Because independent counsels have to be independent. Look at the example of Ken Starr. Ken Starr did not want to go all the places he went, but he was drawn by the logic of his unfolding investigation."
Logic of unfolding underwear and unzipping trousers if you ask me.
Note to Cokie: Maybe the poison wouldn't be in DC in the first place if we ALWAYS followed the law and held politicians accountable for their actions AND statements.
i think you're right. The problem they are avoiding is the problem indeed.
Oh dear god, if they get mad at each other again, poor Cokie might not get out to as many cocktail parties.
Heaven forbid, the humanity of it all.
OT but Limbaugh just this moment said on the radio that he had crashed DenunciaRush's website. What a dick.
Isn't there a Federal law about denial-of-service attacks? If only we had evidence... such as a confession...
I think he was lying (go figure) cause I was able to on the site no problem.
But yeah that shit is against the law.
So it is illegal. Thought so. I guess it's OK to talk about and encourage non violent yet illegal terrorism? Is for Limba i guess.
STEPHANOPOULOS: And it seems like they’re trying to avoid at least in the design of this, criminalizing of policy.
These morons don't seem to quite understand the idea that something isn't criminal because you get to decide after the fact whether or not something good happened as a result of the policy decision, it's simply criminal if it breaks the law.
My family is starving (they haven't eaten for 5 hours, you see), so I'm going to go knock off an ATM and then use some of that money to buy them something to eat at Taco Bell. Don't you dare try and criminalize my actions, there was a good result: my family got fed. How dare you accuse me of doing something wrong! You're just poisoning the discussion, and pretty soon we're all going to hate each other as a result. And that would just be wrong.
What would Newt Gingrich and the GOP have done if they had found out Clinton or Al Gore had ordered the CIA to conceal its activities and lie to Congress?
It would have been Jihad. The Democratic Party's Watergate. Ken Starr would have been elevated from the sniffer of Monica Lewinski's cigar butt into the Savior of the Republic. We would have seen televised hearings with Senators demanding to know who gave the orders, who covered them up, when the president knew, the whole shooting match. Clinton would have been impeached for real. Gore too.
Can anyone possibly doubt it?
"Can anyone possibly doubt it?"
No.
"STEPHANOPOULOS: And it seems like they’re trying to avoid at least in the design of this, criminalizing of policy."
Look you tool, its easy, was the pshht that W and his crime family did illegal or not. Since they've already admitted torture and since the Red Cross declared what they did as such, there's very little to discuss except what suit should the Prosecutor wear to the trials. These people have committed crimes by ALL standards, National and International. What remains is the WAR CRIMES TRIALS.
The President and the rest of the country better figure that out fast before we LOSE what's left of our National soul! It would be nice to see OBL stop laughing at us!
Isn't it time for W to be charged with WAR CRIMES? I say YES, indeed!
Wealthy politicians and right-wing media personalities are ABOVE the silly old laws!
"WOODWARD: Well, still, you know, so much of what we are talking about and living through now is the overhang from 9/11. It just doesn’t go away."
It doesn't go away. I think about a dead friend, dead citizens, every day. I think that the President of the United States had to violate our laws and international laws to get..well, nothing accomplished except line the pockets of his friends' and VP's companies with more money at the expense of a 100,000 dead Iraqis, the millions more displaced, our dead and wounded soldiers, our Constitution and our national soul deserves, perhaps more than a little scrutiny from a bunch of people sitting around a desk worrying about whether they're going to be invited to an F-ing cocktail party.
DONALDSON: Do you know what the program we’re talking about? I don’t.
Delete the word "program." Insert the word "fuck."
We have a winner.......
this cacophonic cabal of establishment enabling eunuchs will make your ears bleed
ROBERTS: I must say, I have very mixed minds about this. Because on the one hand, the whole idea of a prosecution gets Washington into that kind of horrible slog where everybody hates each other and the poison just gets very thick.
Gee, Cokie, we wouldn't want the Republicans to start being, ummmm, all obstructionist and mean, would we?
"STEPHANOPOULOS: And there has been some tension there between the attorney general and the White House. But based on my reporting overnight, George, the way this has been described, one, no final decision is made yet. Number two, it’s not going to be a broad investigation. Not going to be an investigation of policymakers like Secretary Rumsfeld or Vice President Cheney. Not going to be an investigation of anyone who followed the instructions they were given. This is designed to go after rogue interrogators who just weren’t following the guidance they were given."
It makes Pres. Obama complicit in the crimes! I do not want to see that happen Mr. President but I'd be willing to bring you to trial if you don't act. Que Lastima!
Shorter Stephanopoulos: "Holder is gonna find some low-level lackey to blame everything on, and then conclude no one else is at fault and that justice has been served."
if they had a program that they "Didn't Implement" nobody would be talking about stopping it now. If they weren't doing it, they wouldn't have had to stop it.
Yes. They implimented it.
Former FBI chief Hoover shredded the constitutional rights of untold americans with warrantless wiretapping and blackmail and could not be stopped or forced out by more than one POTUS. They were all afraid of him because he had secrets on everybody in Washington. He was a self-loathing gay conservative with an agenda and he left office with honors.
Am I ringing any bells?
ding ding ding ding
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kPzy5PIP9Ik
" (He seems to think that Reno authorizing independent counsels to investigate her own president for trivial political reasons is the same thing as investigating whether the previous administration tortured prisoners.)"
investigating and eventually impeaching clinton was hardly over trivial matters. while at first, it was a harmless sexual romp clinton indeed did by his own hand purjure himself during testimony for which he was rightfully tried in the senate.
in no way are the potential trangressions of the bush administration any less serious than clinton's.
that what Cheney might have been trying to keep secret was his
assassination squads.
Ok, we're seven years into a successful war, or two and a whole lot more...Mr.Libby.(War is a great Cash-Cow)
Maybe, just maybe, this "secrect" Mr. Woodward is so afraid of, was really a true "conspiracy"(sorry Woodward...people do conspire). And, it's been stated that "torture is a way to create false confessions(Hitler style) in order to be used for certain results"ie:go to war...illegally.(War is a great, undetectable Cash-Cow)
And now these dimwits are "afraid" again? Scared little people, that the American legal system might, really work on it's own without being manipulated. Naw, we don't want to work up the criminals...it might make them mad and we'll really have to do something...legal...to protect ourselves...... These phony Conservatives want to say: Screw the AMERICAN legal system? Naw....they are "always afraid"...Draw the lines now! It's our money or their lives.....Frankly Scarlet: I DON'T GIVE A DAMN! They(the panel) are a bunch of fakes when it comes to being American. These "Cheney crime-things" is Bob-Bigger than Watergate....it's just the tip of the crimes. Nip it in the bud. NOW!
A real Conservative!
"seven years into a successful war": that's an oxymoron
DONALDSON: So which hand do you come down on?
ROBERTS: ( Absent some GOP Senator's hand on my inner thigh) I’d probably come down on the rule of law.
it's being investigated, then prosecuted, then sent to prison.
They really hate that, so we should take it easy on them.
That's what you meant to say, right Cokester?
That's right. Kokie is kooky.
... the torturers are the victims, hardworking latino females are now the bigoted elite, and people who are consistently wrong get to be hired as "experts" to weigh on all this.
If we could only capture the energy being dissipated by the rotational momentum of Orwell rolling in his grave we could solve the energy needs for half of the industrialized world...
poetry that last statement . . .. and clever, to boot.
.
http://www.mediachannel.org/wordpress/2009/07...
From it:
"Were these Abu Ghraib photos all made public, but those from other times and places kept hidden, and were we unaware of the executive orders, Justice Department memos, presidential signing statements, congressional reports, Red Cross reports, presidential and vice presidential televised confessions, and so forth, the military could still claim this was the isolated work of a few “bad apples”. But we would have a better understanding of what that work was. And making these images available to the public, or merely to a special prosecutor, would suggest an interest in seeking accountability for those responsible but not present in the photographs. On the other hand, hiding the evidence while prosecuting the soldiers who posed in some of the photos looks increasingly like scapegoating for the benefit of the Military Intelligence, CIA, and contractors who instructed the soldiers, as well as the commanders all the way up to the Secretary of Defense who encouraged torture, the lawyers who sought to provide immunity, and the president and vice president who gave the authorizations. Remember, for Attorney General Eric Holder to decide that our laws against torture can be enforced, he does not need to wait until each new piece of evidence is revealed and then respond appropriately. He already has all of this evidence and much more that we know about but have not seen."-David Swanson
Very well done Mr. Swanson.
watching this pack of dinosaurs.
Why does anyone still bother?
Evo or Devo?
ROBERTS: I must say, I have very mixed minds about this. Because on the one hand, the whole idea of a prosecution gets Washington into that kind of horrible slog where everybody hates each other and the poison just gets very thick.
DONALDSON: Unlike at the moment, right?
ROBERTS: Well, no, it hasn’t been as bad lately as it was in the last 16 years.
Cokie, Cokie, Cokie, Cokie....................
Coke, Coke, Coke, Coke............
I was counting on someone to giggle about it.
Deleila
President Obama finds some new recruits to send to Afghanistan:
http://www.freewebs.com/buto-clan/squirrel%20...
Those bastards can fucking choke on it.
I'll bet money that Woodward is helping bush and or cheney write their book. Most likely, it's bush. Lately he's been very defensive of the republicans and I think it was on Chis Matthews show that he said bush's book would be interesting. Only someone involved in writing it would say something like that.
did we get saddled with opinionists like these mooks?
You'd think a bunch of Beltway BLOWviators would be licking their chops at possible hearings, ANY hearings.
Does this bunch have investments in the torture industry? Is that what they're scared of?
As for criminalizing policy differences, well that ship has sailed.
So we can't have any investigations into bad behavior because everyone in D.C. will just be petulant. Why are we governed by little children who never learned to take responsibility or play nicely with others? I used to be so excited to become an adult when I was younger. Now that I'm entering adulthood I'm quickly getting jaded by seeing that nothing really changes outside of physical appearance. It's really depressing.
I really can't care about people's feelings getting hurt when they've been responsible for criminal behavior and inhumane acts. Hurt feelings from valid accusations aren't poison. Corruption and greed are poison. We're never going to be able to move forward and make things better if this whiny blackmail continues to work. I'm usually a pretty calm guy, but stuff really sets me off.
"STEPHANOPOULOS: And it seems like they’re trying to avoid at least in the design of this, criminalizing of policy"
Geee-ZUS, do people lose the sense of logic when they get jobs in D.C. and on TV?
George, Dude! , if the policy IS criminal, don't blame the freakin' investigation for "criminalizing of policy" - blame the asshats who put that policy in place!
Sometimes I feel like going to D.C. and bitch-slapping anyone wearing a tie...
ABC Lord Of The Flies
Sorry if this was already posted.
That's George Will not Sam Donaldson!!!!!!!
Nevermind.
Login or Register to post comments.