Oh Goody, A Constitutional Lawyer in the White House!
By Susie Madrak Monday Jan 12, 2009 11:00amGlenn Greenwald on Obama's plan to build a "new process" to convict those Guantanamo detainees kept on the basis of evidence obtained by torture:
What he's saying is quite clear. There are detainees who the U.S. may not be able to convict in a court of law. Why not? Because the evidence that we believe establishes their guilt was obtained by torture, and it is therefore likely inadmissible in our courts (torture-obtained evidence is inadmissible in all courts in the civilized world; one might say it's a defining attribute of being civilized). But Obama wants to detain them anyway -- even though we can't convict them of anything in our courts of law. So before he can close Guantanamo, he wants a new, special court to be created -- presumably by an act of Congress -- where evidence obtained by torture (confessions and the like) can be used to justify someone's detention and where, presumably, other safeguards are abolished. That's what he means when he refers to "creating a process."
Amazingly, when discussing the same topic, Obama vowed that "we will send a message to the world that we are serious about our values." How? By creating a new court just for accused Islamic radicals that allows us to use confessions and other evidence that we obtained through torture? That sounds like exactly the same "message about our values" that we've been sending.
Digby has more:
But I would suggest that Obama contemplate one little thing before he decides to try to find "middle ground" on torture. It is a trap. If he continues to torture in any way or even tacitly agrees to allow it in certain circumstances, the intelligence community will make sure it is leaked. They want protection from both parties and there is no better way to do it than to implicate Obama. And the result of that will be to destroy his foreign policy.
If the man who represents the second chance this country's been given around the world to repudiate the horrors of the Bush years is revealed to have perpetuated the same horrors, his credibility and foreign policy will be in shambles. And there are many people buried in the intelligence and military establishments who would be happy to make sure that happens.
Obama said today on Stephanopoulos that he doesn't want to look backwards but that Eric Holder could conceivably find something that must be prosecuted. (Good luck with those hearings, dude.) And he said that closing Guantanamo was a difficult matter that would probably have to be dealt with by creating some new hybrid justice system. Of course, the Bush administration did that too with the military commissions, and they haven't exactly worked out too well. But hey, the people languishing in Gitmo for years can wait a few more for the next shiny new justice system to be proven useless too. No hurry there.
As Greenwald discusses today, Obama is doing what all Democrats in my adult lifetime have always done --- he is working as hard as he can to prove that he isn't captive to his left. (You would think that the fact that the left is the law and order faction on this issue would at least make some of them scratch their heads.) And he seems to be doing a good job of it --- even Pat Buchanan is effusive in his praise of Obama for making sure that everyone knows he isn't "Reverend Wright's man."
But I'm not sure that's what's required right now. The nation is confused and scared about their economic security. They are embarrassed and angry at what the Republicans did. In fact, it seems that I heard somebody recently talking about how they desperately wanted ... change. I guess that's a word that's open to interpretation, but it seems to me that it's at least possible that they meant they wanted Obama to change the policies of the Bush administration.









Login or Register to post comments.
The plain language of the constitution makes torture verbotten, under cruel and unusual punishment, as well as the III, IV and V amendments.
Precedent may be another matters
The man hasn't even been sworn in yet, and you people are dissecting him like he's publicly said stuff! /snark
...if we'd be swearing in Grandpa next week. Admit it...you're a Bitchmonger.
At least with Grandpa you KNEW what you were getting. Republicans tell you publicly to go f*ck yourself.
We all should have just stayed home, things won't change, Obama=Grandpa, what the fuck ever.
You got a plumber's license?
If there are any...
Make a list.
and then share with us...
....prognosticating down line negative situations before they actually happen isn't my specialty. You hold on to your imaginary doomsday list...I'll pass.
I sure Canuck will glady play Nostradamus with you.
Nostrildamus often couldn't tell which list had his prophecies and which his groceries.
... aren't you the one whose been pissing on about how CHANGE isn't?
You know what it is really? Been thinking about it alot. Dems have beaten spouse syndrome. Oh they hope and pray their next one will be different, even stick up for them, but in the end, they get it in the end from their leaders as much as they do from Rep leaders. The man doesn't have to be sworn in to know what he is going to do. He's publicly stated it, over and over, and in case you miss it, there he is on television again telling you. Face it leftwingers, you've been snookered.
As a leftwinger, I only voted for Obama for the sake of SCOTUS.
I don't think the Democratic party is at all to the left, it is just to the right of center.
Socialists, Greens and Naderites are the leftist parties.
For some reason(what could it be?) they often have a hard time even getting on the ballot.
Property. THe Pukes are the "Far Right Wing" of that same party.
There may be individual differences between personalities, but in terms of their goals, they're virtually identical...
...Republican toilet were my issues. I don't really know what Obama will accomplish, but to suggest that he's the same as the Repukes is factlessly ignorant.
Everyone here would be singing the blues if Grandpa had won.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZnlW1fSXZZM
What if Obama recommends right-leaning judges for the SC? Given the choices he's made for his administration, I wouldn't be surprised at anything unprogressive he does in the future. After all, his big thing is post-partisan government, so apparently somebody's conservative or progressive politics don't matter anymore.
Yes, SCOTUS ...
And further down the ticket, in my case, to vote Dole back out now enough of my neighbors, independent of party, had seen what I warned them they would. I actually preferred the Republican governor candidate here.
Getting a decent congress critter to vote for is hard too. Harder, maybe.
I remember fondly back in the day (a few weeks ago) when C&L'ers were scolding those of us who didn't buy the "Nation is center-left now!" meme.
Of course, what were our other options? Dodd, Edwards, Clinton? Personally, I voted Kucinich in the primary elections and McKinney in the general elections. The rest of those bastards would sell their mothers to third-world slavery for a shiny nickel.
According to this fellow, we're in a DEPRESSION right now, not merely a RECESSION.
Maybe in about a year they'll let us know that January of 2009 was the beginning of the "Depression" kinda like they just told us that the "recession" began in 2007.
Here's the happy link:
http://www.************.com/chief-economist-i...
(They are playing games with the link. If you want to read it go to ************...if you can get there.)
Ha, ha. This is funny guys. I won't bother writing in the website again for the link because the name is continually blocked.
So, go to Whatreallyhappened.com and try to find the story. Good freakin' luck!
As old Grandpa said, "The only thing permanent is CHANGE. Things are so permanently changing until they become more of the same."
...I'll leave you buyers remorsed psychos to your bitchfest...enjoy.
by each step St. Barry takes back away from the promises that got him 'elected.' As Arthur Silber has often stated:
...he certainly hits the nail on the head. The evidence of that wisdom is all around us and we'll see more of it from Obama as time goes on.
The Power of Narrative
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wxr26YkZlQk
Woody and Arthur Silber
Intelligently and persuasively well stated.
What would Hillary have done if she were president? More draconian? Less apologetic?
All I know is if we had elected Kucinich, we wouldn't be having half these discussions.
I agree with you, but the MSM in this country determined at the outset who the candidates would be.
immediately.
Investigate, prosecute and punish war crimes, and violations of US law.
...sorry, this will take time.
(N/T)
Greenwald's update today, found here.
Here is clip from the statement of the ACLU's Executive Director, Anthony Romero, who today said this:
Notice that he said: 'Closing Guantánamo and the military commissions is a matter of both reclaiming our international reputation and increasing our national security, and must be done immediately.'
The emphasis is added.
When it is found, as it will be, that the law is being violated, the only option is to immediately stop violating it.
There is no other option. To do otherwise is to join the ranks of the lawbreakers.
The rhetorical price--the shit he'd take from the SCUM and their Neo-con owners--is too steep, and he's too compromised...
PEBO will sign an order closing Gitmo in 1st week in office...
Didn't you guys get the memo? Praise his vastly superior knowledge and grasp to do the right things, and then stand back and cheer:
Yes we can, yes we can, yes we can, yes we can...um can what? Don't ask questions!
We're either not giving him enough of a chance, or we're not being quick enough to condemn him.
... until he's sworn in and actually does something before forming a judgment.
But he is not making it very easy.
He hasn't hinted anything has he? Hahahaha. Sorry. Couldn't resist.
I said back in January, last year, that Obama was to our politics what Febreez is to domestic sanitation: It doesn't actually CHANGE any thing, but it does conceal the stench.
Eight more days until we see what we've really got.
We at least have a president who can stand up straight and talk in complete sentences without bobbling his head, shrugging his shoulders, or giving us a demented chuckle.
And so far no smirk!
at least he does it in complete sentences...
"Do not sit there cowering and pretending the only way to win is as Republican-lite. If the Washington-based party can't get up and fight, we'll find someone who can."
Ivins' essay "Addressing the National Crisis Means Moving Beyond 'Republican Lite'" is worth re-reading with an eye to how the Democratic leadership handles all the current critical issues.
... 'cause all too often, the Democrats will act all outraged, then quietly concede the argument.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dl73rGXh3zA
To be loud about this crap.
We have a constitution, damnit. We don't need an "alternative" system for "other" defendents.
The only legal recourse is to treat the Guantanamo detainees like POW's or criminals.
Does anyone think that any of these people are actually threats? I mean especially after 7+ years of solitary and "harsh interrogations"? I'd be shocked if any of the detainees still had the capacity to make change, let alone plan terrorist attacks.
This is Bush's boondoggle. Obama ought to give each of them 40 acres and a mule - it'll be a lot cheaper in the long run. And its probably constitutional, which would be a welcome relief.
never got what was promised 'em.
What makes anybody think Obama will have the courage to confront the injustices of his predecessor. NAGAHAPUN.
Arthur Silber (and I) have long argued:
Come on. Do we REALLY expect guys who have been in the hole for seven years to have any actionable intelligence value?
If I were leading a covert group and someone had captured one of my people, we'd be dumping any plans they had knowledge of and going to a communications blackout. Furthermore, if I have twenty operatives and they're going to hijack four planes, Thugs 1-5 don't know anything about Thugs 6-20. (They may know there are multiple targets, but they don't know who, they don't attend the same flight school or training location, and so on.)
This is basic operational security.
http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2009/01/10/...
This is what is know as "sliding down the slippery slope".
The policies that GW Bush instituted will be with us for a long time, perhaps forever. There is no political will to bring justice down on those that initiated the horrific policies now in place in this country.
Unless we are willing to take that terrible medicine in order to heal ourselves as a nation, we will never be well. Nor will we have ANY credibility in the third world, nor any other civilized world.
Going against the status quo is difficult and dangerous. Just ask the Kennedy clan. True leadership is having the cojones to risk it all.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hp6Zx_fzpq8
i think most thinking people had a good chuckle when the rightwing claimed that obama was the 'most liberal senator', obviously he's not. and that was just a ploy, that, imo, backfired, as it made him more appealing to some.
but, i think a lot of people--knowing full well that he is a neoliberal centrist--are surprised as to how much he is throwing the left and progressives under the bus. but they shouldn't have been. so NOW is the time to speak out, make it clear to the obama admin that they won't be able to walk over the left as easily as the clinton admin did... (i hope)
the obama admin is flirting with the potential to be a bush-meets-the-clintons administration.
anyone in the administration that joins the ranks of the war and FISA criminals, et al will receive my non stop opprobrium, until my last breath.
I've never read the term "neoliberal centrist" before. I can deconstruct the expression, but would you define it simply for me. Thanks.
ok, drop centrist, i guess it is slightly redundant. obama, despite some of his recent rhetoric, is a neoliberal.
I admit to being a bit confused about a technicality. Does the US Constitution and it's appendages apply to Americans, or to anybody regardless of where or who they are? Clarify this?
recognizes foreign and international law.
If you are asking if the Constitution overrides other laws if an American is living oversease...unless they have diplomatic immunity...the answer is NO, and diplomatic immunity has limitations too.
What appendages of the Constitution are you referring to?
Article III, Section 1 - Judicial powers
(The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and TREATIES made...) [uppercase mine.]
To oversimplify: "Alienage" can be a suspect classification triggering heightened scrutiny of laws which discriminate in some instances. Many, if not most rights (e.g. free speech, right to remain silent, right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment, criminal due process) do not depend on citizenship status.
Others, like voting rights, right to hold office, etc. can depend on citizenship status.
But the basics are universal.
Amendment 4 - Search and Seizure. Ratified 12/15/1791.
The right of the PEOPLE to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Amendment 5 - Trial and Punishment, Compensation for Takings. Ratified 12/15/1791.
Amendment 6 - Right to Speedy Trial, Confrontation of Witnesses. Ratified 12/15/1791.
In all criminal prosecutions, the ACCUSED shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
Amendment 8 - Cruel and Unusual Punishment. Ratified 12/15/1791.
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
You notice it doesn't say citizens but people and the accused. I dropped the V amendment because it specified Grand Jury indictments as long as the accused isn't being held for cases ariving in land or naval forces, but the part about due process would likely be applicable.
I also dropped amendment VII because it involves civil cases.
Way oversimplified: US law applies only on American soil - unless it doesn't. For example, the Constitution gives the Federal Government jurisdiction to punish piracy.
See the next to the last paragraph regarding land or naval forces.
for Director of National Intelligence.
As reported by Democracy Now, when genocidal monsters in the
Indonesian military were committing massacres in East Timor, Admiral
Blair DEFIED his orders to get them to stop, and instead gave them
encouragement to continue. He then lied to Congress about it all.
http://www.usalone.com/reject_blair.php
http://www.democracynow.org/2009/1/9/did_obam...
The first massacre was in 1975 under Ford. Blair's massacre was in 1999. Don't want to confuse American sanctioned massacres, do we.
On November 12th, 1991, Indonesian troops opened fire on a crowd of several thousand unarmed Timorese civilians gathered in Dili. At least 271 people were killed.
Indonesia invaded East Timor in 1975
Blair's massacre was #3!
I was admonishing someone for forgetting, and then did it myself. I only learned of East Timor after reading Noam Chomskys book on the massacre back a few decades ago, and it woke me up to a lot of what goes on in the world in the name of the American people. I forget that sometimes things start before we even make an appearance, but we are hinding in the brush.
First, creating any new justice process means explicitly that our justice system is not "Justice for All" and that "parallel" means "Double Standard"... A thoroughly Corrupt Concept of meaning of the Justice itself. On this point we can only hope Obama's strategists recognize the crucial importance of Executive Authority.
Now to the real Trojan Horse:
It may not be obvious, but the deliberate sabotage of The United States of America is being executed before our eyes. While the Guantanamo miscarriage of justice, or, "War Crimes" there are important, American citizens must step back and look at the larger picture so as to realize any unity or substantive change.
Look at how the news cycles jump from one massive international offense to another, Bankster-Bailout with exactly ZERO help to actual housing occupants but lots of cannibalistic Consolidations, Iraq and Afghan Conflicts Flailing mixed with major Energy Deals, President/Vice President openly admitting War Crimes and massive violations of Federal Laws, Treason, Simultaneous Attacks on Environment, Land Management, Workers Rights, Species Protections and Science, SEC cases being dismissed, Food-Tainting, Toy-Tainting, Bird Flu and other "Bio-Threats", Over-Classification/State Secrets/Executive Privilege, Losing Emails/Data/Accountability throughout federal agencies, and then there's the MIA Congress, or should we say, Military-Industrial-Congress who joined Israel in advance of Obama's swearing in by sanctioning a Palestinian Genocide and attempting that all-too-clear desire of the PNAC-backed Bushies to commence WWIII while they still have their finger on the button.
Smart people make mistakes, criminals make tons of them. The Borderless-Billionaires behind each and every one of the above noted travesties do not "need" a democratic America, it in fact dilutes their power when it's run properly. They don't need the voice of the people, they don't need a middle-class, they don't need manufacturing here, they don't need safety-nets, health care, environmental protections or a green revolution, and they certainly do not need US Constitutional Restraint.
Isn't it plain as day that we the people have been divided by the official acts of a tiny elite in our own time that has thrown so many curve-balls at us that it leaves us stuck in a dense soup of stench too deep for us "little powers" to overcome?
I wouldn't want the job of putting a rubber on a horse.
You wouldn't need to if you just planned to beat a dead horse.
but you are correct. We are so screwed by the neo-con, corporate, international financial-cabal, fascist folks who've been dismantling every part of our nation. When this economic crisis is full-blown (maybe in the next year) many more people in the US of A will hopefully begin to understand what has been taken from them - right our from under their (our) noses.
Fear is a powerful intoxicant. Unfortunately, by the time most people sober up, we'll be a third world country.
Yah, that sums up the 15 second in-depth conversation I had with my currently deceived father last night, it went something like:
(This was a family gathering seeing-off my younger brother for his 3rd tour in the ME, 2nd to Afghanistan and I could see it was worrying my mother) I said, "Well, Biden was in Afghanistan this week trying (now speaking over me) m dad said, "I don't want to talk about it!" I decided to continue because of the obvious interest my mother had when she said, "Yes, go on", and I continued, "I don't know if he's negotiating a way out, but I'm hoping for an early end, maybe 3 months. The War Lords now control some 75% of the country and the British couldn't beat them, the USSR couldn't do it, and neither can we." She started her one-way wingnuttia response, "that's because no one's standing with us", to which I said, "There is no military solution, we need to make friends in the world." My older brother and his wife sat there as usual avoiding controversy or independent thought, but boy, can he talk up a storm about the latest ***MOVIES***.
My parents fell into the fear-trap several years ago, reinforced by their "religious" disdain for the internet being "END TIMES", and yes, they had a Sarah Palin sign. The Americans I know who are not practicing a fear-based ideology, are suffering from those Weapons of Mass Distraction that is pumped out of every corporate cubic inch of our culture.
But to the point, I think the progressive community makes a HUGE misunderestimation of the intelligent scheming going on that is at work to tear our nation into shreds. I've known too many "little" rich people and listened to them in back rooms making money out of a deliberately-trashed situation to believe the really big money doesn't have most all of this quite set in stone. PNAC was no aberration. Thank you for listening.
If Obama does anything about war and other crimes, it'll be remarkable. No one, if I recall correctly, was ever charged for the Gulf of Tonkin fraud which cost how many lives? William Calley served a couple years back then and now Lindy England is fulfilling the time-honored tradition of serving time for the administration.
No president will ever allow the International War Crimes Tribunal access to officials or the military as it would have a chilling effect on future immoral behavior, especially if a former president was serving time in Europe.
was paroled on March 3, 2007, after having served 521 days.
Good calls on two points on the same thread! Checked your comments list and am impressed. Nice to know I need to take it up a notch or two.
soldiers left in prison is Charles Graner. All the rest are out.
Is Greenwald saying that he knows how Obama is going to deal with Gitmo based on THREE WORDS? "Create a process" - its interesting, I thought Obama meant they were going to create a process by which all Gitmo detainees could be sent home with a nice new car. I guess that's the problem with taking somebody's words and trying to predict the future.
I just hope we hold Greenwald up to the same standard we have been saying we should hold up those critics who supported the Iraq war. If Greenwald turns out to be wrong and perhaps a little too hasty in his predictions, maybe we shouldn't worship him like a God next time around . . .
Login or Register to post comments.