Boy, how could that have happened?:

Citigroup, the battered banking giant, announced a first-quarter net profit on Friday after more than a year of staggering losses and three bailouts from Washington. The New York-based bank reported first-quarter net income of $1.6 billion, after a loss of $5.11 billion in the period a year earlier. It announced a loss, however, of 18 cents a share, because of changes in its stock structure. The results were also helped by an accounting adjustment that allowed the bank to post a one-off gain of $2.5 billion on its derivative positions.

(Emphasis supplied.) Can you spell A-I-G?

Speaking for me only

Conservative pollster Scott Rasmussen writes:

The secession question was prompted by "tea parties" nationwide on April 15 to express frustration about the high level of new federal government spending. But President Obama has maintained solid approval ratings over the past month in the Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll.

Yes, the main Tea Party message turned out to be about secession. In case you were wondering, 70% of Texans are not as idiotic as their Governor - they know that Texas does not have a right to secede.

Speaking for me only

Glenn Greenwald writes a very good, nuanced piece on what was good and not so good from the Obama Administration yesterday on the torture issue. I also liked Digby's statement:

All of these cases were brought about by public and political pressure. It occurs to me that this is the only way it can happen in our broken political system --- that a president never willingly investigates itself, of course, but also never wants to investigate its predecessor either (the Democrats usually for fear of starting an endless vendetta, the Republicans usually for fear of setting a precedent.) They must be made to do it.

With respect to the Bush torture regime, it's obviously very difficult for the administration to take on the intelligence community unless there is a large public constituency demanding action. It's risky on all the levels mentioned above but also risks alienating a very important bureaucracy with a lot of very special power. I recognize that it's not easy, especially for a Democrat, although I think it's so important to the future security of the nation that I would have hoped the president would use some of his political capital to prove that the United States is a country of laws not men.

Speaking for me only. This is an Open Thread.

Even Fred Hiatt wants investigations of the Bush Administration's torture activities:

[T]he decision to forgo prosecutions should not prevent -- and perhaps should even encourage -- further investigation about the circumstances that gave rise to torture. . . . More light needs to be shed on how decisions were made and why. And more information is needed on who in the Bush administration made the ultimate decision to authorize the use of techniques that have long been considered torture and a violation of domestic and international legal strictures. A commission like the one that investigated the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks would likely provide the best vehicle for such an exploration.

At a bare minimum, the Obama Administration should support Senator Patrick Leahy's Truth Commission idea.

Speaking for me only

It's one thing to read the memos. It's another to read how they were executed.

• Nudity, sleep deprivation and dietary restrictions kept prisoners compliant and reminded them they had no control over their basic needs. Clothes and food could be used as rewards for cooperation.

• Slapping prisoners on the face or abdomen was allowed. So was grabbing them forcefully by the collar or slamming them into a false wall, a technique called "walling" that had a goal of fear more than pain.

Bell Curve Sully:

[I]ntelligence is not infinitely alterable. My point was that growing inequality will be very, very hard to prevent or restrain in the face of these factors.

What factors? The fact "IQ" (No, IQ does not accurately measure intelligence, which is impossible to define anyway) is significantly alterable, but not "infinitely alterable? Really?

More . . .

Maybe it was just a poor choice of words, but President Obama said in Mexico today that the U.S. must "crack down" on drug use in our cities and town. (Video here, transcript here.)

Perhaps he meant we need to spend more on drug treatment and preventive measures. But "crack down" is a phrase I expect him to use when discussing large-scale traffickers, not users.

Was it a slip of the tongue, or is Obama threatening more punitive measures for users?

As many times as I've interviewed my favorite Bachelor, Colorado snowboarder Jesse Csinscak on the phone, I only got to meet and hang out with him in person tonight (photo here).

Jesse was in Denver to help kick off the new season of Denver's Rebuilding Together, an organization of volunteers that renovates homes for low-income disabled and elderly residents at no charge to them.

On Saturday, another 500 volunteers will fan out in cities across the metro area to help 25 other families stay in their homes too. Celebrating its 10th anniversary, Denver's Rebuilding Together is one of the nation's largest volunteer-based home-repair organizations, with chapters in 43 states.

[More...]

I watched Keith Olbermann's Special Comment and Jonathan Turley's appearance on Rachel Maddow's show and they both make a compelling case for prosecution on the torture issue.

And yet . . . I can't bring myself to condemn Obama on this. My stomach is churning about it and I want at least a Truth Commission but I am having a hard time blasting Obama on this. I am continuing to cogitate on the matter. For the record, my first post as a FPer at daily kos was about torture and Alberto Gonzales. So shouldn't I be outraged? Yes, and yet I can empathize with Obama here. Maybe I shouldn't, but I do.

You folks reach any conclusions? In any event, here is an Open Thread.

Here is the DOJ press release on the four torture memos released today. They are:

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

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

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

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

Here is the ACLU's press release.

Senator Leahy's proposal:

We need to get to the bottom of what happened -- and why -- so we make sure it never happens again. One path to that goal would be a reconciliation process and truth commission. . . . President Obama is right that we cannot afford extreme partisanship and debilitating divisions. . . . Rather than vengeance, we need a fair-minded pursuit of what actually happened. Sometimes the best way to move forward is getting to the truth, finding out what happened, so we can make sure it does not happen again. . . We need to come to a shared understanding of the failures of the recent past. It is something to be considered.

I do not know if I agree with this approach, but given the statements today from President Obama and Attorney General Holder, it is something to be considered.

Speaking for me only

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.

[MORE . . .]