home

On Greg Craig

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Other Politics
Posted on Sun Nov 16, 2008 at 07:18:42 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Greg Craig was named White House counsel. Marcy Wheeler is not pleased.

My take is somewhat different than Marcy's. Craig was trying to justify Barack Obama's flip flop on telecom immunity when he spouted nonsense about FISA expiring. I think he knew that what he was saying was pure nonsense. But then, the real issue is that Greg Craig does not tell the truth and thinks most of us are idiots or do not care about the truth when it comes to Obama. But, in Craig's defense, it seems true that many do not care about the truth when it comes to Obama and warrantless wiretappping, telecom immunity and other such issues. Of course, we do not know YET where Obama will end up on these issues. But I submit that that is precisely the problem.

Update - I am told that on 60 Minutes, Obama was quite forceful on the issue of torture and on closing Gitmo. This is terrific and important news. I will post a transcript and/or video when it becomes available.

By Big Tent Democrat, speaking for me only

< Drinking in Wisconsin | Obama On 60 Minutes >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    On Greg Craig | 34 comments (34 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Very good interview (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by cal1942 on Sun Nov 16, 2008 at 08:20:29 PM EST
    He came off very well.  Krofts asked what executive orders would be first and Obama answered Gitmo and torture.

    Obama also gets it regarding the auto industry and named the economy as the top priority.

    I may have interpreted in a fog of wishful thinking, but my impression was that he would be bold concerning the economy.

    I ended up voting for Obama because I'm a Democrat and because Republican rule had to end.  This interview made me feel comfortable with that vote.

    Regarding the economy (5.00 / 2) (#17)
    by ai002h on Sun Nov 16, 2008 at 08:44:33 PM EST
    I liked how he said that the deficit cannot be a concern, thats a good sign and imo it signals someone who's ready to make bold decisions regarding a stimulus.

    Parent
    hey btd (5.00 / 3) (#15)
    by lilburro on Sun Nov 16, 2008 at 08:24:55 PM EST
    and everyone else interested in Brennan...I wrote a diary here (scroll down) that recaps a lot of previous info and talks a bit about his associations.  I also advocate for Rand Beers who is no saint (perjury) but compared to Brennan has been much more adamant against torture.  Anyway I'd love to know what any of you all think.  Shameless plug over now.  :P

    Digby just linked you (4.50 / 2) (#16)
    by andgarden on Sun Nov 16, 2008 at 08:35:01 PM EST


    Parent
    cool (none / 0) (#27)
    by lilburro on Sun Nov 16, 2008 at 09:24:33 PM EST
    thank you for letting me know :)

    Parent
    Alberto Gonzales (5.00 / 5) (#19)
    by caseyOR on Sun Nov 16, 2008 at 08:52:28 PM EST
    was Bush's White House Counsel. The person in that position operates as the president's attorney. Craig will be advising Obama on what is and is not legal for him to do as president. I would certainly like to see someone with a clear understanding of, and appreciation for, the constitution and the separation of powers serving as WH Counsel.

    Using the WH Counsel to find ways to justify whatever POTUS wants to do has not worked out for us under Bush. There is no reason to think it will be any better under Obama. If Craig thinks his job is just to make Obama look good, that is bad for us.

    Times is reporting, w/ respect to Clinton. . . (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by LarryInNYC on Sun Nov 16, 2008 at 09:04:51 PM EST
    as Secretary of State:

    One sign that many said pointed to Mrs. Clinton's possible selection was the news that Gregory B. Craig would be White House counsel instead of national security adviser or deputy secretary of state, as some had expected. A law school friend of the Clintons who represented Mr. Clinton during impeachment, Mr. Craig backed Mr. Obama from the start of the campaign and was a scathing critic of Mrs. Clinton's claims to foreign policy experience. Although some advisers saw no connection, others said putting him in a foreign policy job would be untenable if Mrs. Clinton were secretary of state.

    Link.  For what it's worth.

    Worth nothing imo (none / 0) (#23)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Nov 16, 2008 at 09:13:37 PM EST


    Parent
    What did you mean by your comment (none / 0) (#24)
    by Teresa on Sun Nov 16, 2008 at 09:16:28 PM EST
    yesterday (that you didn't think Obama should do it, though you don't have strong feelings either way)?

    Parent
    I meant (5.00 / 2) (#25)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Nov 16, 2008 at 09:19:42 PM EST
    that Clinton will do a fine hob but is wasyed at State.

    Think about it. Is the Secretary of State job REALLY where Obama needs Clinton's help? Or is it in the Senate championing policies they both favor?

    Parent

    I can't argue with that. (none / 0) (#26)
    by Teresa on Sun Nov 16, 2008 at 09:23:21 PM EST
    I have mixed feelings about it. If she wants it, I hope she gets it, but selfishly I want her in the Senate. That's if she can be allowed to get any of her proposals through.

    Parent
    Not to mention (none / 0) (#34)
    by gyrfalcon on Mon Nov 17, 2008 at 03:51:12 AM EST
    there are some much better choices for SoS.  There are very few things in government HRC couldn't do an excellent job at, but there are also some where she's not the best possible choice, and State is certainly one of those.  So to my mind, it's a somewhat wasted opportunity on both counts.

    I'm also uneasy about her abilities as the direct hands-on manager of a large and fractious bureaucracy like State, although perhaps that part of the job could be delegated to a strong deputy.


    Parent

    Then. . . (none / 0) (#35)
    by LarryInNYC on Mon Nov 17, 2008 at 07:56:13 AM EST
    Worth nothing imo

    it's a good thing I read it online, for free!

    Parent

    NatSec Adviser? (none / 0) (#32)
    by gyrfalcon on Mon Nov 17, 2008 at 03:43:47 AM EST
    What?  I could see him, just barely, as deputy SoS, but National Security Adviser?  Good grief.  If there are people close to Obama's circle who thought that would have been the best possible NSA he could pick, that's very concerning.

    Parent
    I agree on Greg Craig (none / 0) (#2)
    by ai002h on Sun Nov 16, 2008 at 07:44:22 PM EST
    IMO he was simply shilling for Obama and saying what he had to say. When someone is as close as he was to the candidate and the campaign, he pretty much has to mirror and defend Obama's stance on issues.

    On another note, it was EXTREMELY encouraging to see how forceful Obama was on 60 minutes regarding Gitmo and Torture. He said they would be top priorities that had to be dealt with asap, and that they would help restore the moral standing of the US. Not one bit of wavering or waffling.  

    I missed it (none / 0) (#3)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Nov 16, 2008 at 07:45:32 PM EST
    That is indeed encouraging.

    I am thrilled to hear that.

    Parent

    Just aired on 60 min (none / 0) (#4)
    by ai002h on Sun Nov 16, 2008 at 07:50:12 PM EST
    He was on for almost the whole show..but yeah, it was very good to hear. I think he understands that he was elected for promises that he made on the campaign trail, at least I hope he does.

    Parent
    Here's a link to a story (none / 0) (#5)
    by ai002h on Sun Nov 16, 2008 at 07:57:21 PM EST
    BBC just put out on the interview:

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/us_elections_2008/7732636.stm

    hmm (none / 0) (#6)
    by andgarden on Sun Nov 16, 2008 at 08:03:02 PM EST
    I'm reminded of:

    "We do not torture," Bush declared

    I'll have to catch the transcript.

    Parent

    So Am I (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by BDB on Sun Nov 16, 2008 at 08:51:02 PM EST
    I do not trust what any politician says on torture (or surveillance for that matter).  This is not limited to Obama.  On torture and domestic surveillance, I'm in a "believe it when I see it" place.   I've been told too many times by too many people that we don't torture or that it will end, only to see it continue.  I hope Obama does end it for real (instead of for show) and I will applaud him for it.   But I'm not going to do that until he ends it.  

    Talk is cheap.  That's one thing I've learned the past eight years.

    Parent

    He also said (none / 0) (#7)
    by ai002h on Sun Nov 16, 2008 at 08:05:52 PM EST
    that he needs to rebuild the trust the american people have in their president. I think he was talking to you :) :)

    Parent
    Trust but verify. . . (5.00 / 4) (#8)
    by andgarden on Sun Nov 16, 2008 at 08:07:21 PM EST


    Parent
    Exact question and Answer (none / 0) (#9)
    by ai002h on Sun Nov 16, 2008 at 08:12:33 PM EST
    Kroft: There are a number of different things that you could do early pertaining to executive orders. One of them is to shutdown Guantanamo Bay. Another is to change interrogation methods that are used by U.S. troops. Are those things that you plan to take early action on?

    Mr. Obama: Yes. I have said repeatedly that I intend to close Guantanamo, and I will follow through on that. I have said repeatedly that America doesn't torture. And I'm gonna make sure that we don't torture. Those are part and parcel of an effort to regain America's moral stature in the world.

    Parent

    Transcript link (none / 0) (#10)
    by ai002h on Sun Nov 16, 2008 at 08:14:07 PM EST
    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/11/16/60minutes/main4607893_page3.shtml

    Parent
    Dont get me wrong, I'm also a cynic (none / 0) (#12)
    by ai002h on Sun Nov 16, 2008 at 08:15:11 PM EST
    but this is at least very encouraging, we got to give him that.

    Parent
    I'm glad to hear (none / 0) (#11)
    by andgarden on Sun Nov 16, 2008 at 08:15:03 PM EST
    that he's maintaining his closure promise. But on the point of torture he is either misinformed or lying. I hope he doesn't try to whitewash W. on that point.

    Parent
    misinterpreting (5.00 / 3) (#30)
    by txpublicdefender on Sun Nov 16, 2008 at 10:55:55 PM EST
    I think you're misinterpreting his statement.  When he says, "America doesn't torture," he means that, as far as he is concerned, it is against America's ideals and values to torture, and he won't stand for it.  At least, that is how I interpret it, especially considering the context he put it in with restoring America's standing in the world.

    Parent
    Maybe (5.00 / 2) (#31)
    by gyrfalcon on Mon Nov 17, 2008 at 03:39:39 AM EST
    But after how many months of WORM, I remain a skeptic on explanations of how Obama meant something different than the words that actually come out of his mouth.

    Like everything else, we'll have to wait to see what he actually does.  I am encouraged about Gitmo, though, since he seemed completely unequivocal about that.

    Parent

    He also needs to (5.00 / 1) (#33)
    by gyrfalcon on Mon Nov 17, 2008 at 03:44:58 AM EST
    do something about the lack of trust a lot of the American people have in him personally.  I wonder whether he realizes that.


    Parent
    Transcript from '60 Minutes' (none / 0) (#13)
    by ajain on Sun Nov 16, 2008 at 08:17:52 PM EST
    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/11/16/60minutes/main4607893_page3.shtml
    Kroft: There are a number of different things that you could do early pertaining to executive orders. One of them is to shutdown Guantanamo Bay. Another is to change interrogation methods that are used by U.S. troops. Are those things that you plan to take early action on?

    Mr. Obama: Yes. I have said repeatedly that I intend to close Guantanamo, and I will follow through on that. I have said repeatedly that America doesn't torture. And I'm gonna make sure that we don't torture. Those are part and parcel of an effort to regain America's moral stature in the world.



    Counsel to the President is not the AG (none / 0) (#20)
    by Peter G on Sun Nov 16, 2008 at 08:54:20 PM EST
    You hit the nail on the head, Dalton.  Contrary to the twisted views of the present "administration" the job of Counsel to the President is not to make legal policy for the US Govt.  He or she is supposed to advise the President on legal aspects of the President's job and the operation of the White House.  

    BTW, I have followed Greg Craig's career since 1976, when I succeeded him as an Assistant Federal Public Defender in Connecticut.  He is fundamentally human rights oriented.  That's what he did on Sen. Kennedy's staff and then in the Clinton State Dept., and in his primary career as a criminal defense lawyer, which on this site should count as a strong positive sign.  He is not a political operative, a flak or a hack.  I am very encouraged by this choice.

    couldn't agree more (none / 0) (#29)
    by txpublicdefender on Sun Nov 16, 2008 at 10:51:33 PM EST
    I have followed his career as well.  When I was a young lawyer, I actually struck up a short e-mail correspondence with him after his successful representation of Elian Gonzalez's father.  He was incredibly gracious to me, a first or second year associate.  I think he is a brilliant legal mind who has focused his career on human rights and criminal defense.  I couldn't be happier about his appointment.

    Parent
    video/partial transcript (none / 0) (#28)
    by DanAllNews on Sun Nov 16, 2008 at 09:49:32 PM EST
    http://thinkprogress.org/2008/11/16/obama-moral-stature/

    Obama can go ahead and make this selection (none / 0) (#36)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Nov 17, 2008 at 09:28:20 AM EST
    I suppose (he's going to do what he wants to do anyhow), because if and when Craig lies his tail off again don't worry......it is likely the remaining Republican party will call him on it and they'll make sure they get the press time to let the country know they are calling him on it for as many press cycles as they can finagle out of it.

    On Greg Craig | 34 comments (34 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment