home

Who Would Holder Investigate in a Torture Probe?

By Jeralyn, Section War on Terror
Posted on Sun Jul 12, 2009 at 01:32:27 PM EST
Tags: torture (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

As a follow-up yesterday's post on the Newsweek article suggesting Attorney General Eric Holder may conduct an investigation of Bush torture policies, I'd like to point you to Glenn Greenwald today. He points out that the sources floating this trial balloon also indicate:

[T]he investigation will only target "rogue" CIA interrogators who exceeded the limits of what John Yoo authorized, and would not include high-level policy makers who authorized the torture tactics and implemented America's torture regime.

In other words, as Greenwald writes, it would be Abu Ghraib redux. Tim F. at Balloon Juice makes a similar point.

< Frank Rich's Strange Column | Breaking Down the IG Warrantless Surveillance Report >

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

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Who Would Holder Investigate in a Torture Probe? | 15 comments (15 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    It's the reverse Nuremberg defense (5.00 / 8) (#1)
    by Steve M on Sun Jul 12, 2009 at 01:36:17 PM EST
    There's no point in investigating most of the interrogators, because they were just following orders!  What a strange world we live in.

    What bothers me is that (5.00 / 3) (#9)
    by Anne on Sun Jul 12, 2009 at 08:36:18 PM EST
    if the investigation were confined to "rogue" interrogators who exceeded what Yoo declared to be legal, isn't that tantamount to agreeing that what Yoo authorized was legal, and that the legal basis for the memos was sound?  

    I don't understand why the Obama administration doesn't see that by limiting any investigation, and passing on the opportunity to get to the bottom on things, and hold people - at whatever level of the government they were - accountable, it is condoning what the policymakers did.

    I guess the days of doing the right thing because it is the right thing are gone, and now we float trial balloons via anonymous leaks to assess the political risk/reward before we do anything.

    Pathetic.

    Parent

    I think it is the Old Saw (none / 0) (#10)
    by NMvoiceofreason on Sun Jul 12, 2009 at 08:39:08 PM EST
    That the people who are talking don't know and the people that know don't talk.

    Take it all with several grains of salt.

    Parent

    Santa Claus (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by Dadler on Sun Jul 12, 2009 at 02:38:42 PM EST
    Does St. Nick freelance in the off-season?  Is there a website?  If so, can we please try to get him to deliver some real spine to Holder's office.  I hope he actually gets on Obama's nerves here.  I hope he gets on them so much that it actually makes real news.

    Holder is a stockholder in (5.00 / 2) (#3)
    by oldpro on Sun Jul 12, 2009 at 02:58:56 PM EST
    Power, Inc. and short-term returns are all that matter.

    This is the 'hopey' part, hoping to convince most people that it is the 'changey' part of the admin fulfilling its promises.  The Rs won't make a fuss about making a few outliers accountable so long as it's not an attack on those responsible for the policy...and no one really cares if the ACLU makes a fuss.

    So there.

    I would think that Holder would (5.00 / 2) (#8)
    by Anne on Sun Jul 12, 2009 at 08:02:47 PM EST
    not have to do a whole lot of investigating before he realized that all roads keep leading to the same people, and that what is needed is a special prosecutor.

    I just don't see how we can keep getting more and more damning information and then have either the president or the DOJ just let it go as if it doesn't matter now.

    It matters.

    Ha (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by lilburro on Sun Jul 12, 2009 at 09:40:10 PM EST
    where are all our "Obama is amazing and misunderstood!" commenters today?

    "But-but-but (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by Spamlet on Sun Jul 12, 2009 at 10:53:54 PM EST
    the Clintons!"

    Will that do?

    /s

    Parent

    Meet the new boss ... (5.00 / 1) (#13)
    by cal1942 on Sun Jul 12, 2009 at 10:16:05 PM EST
    So again the search is on for "rotten apples" at the lower level.

    What it would do is destroy (1.00 / 2) (#4)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Jul 12, 2009 at 03:17:13 PM EST
    the CIA.

    If that is what you want, push for them to go for it.

    The late Senator Daniel Patrick Monihan (5.00 / 4) (#5)
    by KeysDan on Sun Jul 12, 2009 at 04:09:08 PM EST
    was of the mind, and so stated, that after the fall of the Soviet Union, the CIA should be disbanded.  That it had completed its cold war mission and that we should give the agency our heartfelt thanks.  No doubt there was some generosity even with that sentiment, since we know that accurate estimates of Soviet economic strength, upon which we based our defenses, escaped their analysis or was otherwise ill-reported.   More recently, the 9/ll Commission Report's discussion of the CIA was not entirely complimentary.  While we live in a dangerous world, and, in my view, need an effective CIA,  politically malleable directors such as George Tenet undermine its purpose.  Moreover, a comprehensive look at the agency in light of new challenges and intelligence capabilities is required.  To do that task right, a look backward is needed--if that suggests destruction then we are lost.

    Parent
    Make that: Moynihan--regrets (none / 0) (#6)
    by KeysDan on Sun Jul 12, 2009 at 04:10:39 PM EST


    Parent
    If this is the CIA you want (none / 0) (#7)
    by NMvoiceofreason on Sun Jul 12, 2009 at 06:35:05 PM EST
    One that commits war crimes and tortures people to death, then I'm very eager to see that CIA get prosecuted, be put in prison, or put to death. If you are talking about a CIA that creates networks of human intelligence operatives worldwide, then we have to defend it to the death. Like trying those treasonous bastards who outed a NOC - a covert soldier of the Republic - for mere political cover. But having a valid, useful intelligence system isn't on your menu - political cover is. And we all know where that leads.

    Parent
    You might want to read (none / 0) (#12)
    by cal1942 on Sun Jul 12, 2009 at 10:12:55 PM EST
    "Legacy of Ashes: The History of the CIA" by Tim Weiner.

    We need an intelligence service.  What we should do is cleanse the CIA and improve its focus.

    Of course, more important yet is to investigate the policy makers.

    Parent

    That the CIA may not be effective (1.00 / 1) (#15)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 07:05:07 AM EST
    as we would like will not be disputed by me.

    But I don't think the proposed witch hunt has anything to do with improving it and everything to do with destroying it, along with Bush and Cheney and anyone who disagrees with the far Left's vision of the world and what our national defense, if any, should be.

    Who Would Holder Investigate in a Torture Probe? | 15 comments (15 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment