Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Absolutely damning indictment of Cheney on NPR

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
GCP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-15-09 07:28 PM
Original message
Absolutely damning indictment of Cheney on NPR
Edited on Thu Jan-15-09 07:32 PM by Godlesscommieprevert
Nina Totenberg absolutely lays into him

Listen and read here:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=99422633

Nothing better defines Cheney's influence than his domination of policy on the war on terror, setting up Guantanamo, getting waterboarding and other harsh interrogation techniques authorized, and circumventing established laws on domestic surveillance.

"It all boiled down to two things, fundamentally," Gellman said. "It was: How do you spy on people who you think may be terrorists, and what can you do to them once you catch them?"

To do any of these things, he needed legal authority. So, he established a back channel to John Yoo, the No. 2 man in the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel. Little known to the public, that office tells the president and his subordinates what they can and can't do under existing law. And with guidance from Cheney and his chief counsel, David Addington, Yoo wrote legal opinions that authorized everything from waterboarding and other harsh interrogation tactics previously considered torture, to domestic surveillance by the National Security Agency without first getting permission from the court set up to approve such surveillance.

snip

Later, the secret domestic surveillance program would become the subject of a threatened massive resignation from the top ranks of the Justice Department. By then, there was a new head of the Office of Legal Counsel, Jack Goldsmith, who examined many of John Yoo's opinions and found them, in his words, deeply flawed. The torture authorization was finally revoked.

And the domestic surveillance authorization had big problems. Attorney General John Ashcroft, Deputy Attorney General James Comey and others agreed that the president was exceeding his constitutional authority, and with Ashcroft critically ill in the hospital, Acting Attorney General Comey refused to reauthorize the program. That led to the now famous hospital scene with top White House officials pressuring a resistant Ashcroft to overrule Comey.

Keeping Bush In The Dark

In his book, Gellman describes how, before this face-off, Cheney kept President Bush in the dark for three months so that the president was unaware that his Justice Department believed the program was illegal. When Comey finally went to the White House after the hospital scene, both he and Bush were in for a rude shock.

"The president says to the acting attorney general, 'I just wish you weren't bringing this objection at the last minute,' " Gellman said.

Then Comey told the president it wasn't just he who was objecting, but the top ranks at Justice, and even the FBI director was about to resign. When Robert Mueller confirmed that in a meeting with the president, Bush reversed course.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Raven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-15-09 07:29 PM
Response to Original message
1. Gee, I thought we hated NPR here...n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GCP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-15-09 07:36 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. That just shows the declining level of maturity around here
:hide:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-15-09 11:19 PM
Response to Reply #1
6. It's not all bad and it's not
all good.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bottomtheweaver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-16-09 09:41 AM
Response to Reply #6
8. That's how I see it.
I listen to it but I have to run it through the propaganda filter to figure out what's going on. This particular reporter for example is a major catapulter.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-16-09 12:51 PM
Response to Reply #8
13. I never did listen to it..I'm
not a radio person but from what I've read on DU and what my friend says who does listen..they got a few catapulters on there.

Catapulters should be outlawed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
a kennedy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-16-09 10:19 AM
Response to Reply #1
9. the national end of NPR, but our local WPR station is great.....
I still give to our local WPR (Wisconsin Public Radio) station.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bottomtheweaver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-15-09 07:41 PM
Response to Original message
3. They're blaming Cheney for everything so Bushler can pardon him
and make it alllllll go away. Hey if it's NPR you know it's gotta be some kind of brainwashing, and sure enough, it is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Buzz Clik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-15-09 10:46 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. No. You've let your ignorance and paranoia destroy your logical analysis.
These arguments have been put forward for years. Hells bells, there have been a few of us right here at DU making the same arguments: impeachment would be impossible until we separated Bush and Cheney from the Justice Department and Office of Legal Counsel that were protecting them both.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bottomtheweaver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-16-09 09:38 AM
Response to Reply #5
7. I'd put the number at 29%.
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Buzz Clik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-16-09 12:31 PM
Response to Reply #7
12. I have no idea what you're talking about.
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HughMoran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-16-09 10:53 AM
Response to Reply #5
11. That's not unusual
Good for a chuckle though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Buzz Clik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-15-09 10:44 PM
Response to Original message
4. I'm glad you posted this. I listened to the original broadcast absolutely spellbound.
Some really, really important points emerged:

1) The evil behind the Bush administration was clearly Cheney.
2) Bush was more than happy to let Cheney have his way. He only changed course when it was clear he was about to face impeachment.
3) John Yoo shares blame with Cheney in that Yoo provided the legal protection for Bush and Cheney during all the illegal activities.

And the good news? We have a new Attorney General who just declared Cheney's actions as illegal.

Please, God, put that bastard in jail.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Proud Liberal Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-16-09 10:48 AM
Response to Original message
10. I thought it was an interesting story
However, I'm concerned about its apparent attempt to minimize Bush's role in everything. Regardless of whether or not Cheney was the REAL "power behind the throne" in the Bush (mis-)administration (at least during most of the first term), as President and Commander-in-Chief, Bush was ultimately responsible for how his (mis-)administration was run during his two terms in office and for the conduct of all of the officials therein. If he was really troubled by what was going then he could've demonstrated some REAL "resolve" and fired/replaced Cheney, Rumsfeld, et. al when it became apparent that they were engaging in extra-constitutional and/or illegal conduct. However, he really should've never been so disengaged and unaware of what was going on in his (mis-)administration that Cheney and some of the other members of his (mis-)administration would have even been able to do what they were apparently doing during the first few years of his (P)residency, however, given the lack of attention and concern he exhibited in regards to all of those pre-9/11 security warnings, I guess it's not too terribly surprising.
It's also kind of interesting to learn that he actually worried about being impeached during his first term when his popularity and political capital were at their zenith. If Democrats couldn't muster the courage and will during the past Congress- when his popularity was only slightly higher than bubonic plague- to bring articles of impeachment against Bush/Cheney, then it almost seems laughable to think that Bush would've been worried that anybody might attempt to push for impeachment they would've even been willing to push for it back in 2002-2003, particularly when Bush had a Republican "rubber stamp" and a cowed Democratic minority in Congress.
It was good to learn that some members of the DOJ, including, surprisingly John Ashcroft of all people, and the FBI Director were apparently troubled by what Cheney was up to and some of them were prepared to resign if Bush didn't listen to their concerns. However, nothing in that story IMHO should be construed so as to reflect positively on Bush other than the fact that Cheney's power and influence (as well as those of the neocons) were severely diminished in Bush's second term- not that Bushco managed to accomplish much of anything meaningful but at least we didn't actually end up attacking/invading Iran and/or, if the story is accurate, giving Israel those bunker-busting nukes that Cheney reportedly wanted to give to them.
:scared:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 16th 2024, 10:10 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC