|
Edited on Sun Dec-09-07 03:21 PM by Caro
Brought to you by Carolyn Kay MakeThemAccountable.com Top Story
I usually don’t post on Sundays, but I’m making an exception today because there’s too much important stuff to wait until tomorrow. Hill Briefed on Waterboarding in 2002
In September 2002, four members of Congress met in secret for a first look at a unique CIA program designed to wring vital information from reticent terrorism suspects in U.S. custody. For more than an hour, the bipartisan group, which included current House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), was given a virtual tour of the CIA's overseas detention sites and the harsh techniques interrogators had devised to try to make their prisoners talk. Among the techniques described, said two officials present, was waterboarding, a practice that years later would be condemned as torture by Democrats and some Republicans on Capitol Hill. But on that day, no objections were raised. Instead, at least two lawmakers in the room asked the CIA to push harder, two U.S. officials said. Project for the Old American Century
The Nation18 percent:
American voters who believe that Iran has halted its nuclear weapons program, according to a Rasmussen survey. 66 percent disagree and say Iran has not stopped its nuclear weapons program.
Give it time. Big reversals like this take a while to sink in.—Caro
Democrats Call for Inquiry in Destruction of Tapes by C.I.A.
WASHINGTON, Dec. 7 — Angry Democratic lawmakers called for investigations today into the Central Intelligence Agency’s destruction in 2005 of at least two videotapes documenting the interrogation of two Qaeda operatives in the agency’s custody. Senator Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts accused the C.I.A. of “a cover-up”… “We haven’t seen anything like this since the 18½ -minute gap on the tapes of Richard Nixon,” Mr. Kennedy said.
Inquiry Sought On CIA Tapes: Destruction Is Said To Be News to Bush
The White House said that President Bush was unaware of the tapes or their destruction until this week, but administration sources acknowledged last night that longtime Bush aide Harriet E. Miers knew of the tapes' existence and told CIA officials that she opposed their destruction.
Does Bush know anything about what goes on in his administration?—Caro
House Intel Joins Torture Tape Fray (by David Kurtz at Talking Points Memo)
The House intelligence committee will also be investigating the CIA torture tapes, according to a … statement from committee Chairman Silvestre Reyes: "While I welcome this preliminary inquiry, this Administration cannot be trusted to police itself. For that reason, the House Intelligence Committee will begin its own inquiry this week. We will follow the facts wherever they may lead, and we will use every tool at our disposal to conduct a fair and complete review on behalf of the House of Representatives and the American people.”
C.I.A. Was Urged to Keep Interrogation Videotapes
WASHINGTON, Dec. 7 — White House and Justice Department officials, along with senior members of Congress, advised the Central Intelligence Agency in 2003 against a plan to destroy hundreds of hours of videotapes showing the interrogations of two operatives of Al Qaeda, government officials said Friday.
Hayden: Destruction Of Tapes Was ‘In Line With The Law’ Because Torture Advocate Rizzo Said So
CIA Director Michael Hayden said, “What matters here is that it was done in line with the law.” As proof, he cited internal CIA legal decisions… The man in charge of this “rigorous review”? John Rizzo — the Acting General Counsel of the CIA. Recall, Rizzo was nominated by President Bush last year to become CIA General Counsel. At his confirmation hearings, Rizzo unapologetically stood behind his approval of the “Bybee memo,” which defined torture as “serious physical injury, such as organ failure.” When asked whether he still agreed with that decision, Rizzo answered, “I honestly — I can’t say I should have objected at the time.”
Click through to watch the video of the Rizzo hearing.—Caro
Were other tapes destroyed?
“Vincent Warren of the Center for Constitutional Rights, which has been representing detainees held by the government at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, suggested that the disclosure by the CIA suggests the agency destroyed evidence in other cases. The center represents Majid Khan, a former ‘ghost’ detainee who was allegedly held in a secret prison in Eastern Europe before being transferred to Guantanamo. Warren said the center has asked for materials relating to interrogations of Khan. ‘I find it hard to believe the CIA would make videotapes of interrogations of only two people,’ Warren said.”
Lawyers charge the CIA tortured their client in secret prisons
WASHINGTON — Lawyers for a terrorism suspect from suburban Baltimore who's imprisoned at the Guantanamo Bay naval base in Cuba claim they have evidence that their client "was subjected to a program of state-sanctioned torture" while he was in CIA custody.
Sen. Whitehouse Reveals Secret DoJ Legal Memos: Bush Determines What Is Constitutional
(Friday) morning, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) delivered an impassioned floor speech to help frame the debate over FISA reform. Using his privilege as a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Whitehouse said he has “spent hours poring over” secret opinions issued by the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) — and he took notes (including) … The President, exercising his constitutional authority under Article II, can determine whether an action is a lawful exercise of the President’s authority under Article II.
Click through to watch the video of Whitehouse’s speech.—Caro
Pentagon plans unchanged by Iran report: general
A U.S. intelligence assessment that Iran halted its nuclear weapons program in 2003 has had no effect on Pentagon planning, a senior U.S. military officer said on Friday. Marine Corps Lt. Gen. John Sattler, director for strategic plans and policy on the U.S. military's Joint Staff, said officials were still digesting the National Intelligence Estimate released on Monday. Economy & FinanceBush’s ‘too little, too late’ subprime solution.
On The Situation Room yesterday, CNN financial analyst Ali Velshi broke down Bush’s mortgage plan. “Despite the fact that the White House says it’s going to help up to 1.2 million people,” Velshi said, “the best numbers we can get is 240,000 people who are going to be helped by this.” CNN noted that the rules attached to the plan cut out many homeowners who need help. “There’s still a lot of people who stand to lose their homes. That means a lot of people are saying this plan is a little too little and a little too late,” Velshi said.
Click through to watch the video.—Caro
Economic Experts Weigh Bush's Mortgage Rate Freeze Plan, Housing Crisis
(PBS’S) JEFFREY BROWN: We heard Secretary Paulson refer to 1.2 million, I think, people he thinks would be eligible for refinancing possibly… MICHAEL CALHOUN (President, Center for Responsible Lending): … Our numbers are much smaller, somewhere about 145,000 families is our estimate of who might benefit from this continuation of their existing mortgage rates, which are no bargain rates. Most of these rates are 8 to 9 percent. So it's not like these homeowners who continue at that rate are getting some discount mortgage rate.
The Sandbag Plan (by Elizabeth Warren at Credit Slips, thanks to Economist’s View)
(The administration’s plan to deal with subprime mortgages) seems to be nothing more than a guideline for when some lenders or servicers might let some borrowers extend lower interest payments for a while before the interest jumps up later. The loan on the house stays the same, even (if) the family owes much more than the house is now worth--a circumstance that will cut off any refinancing option and any real resolution of the problem… CongressDaily reports that "the mortgage industry hopes a White House plan designed to aid subprime borrowers at risk of losing their houses will help scuttle congressional efforts to refashion mortgages through the bankruptcy code.” So the administration's subprime mortgage plan is the bank lobby's dream. "Totally will sandbag the bankruptcy stuff." And totally sandbag American homeowners and would be homeowners.
Not just your ordinary Bush administration bait and switch plan.—Caro MediaPermanent link to MTA daily media news
Perino: Congress Knew More About CIA Activities Than Bush, President Not ‘Aware’ Of Torture Tapes
During the White House press briefing (Friday), reporters bore into White House Press Secretary Dana Perino over when President Bush was first informed about the CIA’s destruction of videotapes in 2005 that featured agency officials using harsh interrogation tactics. Perino said that Bush had “no recollection of being made aware of the tapes or their destruction before yesterday”
Does he know anything about what goes on in his name? Click through to watch the video.—Caro
WHAT THE TAPES WOULD HAVE SHOWN.... (by Kevin Drum at Political Animal, Washington Monthly)
(He)ere's what the tapes would have shown: not just that we had brutally tortured an al-Qaeda operative, but that we had brutally tortured an al-Qaeda operative who was (a) unimportant and low-ranking, (b) mentally unstable, (c) had no useful information, and (d) eventually spewed out an endless series of worthless, fantastical "confessions" under duress. This was all prompted by the president of the United States, implemented by the director of the CIA, and the end result was thousands of wasted man hours by intelligence and and law enforcement personnel. Nice trifecta there. And just think: there's an entire political party in this country that still thinks this is OK.
Presidential Perks (by digby)
The political press prides itself on the way it explores "character," passing judgment on politicians through the lens of bourgeois Village sexual mores and social hierarchy. When it isn't outright character assassination (usually informed by clever Republican PR) it's almost always useless as a guide for adults to assess the fitness of candidates for office. But there are times, when a candidates says something so revealing that the hair on the back of your neck stands up. This was one of those times: “… (Bush:) I watched (Larry King’s) interview with (Karla Faye Tucker)… He asked her real difficult questions, like 'What would you say to Governor Bush?' 'What was her answer?' I wonder. 'Please,' Bush whimpers, his lips pursed in mock desperation, 'don't kill me.'” The idea that (Bush) didn't know about these torture session is ludicrous. It was one of the perks.
Read that quote and more at The Real George Bush, whom some of us knew a lot about in 2000, but not by way of the mainstream media.—Caro
Suskind: WH Efforts To Pin Full Blame On Rodriguez For Destruction Of Tapes ‘Hard To Believe’
The full blame for the destruction of the tapes has fallen on Jose Rodriguez, then the CIA’s head of the clandestine division. Rodriguez reportedly undertook the destruction of the tapes in a unilateral manner, without receiving any instructions from his bosses or giving them advance notice of his actions. (Friday) night on CNN, Ron Suskind — author of the One Percent Doctrine — said the idea that Rodriquez didn’t get “some authorization from above” is “hard to believe.” “It simply doesn’t work that way,” Suskind said, noting that “at this point, lots was being authorized from the White House in terms of the CIA.”
Click through to watch the video.—Caro
‘Well-Informed’ Source Tells CBS That Tapes Were Destroyed To Prevent Prosecution
Last night on the CBS Evening News, national security correspondent David Martin reported that a “well-informed source” informed the network that the CIA destroyed the interrogation videos to “avoid criminal prosecution.”
Torture Tapes (by Larry Johnson at No Quarter)
Let’s be clear why these were destroyed–the chief of the Operations Division, Jose Rodriguez, understood that this was video evidence of torture. It was not the exposure of clandestine identities that had him fretting. It was the fear that CIA officers and contractors could be standing before a tribunal in the Hague trying to explain why the images of torture were not torture. Then there is the potential embarrassment from showing that these extreme interrogation measures did not produce any intelligence of significance.
Krauthammer On Fox (by Andrew Sullivan, thanks to Economist’s View)
(According to Charles Krauthammer,) the government has a right to torture when it feels like it and the right to destroy the evidence because it would incriminate them and hurt the image of the United States. Again, I keep pinching myself that I am actually hearing these things on the television… If this isn't a form of tyranny, annexed to torture, what is? And if the executive branch can simply get away with it, and have serious commentators defend the president's trashing of the Constitution as necessary to fulfill his oath of office, we really have left the rule of law behind in the ditch.
‘More Candor’ From Joe Klein
(Thursday), The New York Times published an explosive report revealing that in 2005, the CIA destroyed tapes documenting harsh interrogation tactics against two al Qaeda operatives… Only after the Times informed the CIA that it was publishing its article did the agency finally admit that to destroying these tapes… Yet no act by the Bush administration is too small to go unrecognized by Time’s Joe Klein, who saw it as “more candor”.
The Senate and the Iran NIE (Sic Semper Tyrannus)
The "jungle telegraph" in Washington is booming with news of the Iran NIE. I am told that the reason the conclusions of the NIE were released is that it was communicated to the White House that "intelligence career seniors were lined up to go to jail if necessary" if the document's gist were not given to the public. Translation? Someone in that group would have gone to the media "on the record" to disclose its contents.
From The Wrong About Everything File (by digby)
From Ilan Goldenberg at Democracy Arsenal: “In recent days conservative like (Ilan) Berman, Norman Podhoretz, Danielle Pletka and Jon Bolton, have been trying to cast doubt on the conclusions of the intelligence community. Now the Washington Post is picking up on it and lending the arguments more credibility.”… (T)he bloodthirsty neoconservatives have a track record over 30 years of exaggerating threats… They should never be taken seriously by anyone again.
Hannity: ‘The NIE Report In 2005 And The One In 2007 Are Basically The Same’
Interviewing John Bolton (Thursday, Sean) Hannity argued that it “is not the case” (that) the administration overinflated the Iranian threat. “The headlines that we’re reading about the NIE are misleading,” he argued. Hannity then claimed the 2005 NIE — which falsely concluded that Iran was “determined to develop nuclear weapons” — was “basically the same” as the 2007 NIE.
Click through to watch the video.—Caro
Darth Vader blogging (by Paul Krugman)
Back when Hillary Clinton described Dick Cheney as Darth Vader, a number of people pointed out that this was an unfair comparison. For example, Darth Vader once served in the military. Here’s another reason the comparison is invalid: the contractors Darth Vader hired to build the Death Star actually got the job done (as opposed to the problem-ridden U.S. embassy in Baghdad).
FAIR Media Advisory: The Lou Dobbs Primary?
Media coverage of the 2008 presidential election identifies immigration as a key issue for the U.S. electorate--even though, according to most polling, it does not rank as a top priority for voters.
"Its not True" (by Mark Thoma at Economist’s View)
I think this is a good sign. Do tax cuts pay for themselves?:
Washington Post: Mr. Giuliani and the Tax Fairy. Editorial "...It's not true..."
Time: Tax Cuts Don't Boost Revenues, by Justin Fox ..."these claims are false..."
Now, will the press make the connection between the willingness to make these claims and character? Those who say this are either making claims they know are false, or have economic advisors who don't know what they are talking about. In any case, whether its the willingness to mislead to promote an idea, or the incompetence in choosing advisors and the unwillingness to consider evidence at odds with their preconceived notions, it's worth noting.
Looks like some will, Prof. Thoma. See below.—Caro
Straight shooter, wacky tax idea (by Scot Lehigh, Boston Globe)
JOHN MCCAIN has a reputation as a straight shooter, and on some issues, deservedly so. But when he came to the Globe Wednesday, McCain took refuge in a supply-side myth: the notion that President Bush's tax cuts have created a compelling revenue surge.
FOX News Clinton bias amplified: Sheppard Smith even wonders why (by John Amato at AMERICAblog)
The fair and balanced network couldn’t do a segment on Oprah supporting Obama without somehow smearing Bill Clinton and as a result, smearing Hillary as well. “Smith: Now for once, forget about Oprah. What America wants to know is—who Gennifer Flowers is going to vote for. Huh. President Clinton’s one time… well… friend…claiming she’d consider voting for Hillary Clinton, surprisingly enough. Flowers, who works as a lounge singer in Las Vegas, says she likes to support her gender in the election. Hillary’s camp so far is not commenting on that endorsement. I have no idea why that was in the newscast (laughter) but it was.
Click through to watch the video.—Caro
Deadly Clinton hatred (by Paul Krugman)
I was glad to see that this Times piece by Michael Luo and Kit Seelye got to the heart of the Wayne DuMond case… “Mr. DuMond’s case had become something of a celebrated cause among conservative activists…” There’s a story still not told in regular news media about what really happened during the Clinton years — about the simply insane Clinton hatred on the right, which was aided and abetted by a lot of seemingly respectable people. And Mike Huckabee, however gosh-aw-shucks-likeable he may seem now, was an accessory.
Obama Goes after Krugman (by Mark Thoma at Economist’s View)
Krugman has clearly gotten to the Barack Obama campaign, to the point where they have released an attack on him to try to defend their (indefensible) position on health care mandates. This is based upon misinterpreting what Krugman said, then acting like there's a contradiction in his statements.
NOT a good idea, Sen. Obama.—Caro
WaPoWATB (by digby)
So Deborah Howell clutches her pearls and takes another whiff 'o smelling salts. Once again the terrible rudeness of liberals who took issue with the fact that the Washington Post repeated slimy wingnut smears on their front page… Even if their critics were questioning their motives, it doesn't change the fact that the editors of the paper put rightwing oppo trash on the front page of the Washington Post with a halfhearted refutation. It's not like this is the first time this has happened… Rather than continuing to be reflexively defensive when these things come up, it's long past time for the Washington Post to do a little soul searching and recognize that an awful lot of people just don't trust them anymore. Maybe they should put a reporter on it.
Yes, but not Ceci Connolly, please.—Caro Lots more really good stuff atMakeThemAccountable.com.
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
