Holder to Appoint Prosecutor to Investigate CIA Terror Interrogations

[BSmith1068]

I suppose it was only a matter of time:

Cheney takes swipe at Obama over prosecutor

(CNN) — Former Vice President Dick Cheney is again taking aim at President Obama, issuing a statement Monday suggesting the administration's decision to name a prosecutor to investigate CIA interrogations under President Bush fuels "doubts about this administration's ability to be responsible for our nation's security."

"The people involved deserve our gratitude," Cheney said in the statement. "They do not deserve to be the targets of political investigations or prosecutions."

The former vice president also said documents released Monday prove enhanced interrogation techniques yieled valuable information that "provided the bulk of intelligence we gained about al Qaeda"

"This intelligence saved lives and prevented terrorist attacks," Cheney said. "These detainees also, according to the documents, played a role in nearly every capture of al Qaeda members and associates since 2002."

"The activities of the CIA in carrying out the policies of the Bush Administration were directly responsible for defeating all efforts by al Qaeda to launch further mass casualty attacks against the United States," he added.

Late Monday, the government released declassified CIA documents originally requested last May by Cheney. The former vice president had argued they would show enhanced interrogation techniques saved lives.

While analysis in the documents says information from detainee interrogations "helped thwart a number of al-Qaida plots" and "arrests…disrupted attack plans in progress," it remains unclear from the heavily redacted documents whether that information was obtained through the enhanced interrogation techniques Cheney defends.

The documents' release came the same day Attorney General Eric Holder asked federal prosecutor John Durham to examine whether CIA interrogations of suspected terrorists were illegal after the release of a 2004 CIA inspector general's report into further questionable interrogation techniques.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/08/25/cheney-takes-swipe-at-obama-over-prosecutor/

I wonder if he realizes how self-serving he sounds? Probably doesn't care even if he does.

 

[amadeus]

And so the deflection of a perfectly valid argument begins...

How exactly? The fact that we threatened the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks constitutes some kind of abhorrent abuse? Please... it's just laughable. You can't treat this like a police action, that's what led us to 9/11 the first time around.

Also, are we going to get the same outrage by the leftist once the Obama administration pulls a Scooter Libby and starts giving out detailed information about CIA operatives? What else are you going to do, try them in secret? Seems kind of like something the Obama people campaigned against... funny how our intelligence agents are getting treated worse than known detained al-Qaeda guys.

 

[I'm Cleo!]

How exactly? The fact that we threatened the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks constitutes some kind of abhorrent abuse? Please... it's just laughable. You can't treat this like a police action, that's what led us to 9/11 the first time around.

It's still illegal. There's no "mastermind of 9/11" exception in the statutes.

Also, are we going to get the same outrage by the leftist once the Obama administration pulls a Scooter Libby and starts giving out detailed information about CIA operatives? What else are you going to do, try them in secret? Seems kind of like something the Obama people campaigned against... funny how our intelligence agents are getting treated worse than known detained al-Qaeda guys.

Did you just imagine something that you think liberals might do, then forget it was imaginary and start arguing against it?

Cleo

 

[amadeus]

It's still illegal. There's no "mastermind of 9/11" exception in the statutes.

Nor is there any clause to protect insurgents captured on foreign battlefields... KSM is not a uniformed soldier fighting on behalf of a state, he is a member of a paramilitary organization or is at best a mercenary... he is entitled to nothing on our part and is receiving a great deal more than he deserves.

Did you just imagine something that you think liberals might do, then forget it was imaginary and start arguing against it?

Cleo

How else do you suppose CIA interrogators are going to be prosecuted? You can't do it in public, because you'll reveal classified information and you can't do it in private because people will notice that too, and it would be highly embarrassing for this government to start secretly tribunals for people... or is this just because the present administration has a boner for trying to nail Dick Cheney? Even Gov. Paterson of New York isn't blind enough to miss what's really going on here...

 

[I'm Cleo!]

Nor is there any clause to protect insurgents captured on foreign battlefields... KSM is not a uniformed soldier fighting on behalf of a state, he is a member of a paramilitary organization or is at best a mercenary... he is entitled to nothing on our part and is receiving a great deal more than he deserves.

Nope. See the U.S. Torture Statute, which does not make the distinction you've mentioned. It doesn't matter who he is -- U.S. agents are not allowed to torture people. See also Hamdan v. Rumsfeld for a thorough treatment of the larger argument you're attempting.

How else do you suppose CIA interrogators are going to be prosecuted? You can't do it in public, because you'll reveal classified information and you can't do it in private because people will notice that too, and it would be highly embarrassing for this government to start secretly tribunals for people... or is this just because the present administration has a boner for trying to nail Dick Cheney? Even Gov. Paterson of New York isn't blind enough to miss what's really going on here...

The evidence of what they did to detainees isn't secret because . . . they did it to detainees, who have no duty of confidentiality. The methods may have been classified as "secret" at some point, but once they revealed what those methods were by doing them to people, it's absurd to claim that they were still secret.

What would a prosecutor have to prove? That the defendant was acting under color of law -- easy, and doesn't require violating secrecy; that the victim was in the defendant's custody -- again easy, and doesn't require violating secrecy; and that the victim suffered torture -- which I think is not difficult to prove, and plainly doesn't require violating secrecy. There's no problem.

Cleo

 

[BSmith1068]

How exactly?

By changing the argument to be about how bad of a person KSM is and ignoring the fact that what was allegedly done to him was illegal. It doesn’t matter if the person on the other end of the torture was grandma or KSM. It is illegal to torture. Period.

I’d go on, but Cleo has already done a great job explaining my point.

 

[BSmith1068]

My, my. May we have touched a nerve here. Things are getting heated, which means someone must be on the right track:

Republican calls Holder decision 'bull____'

(CNN) – Peter King, the New York congressman likely to challenge Democratic Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand in 2010, is blasting the Obama administration's decision to investigate Bush-era CIA interrogations.

"It's bull____. It's disgraceful. You wonder which side they're on," the Long Island Republican told Politico Tuesday.

On Monday, Attorney Gen. Eric Holder asked federal prosecutor John Durham to examine whether CIA interrogations of suspected terrorists were illegal in the months and years after the September 11 attacks.

Holder said he decided to expand Durham's mandate after examining reports from the Justice Department's Office of Professional Responsibility as well as a classified version of the 2004 CIA inspector general's report into questionable interrogation techniques, among other documents."

King is the ranking Republican on the House Homeland Security Committee and a member of the Select Committee on Intelligence. His comments are significantly more critical than those of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky, who called the decision "poor and misguided."

The White House said Tuesday that President Obama supported Holder's decision.

"It's a total breach of faith, and either the president is intentionally caving to the left wing of his party or he's lost control of his administration," King said Tuesday.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/08/25/republican-calls-holder-decision-bullst/

Funny thing about faith. One could argue that the Republicans already breached the faith of the country. Faith in its values. Faith in its laws. Faith in its ability to overcome difficulties without compromising its values or laws...

 

[woody60707]

They never will be prosecuted as such, but Bush and Cheney are war criminals.

I didn't know congress declared war. What war is this?

 

[GenMarshall]

I didn't congress declared war.

Bush and his buddies tricked them with false information and intel.

 

[Cutlass]

I didn't congress declared war.

A DoW does not excuse acts which are criminal by US law, treaty, international law, or international agreements.

 

[woody60707]

Bush and his buddies tricked them with false information and intel.

You mean Iraq? I thought most of the ppl in getmo weren't from Iraq?

 

[MobBoss]

I'm confused as to as to why you would want legally worthless intelligence?

I'm confused by what you think is worthless?

 

[Holycannoli]

And so is adhering to the Constitution...

You mean like Congress passing health care reform? Unconstitutional. They have no power to do so, but of course certain clauses in the Constitution can be abused the way eminent domain sometimes is.

 

[Bill3000]

I'm confused by what you think is worthless?

Intelligence extracted from illegal methods of interrogation is legally worthless, of course. Fruit of the poisonous tree?

 

[FriendlyFire]

I'm confused by what you think is worthless?

Too bad the CIA destroyed the interrogation tapes.
along with Cheney deleting 3 Million emails.

 

[RalofTyr]

What? Non-Americans don't have rights?

 

[MobBoss]

Intelligence extracted from illegal methods of interrogation is legally worthless, of course. Fruit of the poisonous tree?

KSM gave us a lot of useful intelligence, not only in information on specific individuals, but also on their networks and how they communicate.

Not worthless at all.

 

[Miles Teg]

KSM gave us a lot of useful intelligence, not only in information on specific individuals, but also on their networks and how they communicate.

Not worthless at all.

Of course, we can't see any of that evidence because it's classified, and will be for the rest of the political careers of those involved. Convenient, especially since we know the man lied under torture.

 

[Bill3000]

KSM gave us a lot of useful intelligence, not only in information on specific individuals, but also on their networks and how they communicate

Mobby, if you looked at my post, I was talking about legally worthless - none of the information obtained through illegal interrogation methods can be used in a court of law. I'm not talking about the amount of information gained from illegal methods, which we can't see anyway because the information is classified.

 

[MobBoss]

Of course, we can't see any of that evidence because it's classified, and will be for the rest of the political careers of those involved. Convenient, especially since we know the man lied under torture.

We also know he gave us a lot of facts. Part of the job of intelligence is figuring all that out.

Mobby, if you looked at my post, I was talking about legally worthless - none of the information obtained through illegal interrogation methods can be used in a court of law.

Not all of it was given under the threat of torture, so I think your point remains to be seen in court.

I'm not talking about the amount of information gained from illegal methods, which we can't see anyway because the information is classified.

Your simply speculating about a lot of information you dont really have a clue about. Lets see what happens to KSM in the long run.