The Washington Post reports today that President Obama's advisors are planning to recommend that the administration reverse its decision to try the September 11 suspects in federal court and instead opt for military commissions. That's more than just disappointing, given the overwhelming consensus of military and legal experts that civilian courts are more effective for prosecuting terrorists. If the president were to heed that advice, it would also be astonishingly bad politics.
Senator Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) likes to tout his experience as a former military lawyer. Graham apparently thinks this makes him sound more convincing when he goes around advocating military trials for all suspected terrorists, as he's been doing lately. Graham's now trying to get that idea signed into law in a bill he's introduced in the Senate. A similar provision is likely headed to a vote today in the House of Representatives.
Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, 11/18/09 - Legal proceedings, such as they are, rumbled to life again today at Guantanamo Bay. Pre-trial issues in the case of Mohammed Kamin, an Afghan man who was captured by the U.S. in Afghanistan in 2003, were heard in a military commission courtroom on a small hill a few miles away from where the more than 200 detainees left at Guantanamo are housed.
Attorney General Eric Holder is addressing a war crime without addressing the wars, and is focusing on the lowest ranking participants in that crime without addressing its status as official policy established by higher ups and openly confessed to by a former president and vice president. This is bad applism, the same approach that has held a handful of recruits responsible for Abu Ghraib, claiming to thereby remove bad apples from a good system. But Congress' and the public's approach to the horrors of the past eight years is driven by our own bad applism, by our belief that the departure of Bush and Cheney in itself significantly repaired a system of government that is rotten to the core.
Nationally Renowned Scholars, Writers, Artists, and Advocates Urge Attorney General Holder to Uphold the Rule of Law and Appoint Prosecutor to Investigate Allegations of Torture and Other Serious Crimes
SALT LAKE CITY - Several prominent Americans, including authors, artists, legal experts, and renowned voices of conscience, today transmitted a letter to U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder urging the appointment of a prosecutor to investigate allegations of torture and other violations of human rights and civil liberties committed by former government officials and others. The signatories to the letter are:
One of the most troubling trends that foster prosecutorial misconduct is the failure of state bar and disciplinary agencies to take action against prosecutors who violate their ethical obligations.
Earlier this year, Attorney General Eric Holder and the Department of Justice (DOJ) took swift and almost unprecedented action after uncovering egregious prosecutorial misconduct in the case against Alaska Senator Ted Stevens. Holder promptly dismissed all charges against the Senator, and federal judge Emmet Sullivan ordered an independent, criminal investigation of the prosecutors responsible for intentionally failing to turn over important, exculpatory evidence to the defense. The DOJ has also promised an investigation through the Office of Professional Responsibility. The question now is whether these particular prosecutors will ever be held accountable.
In probably the most disturbing testimony to hit Capitol Hill since Attorney General Eric Holder appeared before the House Judiciary Committee in May and refused to rule out lawless detention or to agree that government officials can sometimes be prosecuted for their crimes, on Wednesday Holder appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee and, among much else, refused five times to agree that warrantless spying is illegal and unconstitutional. I spoke to Holder in April, and he assured me that I would be proud of my country. When?
While the United States’ legal system is founded on grand ideals like all humans being equal, the law is rarely as benevolent or efficient in practice, especially for immigrants. Different classes of people receive different consideration, and the subsequent disparities are glaringly evident in the lives of immigrants. This week’s Wire focuses on immigration-related legal battles, including unconstitutional raids by Immigrations Customs and Enforcement (ICE) and the rights to have competent representation in a court of law.
Dr. George Tiller, one of the few physicians in the country who performed second and third trimester abortions, was fatally shot in church on Sunday. It seems that Tiller was marked for death because of his work. The man charged with murdering Tiller, 51-year-old Scott Roeder, has a 20-year history of anti-choice and anti-government extremism.
I understand that the attorney general is different from every other cabinet officer. Though I am a part of the president's team, I am not a part of the president's team in the way that any other cabinet officer is. I have a special and unique responsibility. There has to be a distance between me and the president. The president-elect said when he nominated me that he recognized that, that the attorney general was different from other cabinet officers. I think if you look at my record, if you look at my career and the decisions that I have made, I have shown that I have the ability and, frankly, the guts to be independent of people who have put me in positions.
How do we square this statement with the President's announcement that those who waterboarded terrorism suspects, among other torture techniques, would not be prosecuted? By issuing such a statement it appears President Obama is the "legal decider" and he has decided, in explicitly political terms, that "nothing will be gained by spending our time and energy laying blame for the past."
I will not describe what could be gained as others have done an eloquent job but I would like to point out that seeking justice for wrongly injured people is not "retribution" as the President put it.
Holder, for his part, appears to be a good foot soldier for Obama. He says it wouldn't be fair to prosecute agents if they were following DOJ advice even if that advice, from the Ashcroft-Gonzalez Justice Department, was flawed. I can understand that logic even if I don't like it but Holder goes a step further: he promises to provide free legal counsel to anyone accused and
To the extent permissible under federal law, the government will also indemnify any employee for any monetary judgment or penalty ultimately imposed against him for such conduct and will provide representation in congressional investigations.
Today Rahm Emanuel, acting as spokesman for the legal decider in Chief, says of torture-policy devisers:
he [Obama] believes that they were -- should not be prosecuted either.
Again, shouldn't this be an independent legal decision based on whether or not laws were broken? Here is Holder's mission statement from the DOJ website:
To enforce the law and defend the interests of the United States according to the law.........to seek just punishment for those guilty of unlawful behavior; and to ensure fair and impartial administration of justice for all Americans.
Maybe that last part is the key; since most of the tortured weren't Americans we apparently don't need to worry about "fair and impartial administration of justice."
Inside, more from Holder's confirmation hearing regarding his responsibilities as Attorney General and a report from Newsweek on the chance Holder may still show some independence from the Office of the President.
(This is an important perspective on the Stevens case dismissal. Because there are virtually no checks against it, prosecutorial misconduct is a de facto built-in part of criminal "justice" system. - promoted by Paul Rosenberg)
This week, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder dismissed the case against former Senator Ted Stevens of Alaska. Citing prosecutorial misconduct as the primary reason, the Justice Department determined that the fairness of the trial had been too damaged by government misconduct to proceed further. Holder stated that, "[a]fter careful review, I have concluded that certain information should have been provided to the defense for use at trial," and that "it is in the interest of justice to dismiss the indictment and not proceed with a new trial." Holder's decision represents a critical first step in addressing a growing nationwide problem of prosecutors abusing their power in order to secure convictions.
The Stevens case had been marred by prosecutorial misconduct from the outset. Judge Emmett Sullivan repeatedly criticized prosecutors for failing to follow orders to provide evidence to the defense. In addition, prosecutorial misconduct at trial led Judge Sullivan to hold one of the prosecutors in contempt, and at one point instruct the jury to disregard some evidence presented by the prosecution. Delays in the case persisted in order to allow the court to deal with additional allegations of misconduct. In February, after replacing the original trial team, new prosecutors discovered even more evidence that should have been turned over to the defense. That prompted Holder to dismiss the charges against Stevens and order an internal review of the offending prosecutors.
isn't the point that whatever he did, whether misdemeanor or felony or a slap on the wrist subject, it's almost beside the point when there's misconduct like this in a democratic system of justice? There's no choice, right? You don't withhold evidence from the defense, no matter what."
DAngelus is certainly right that there's more to the issue than just the prosecutorial misconduct. There is still the matter of Stevens being a crook. But what's the bigger issue here, particularly given the scope of prosecutorial misconduct over the last 8 years?
"There seems to be substantial evidence of prosecutorial and other misconduct in my case, that would dwarf the allegations in the Stevens case," the former Alabama governor told TPMmuckraker in an interview moments ago....
And, as he has before, Siegelman framed his case as part of a wider effort to get to truth about politicization of the Justice Department during the Bush years. "Who at the Department of Justice abused their power, and why?" he asked. "Was Karl Rove directing the show?"
Even bigger than the issue of prosecutorial misconduct, however, is the over-arching issue of restoring the rule of law. As in holding Bush Administration officials accountable for torture, and other criminal policies.
This week, the healthcare reform debate churned on behind the scenes as the economic crisis and treasury secretary Geithner's latest bank rescue plan dominated the news cycle. Meanwhile Democrats weighed various strategies to advance healthcare reform even without a filibuster-proof majority in the senate. Drug policy made headlines this week. Attorney General Eric Holder expanded upon the administration's new found tolerance towards states that permit medical marijuana. The morning after pill will soon be available over-the-counter to 17-year-olds nationwide, thanks to a ruling by a New York federal judge.
Democrats in Congress respected former Attorney General Michael Mukasey beyond any measure he appeared to have earned, and to the extent of fully expecting him to perform his duties even in the most difficult circumstances. In contrast, the same Congress members do not believe Attorney General Eric Holder is up to the job.
"Though this nation has proudly thought of itself as an ethnic melting pot in things racial, we have always been, and we, I believe, continue to be, in too many ways, essentially a nation of cowards." Eric Holder, Attorney-General of the United States.
"Though this nation has proudly thought of itself as an ethnic melting pot in things racial, we have always been, and we, I believe, continue to be, in too many ways, essentially a nation of cowards." Eric Holder, Attorney-General of the United States.
"Though this nation has proudly thought of itself as an ethnic melting pot in things racial, we have always been, and we, I believe, continue to be, in too many ways, essentially a nation of cowards." Eric Holder, Attorney-General of the United States.
The history of Black Americans is a glorious one. It is a chronicle filled with much triumph, as well as many trials and tribulations. Yet, many debate whether a month that commemorates people, pitch in color, defies reason. Do the days dedicated to the acknowledgement of African American achievements divide us as a nation? The answer, some say is a complex one. Consider the thoughts of Columnist, Clarence Page of The Chicago Tribune. Is Black History Month already history? Well, it depends. Another view comes from a fellow Journalist and contributor to The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Cynthia Tucker. She is more emphatic in her evaluation. Ms Tucker writes; Month robs blacks of part in U.S. history, It seems the subject, Black History Month, segregates opinions.
Alberto Gonzalez is disturbed over Eric Holder's unambiguous confirmation hearing statement: "Waterboarding is torture." NPR interviewed Gonzalez and you can find a summary at The Swamp. I've annotated it here with notes from inside Alberto's head:
Gonzales, in an interview airing on National Public Radio's Tell Me More today, voiced his concern about "Making a blanket pronouncement like that.'' He noted "the effect it may have... on the morale and the dedication of intelligence officials and lawyers throughout the administration."
Voice Inside Alberto's Head (VIAH): It's hurting my morale. Plus, I can't get a job as it is.
"My reaction was very similar to General Mukasey's reaction, which was concern about making a pronouncement like that,'' Gonzales said, pointing to the "concern that would arise in the minds of intelligence officials and lawyers at the department, who all acted in good faith, working as hard as they can under very difficult circumstances, to give advice and make decisions to protect our country...
VIAH: It was those intelligence officers and lawyers I worked with who wanted to do all those bad things, not me.
"I don't know whether or not, in making that statement, Mr. Holder had access to all of the opinions, all of the underlying documentation supporting the opinions'' that the Justice Department had issued on the question, he said - noting also "the threat that existed at the time these opinions were offered, and the opinions of the intelligence officials about their belief in a particular detainee having very important, valuable intelligence information that might save American lives.''
VIAH: There was a ticking time bomb you see, and we had "opinions" that torture was okay. W had opinions, Rummy had opinions. John Yoo had some really great opinions.
On the question of prosecuting officers who employed any of the "extreme tactics'' that the Bush administration has acknowledged, without admitting to any "torture'' of detainees: "I don't think that there's going to be a prosecution, quite frankly.'' Gonzales said. "Because again, these activities.... They were authorized, they were supported by legal opinions at the Department of Justice.''
VIAH. Duh! You people are so stupid. We said we could torture people, don't you get that? We gave ourselves the authority so we had the authority. I could poke you in the eyes right now because I still have the authority to do that. John Yoo said so.
At the progressive media summit, Senate Armed Services Chair Carl Levin just said that "there needs to be an accounting of torture in this country." He was adamant that torture was a policy initiated at the highest levels of the Bush administration, and pointed the assembled media to a report on his website indicating as much. I cannot find this report on either the Armed Services website at this time, or on Levin's Senate page. If anyone else can find it, please post a link in the comments. Edit (Dan): Here it is.
Additionally, Levin insisted that he would continue his investigation on torture policies within the Department of Defense until it is completed. He urged the Senate Intelligence committee to do the same for torture policies initiated by the CIA. Further, Senator Levin indicated that he had urged Attorney General nominee Eric Holder to spend resources in the Department of Justice to finish the investigation.
Earlier, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid had indicated that he would provide all Senate committees with additional resources (money and staff) so that, among other things, investigations of the sort Levin was engaged in could be expanded and completed.
Finally, Senator Levin insisted that Eric Holder would be confirmed as Attorney General despite today's delay tactics by Arlen Specter. Also, while I did not have a chance to ask Senator Levin if he intended to introduce legislation to mirror House Judiciary Chair Conyers's bill on a commission to investigate Bush administration crimes, I should have a chance to do so later today. Stay tuned.
First let me say that we want Eric Holder confirmed as Attorney General. We want him confirmed because of statements like this...
Washington, D.C. -- Eric H. Holder Jr., Deputy Attorney General during the Clinton administration, asserted in a speech to the American Constitution Society (ACS) that the United States must reverse "the disastrous course" set by the Bush administration in the struggle against terrorism by closing the detention center at Guantanamo Bay, declaring without qualification that the U.S. does not torture people, ending the practice of transferring individuals involuntarily to countries that engage in torture and ceasing warrantless domestic surveillance.
"Our needlessly abusive and unlawful practices in the 'War on Terror' have diminished our standing in the world community and made us less, rather than more, safe," Holder told a packed room at the ACS 2008 Convention on Friday evening. "For the sake of our safety and security, and because it is the right thing to do, the next president must move immediately to reclaim America's standing in the world as a nation that cherishes and protects individual freedom and basic human rights."
We want the man who said those words to be our next Attorney General. Because in truth and in a logical world the best way, perhaps the only way, to "reclaim America's standing in the world as a nation that cherishes and protects individual freedom and basic human rights".....is to investigate and then prosecute those who have criminally destroyed that standing. They destroyed it by using torture.
Don't expect me to or even ask me to tell you why you should sign the petition.
You already know why you should sign the petition. You don't need me or anyone else to tell you why you should sign the petition.
Click the Badge to read and sign the Formal Petition to Attorney General-Designate Eric Holder to appoint a Special Prosecutor to investigate and prosecute any and all government officials who have participated in War Crimes.
Click "Get Badge" to get the html code and post the badge on your blog or website so other people can find and sign the petition too.
There is no more debate on these matters. The only people who want to continue debating these matters are war criminals who want to be let off the hook and supporters of letting war criminals off the hook.
Signing the petition drafted by budhydharma and Docudharma is not in defiance of our President-Elect Obama, but rather a sign of support for the difficult times that he and Holder will face when performing their clear constitutional duties.
As President, Obama will have the constitutional duty to faithfully execute our laws.
The constitutional oath of office will require President Obama to faithfully execute the office of President and preserve, protect and defend our Constitution. Our constitution also requires that our presidents "shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed." The principle of the rule of law is partially based on this Faithfully Execute clause which requires our President to comply with laws, our Constitution and treaties because our Constitution established a government of laws, not of men and women.
The Geneva Convention is one of the laws which must be faithfully executed.
Our constitution mandates that treaties are one of the laws that the President must faithfully execute. Moreover, treaties are recognized as one of our supreme laws of the land alongside our Constitution and federal laws. For over 200 years, the federal courts have reaffirmed that our President is bound by the laws of war, which include conventions. In fact, both Hamdi v. Rumsfeld (2004) and Hamdan v. Rumsfeld (2006)addressed issues of whether the US government was violating the terms of the 1949 Geneva Convention. Yet, some will whine that it is partisan to not exempt Bush from 200 years of precedent that governed presidents from both parties.
The Geneva Convention imposes a duty to prosecute former presidents who committed war crimes.
You already have your own reasons why you should sign the petition.
All the reasons that built up, piled one on top of the other for that past eight years as these criminals hijacked the country, dismantled the constitution and the rule of law, made their criminal friends fabulously wealthy, were directly responsible for the deaths of more than a million Iraqis in an illegal and immoral invasion and occupation, destroyed the global economy, wrecked America's reputation around the world, and called you a traitor when you cried foul and set up schemes to spy on you and intimidate you into silence.
And tortured people in your name. Tortured people. In your name. Tortured people with the blackest, most heinous and most evil torture methods known to humanity. Tortured people with methods that America has pressed war criminal charges against other countries citizens for using. Tortured people with the most sadistic and evil methods the Spanish Inquisition and more recently the Khmer Rouge made a regular habit of using as an oppression tool. Tortured people with methods that have been universally condemned and outlawed by virtually every country and society on earth.
You already know. You already know all of your own reasons why you should sign the petition.
Attorney General Eric Holder during his 
There is no more debate on these matters. The only people who want to continue debating these matters are war criminals who want to be let off the hook and supporters of letting war criminals off the hook.
