Good morning Christy. The photo is not showing up on a Mac using Firefox.

Hmmmmmm…it’s up for me on a Mac w/ safari. thanks, though…will let the tech crew know…

It’s a stunning photo. Just showed my son, who loved DC when he visited. I’m visiting there in September and he just told me I’m going to need to take a lot of disposable cameras. He said at least one just for the Capitol.
Speaking of sonny, he just replaced his dead Placasomus (?) with a new one. Warning to you Christy. They start out small and get Really Big.

The new goldfish is doing really well still. The water got a bit murky but is starting to clear up again as the tank begins to cycle. The filter seems to be doing it’s job pretty well thus far and, now that we’ve hidden the fish food, The Peanut has learned not to overfeed her new pal. *g*

How radical indeed. The Founders certainly were not perfect, but at least they had the fortitude to publicly question and argue wrongs and fight for a “more perfect union” instead of just accepting wrongs as “the way things are.” Can’t help but see Jefferson approving of the British tack, and frowning at our cowardice in the face of injustice perpetrated in our own names.

When I interned at the UN in Geneva, many staffers from different embassies would quietly confess to me that the true foundation of democracy was in fact the “fortitude to publicly question and argue wrongs and fight for a ‘more perfect union’ instead of just accepting wrongs as the ‘way things are.’ ” And to be able to do “that” without a ruling party putting someone away for wanting to question and argue the wrong(s) publicly, was the heart of democracy.

If flagerent violations of the law are allowed to go unconsequenced, then we have no rule of law in this country any more.

Team OBama needs tounderstand that there are bigger principles at stake than kumbya

It always has been, which is why the OLC memo questioning the 4th Amendment was so utterly and completely offensive on its face. For starters…

I do think that there are so many things they are dealing with at once that it’s impossible to keep all of them on the frontburner all the time. So I do understand a misstep here and there. But it’s up to all of us to push back when they have one — because otherwise things do slide by and I’m not going to let this slide if I can help it.

But we can’t know internally what DOJ folks may or may not be doing in their internal review until it’s made public, nor what prosecutors may or may not uncover and then go after. I just want to be certain that a voice for accountability and the rule of law speaks up for as long as it is needed. And I know you feel the same way…

The positions taken in these memos were not “mistakes” in legal analysis by unskilled lawyers working under pressure. They were elaborately crafted by capable lawyers

notice my bold

correct me if I’m wrong Christ but according to everything I’ve read from you, looseheadprop and Marcy, these yoo memos were NOT elaborately crafted, to call them pedestrian would be kind

is that so or were these notes well done.

also, I believe I’ve seen that yoo’s previous work was in fact quite capable…also correct?

I said this in the last thread, but it is more applicable here: Yoo and the others were tasked with answering the question “How can we do …?” when they should have been tasked with answering “Can we do …?” This inherehtly leads to faulty reasoning and bad decisions.

For some reason, I’m thinking of that quote…The unexamined life….
Of course we have to question. And seek retribution, not revenge. How to demand accountability? Also thinking about leading a horse to water, but then not being able to make it drink.
Thank you to Christy for keeping the questions on the table.
May I also say, I’m saddened by the bad rap “kumbaya” has received of late. No offense meant to LHP.

They were not well done in terms of reasoning or intellectual honesty, but that doesn’t mean they were not elaborately crafted to try and disguise the fact that they were being dishonest. For a lay person who had no knowledge of Youngstown or the various precedents limiting presidential power or the constitution or the Bill of Rights, I suppose some of that dreck might fly. But for other lawyers or folks knowledgeable about history and legal precedents and constitutional checks and balances? Not so much.

But they apparently only needed to seem good enough to provide cover for acts that were already ongoing, according to what we know at this point — and that’s what they did. Shameful doesn’t begin to cover things…

Exactly so!

And to take that a bit further, when you are a lawyer, you are sometimes asked to give an opinion for a client lining out the rationale for being able to lay claim to a piece of property or a particular stance in a contract dispute, say, for insurance purposes or some other reason where you give only a best case scenario review. SOmetimes you do that sort of piece as prep for litigation and have another attorney poke holes into it with a opposing memo so you see strengths and weaknesses for a particular matter.

But that is not what OLC is supposed to do — they interpret the law as it stands, not try to warp the law into the particular stance they want it to be. This was wrong on so many levels, not the least of which because it was a perversion of what their very important role was supposed to be as a stop-gap against tyrannical advances. They utterly failed in that. On purpose.

And that is incredibly shameful all by itself.

If the truth, the whole truth, is not what one is willing to acknowledge, then one must craft Something.
Sorta like saying I’ll take it to the lord in prayer and then saying, Oh Look, God said I was right all along. Talk about smoke-filled back rooms. /s

christy, I don’t know if you’ve seen this, notice my bold;

This was not reckless,” Yoo wrote in the Wall Street Journal about his work. “It was prudent and responsible.”

Not according to a still classified report by a Justice Department watchdog who reviewed Yoo’s work.

An investigation by H. Marshall Jarrett, head of the Justice Department’s Office of Professional Responsibility, reached “damning” conclusions about numerous cases of “misconduct” in the advice from Yoo and other OLC lawyers in the Bush administration gave the White House, according to legal sources familiar with the report’s contents.

The report will likely recommend that state bar association further review Yoo’s legal work and decide whether to take disciplinary action against him, which could include disbarment, sources said.

if there is any method for lawyers to influence a decision of this magnitude, now is the time to give it a go

yoo must be discredited, that’s fine but his decisions must not carry any weight what so ever

they can always be referenced no matter what opinions are formed around them, they already carry the weight of presidential deferance…that is not acceptable

they are rendered moot only by disbarring yoo for those decisions and if the law profession can do anything at all influencing he decisions that arise from that report, I hope they accept that charge

Yes, and sometimes folks are willing to sell too much of their integrity to get to be the person who crafts something like that. Ugh.

From a KPFK interview of John Dean yesterday, I learned that Yoo had been publishing his radical views in unrefereed law journals long before he joined the Bush Administration. So, apparently, it wasn’t as though he crafted his post-9/11 opinions simply to please his bosses. Rather, he loves despotism, and they were shopping for such opinions when they hired him.

I forgot the link

Campaign Finance Reform. Now, please.

Also per the NYT:

Mr. Richman said that would be unlikely for Mr. Yoo, who had pushed an aggressive theory of presidential power long before the administration recruited him.

“The selection of Yoo was putting in place someone where you sort of had an idea what he would say,” Mr. Richman said. “Most academics are in the center of most things, but there are some outliers. And he was an outlier.”

Whether the memos were well reasoned or not, the fact is that the Obama administration has not repudiated them. In fact the evidence to date is that Obama = Bush. Obama’s administration has invoked the State Secrets argument to keep people out of court. Obama’s administration has refused to repudiate rendition. Obama’s administration has not given up on the ‘indefinite holding’ of those that are rightly or wrongly accused of being terrorists.

We worked and voted for a restoration of American Justice under the principle of no man is above the law. The Obama administration has choosen to side with the Bush administration on the prinicple that the Executive is the Law. This will not stand. We cannot let this stand and regain our Civil Liberties in a nation of Law not men.

It is rapidly comming to a time when the Obama administration will have forfited any sense of ligitimacy if they continue on the current path. We called for the impeachment of the last administration to act this way. How long will we keep quiet when one of our own does the same criminal assaults on the Constitution?

“A slap on the wrist is not nearly enough”…then where would you slap them?

Do question Yoo was a deliberate selection — his views matched up with Cheney and Addington’s, as did those of Haynes at DOD who was also a deliberate choice. Jane Mayer’s piece on Addington a couple of years back made that very clear, I think, too.

The two repudiation memos from the last months of the Bush administration already repudiated some of the more egregious crapola. Beyond that, though, Holder has repudiated the torture provisions several times in Congressional hearings publicly, as well as has Dawn Johnson who helms OLC currently — she was just approved recently and is working her way through what needs to be done in terms of written memoranda from what I’ve heard.

It was the Obama administration the interviened in California last week on the side of Yoo. It seems to me that this is the current pivit point.

Ooops — I meant “NO questions.” Need more coffee. *G*

It’s a pivot point, but not the only one — which is why I’m doing a bit of pushback today. Eh?

OT: I just now ran across this:

Ian Welsh

Website:
http://firedoglake.com/author/28/
About Me:
Ian Welsh was the Managing Editor of FireDogLake and the Agonist.

So, what’s Ian up to now?

He did the best economic commentary I’ve ever seen.

He’s been on vacation the last couple of weeks and will be back writing about the economy and other stuff soon.

Christy, I agree. We all have to push back when we see ANY government acting in bad faith or with bad jugement. Obama’s administration has done and I hope will do many good things. Where it is failing at the moment, in my judgement, is on the central issue of What is American Justice. How does the Constitution get interpreted and who can reballance the checks and ballances.

Thanks. Excellent news.

The world is spinning very quickly into the future. I swear, days are no longer even 20 hours long. There has been a quickening.

If we are going to meaningfully address the lawlessness in the Bush Administation and hold people accountable, we have to move quickly. The rabbit hole is just up ahead.

Uh-ho – MSNBC.com:

BREAKING NEWS: Pentagon says Chinese ships harassed unarmed U.S. Navy ship, issues protest

.
It might be instructive to re-read the Declaration of Independence in light of recent events. That indictment of King George III would serve well in drafting a bill on similarly actionable actions taken by our Unitary Executive, Imperial Presidents Dubya & Big O. It’s surprisingly on point, even after 233 years. Helluva a lawyer, that Jefferson. Not a bad architect, either.
.

My point – exactly.

This blog is so on target. And looking at that gorgeous photo gave me this analogy. Suppose these lawyers were the equivalent of the army corps of engineers. They would have caused a flood – and that monument would no longer be visible.

This is what they’ve done to the law.

Complete, total, self-absorbed OT. Pups, brother Garry (adult with mental retardation which is what causes me to flame about expressions like “retard” and “Repuglitard”) was admitted to the hospital again last night. Third time in a month. On the heels of gastro a couple of weeks after David died. I could use pup vibes to pump me up and for Garry’s recovery. Again. It’s been kinda like “Groundhog Day” here lately.

A little more than a slap, Addington is having trouble finding a job.

I think you’re too kind. Your statement implies that they sat back and let all this happen through their inaction, when, in fact, they were active participants in the events that led to the flooding.

That was my point. If the army corps of engineers engineered a flood… They can do it!

I’ve recently become fixated on the question: When will this happen again? Because from what I saw during the Bush years and am seeing now, there seems to be absolutely no mechinism that would stop the very same thing from happening again as soon as an unprincipled President takes office. That Presidents haven’t issued secret executive orders and had secret legal rulings issued that allowed them to do illegal things seems to me, more and more, simply a matter that we’ve had people in the position before who had sufficient honor and integrity not do do it, not because there is any inherent physical prohibition for them doing it. A supine and venal Congress and a judiciary that seems infatuated with the executive’s every claim of “state secrets” have not only been unable to stop this; they’ve seemingly been willing participants.

I remember learning all about checks and balances in high school civics and in the various constitution courses I took over the years, and I remember everyone congratulating themselves when Nixon was forced to resign following Watergate and saying, “See, the system worked!” Well, this time the system clearly DID NOT work. And it is continuing to be a catastrophic failure when the application of U.S. and international law to the subject of human rights and crimes against humanity are concerned.

With the large number of unprincipled crew of political hacks in office now, whose main objectives seem to be preserving their political parties’ power, I really fear for constitutional government going forward. I had hoped, constitutional lawyer and professor that he was, Obama would understand how important it is to make sure that no one in the U.S. really is above the law, ESPECIALLY when it comes to crimes against humanity.

I’m still willing to cut him a bit of slack, but that willingness is shrinking by the day because I haven’t seen any indications at all that his administration even gets why anyone would be upset that people in U.S. custody were tortured, some to death.

koch industry (the actual puppet masters of the entire right wing including the neo cons and the pnac) will find a job for him in one of their think tanks

I get the feeling that Obama is leaving certain parts of the imperial presidency in place because he’s not sure how far he’s going to have to go to implement his plans for rearranging the furniture in this country.

Health care for everyone isn’t going to come without a serious fight. You see how much money AIG has stolen from us recently? That’s just one insurance company. What we need in order to fix health care to keep costs from bankrupting this country is to remove every insurance company from the equation and there will be much weeping and gnashing of teeth if that is attempted.

There’s also the likelihood of more insidious resistance from the wing nut inspired militia nuts, the people who are stealing fertilizer and stockpiling weapons. Make no mistake about it, all this talk from Hannity and Limbaugh about armed resistance is being taken seriously by the many still left in this country who think it’s an abomination that black people are living in the big house as anything but mere servants.

Obama might need the more onerous instruments and powers that were put on the books by Bush to put down any such movements. I’m specifically thinking of the national security/homeland security directive that gives the president the authority to use whatever force necessary in the event of a number of specific triggering events which would be included in some of the resistance I think he’s going to bwe confronted with.

Going back to Crane Brinton’s work on revolutions, moderates have a tendency to lose out to extremists because they feel they aren’t supposed to use the same tactics or to follow the same procedures extremists use. The GOP has morphed into a radical party with an agenda that includes making this country a fascist nation under one party rule. Anything Obama has to do in order to forestall that, including using the tools put in place by the little emperor we just got rid of, is fine with me if it results in a more equitable society for those in this country who are losing their places in society and slipping into homelessness, anxiety, joblessness, lack of insurance and other poverty-induced situations.

Just can’t resist posting this link in response. (YouTube)

RAMA, I cosigned a similar concern you voiced on a thread at EW. I cosign again. Flaws in the Constitution have been exposed, in my view. Or maybe you could say one unified flaw – the character of the president. Our whole system seems to be riding on whether we have another woefully flawed president bent on authoritarian rule. It worries the heck out of me! Which is exactly why I am convinced we must investigate and hold accountable every one of these people at the top who assisted in undermining our whole system of govt.

Ok. Now I’ll try to be quiet. But this issue has me so steamed!

Oh barbara, I’m so sorry you all are going through this again. Poor fella — he’s really had a rough month of it, and so have you. Big, gentle hugs to both of you — and lots of good thoughts and prayers for a speedy recovery and a hospital free stretch of months ahead.

It’s not just flaws in presidential character, but concomitant flaws in Congressional character which subordinated adherence to the law and their oath to uphold the Constitution way back in line behind political advantage and being brought to heel by threats of campaign donation withdrawal without obeying orders from the WH.

Shameful doesn’t begin to describe the cowardice of so many the last few years, and the avarice and lust for power of so many others.

Oh, and no need to be quite — steam away. *G*

One reason over the past decades the office of the President has grown in power is TV.
It lends itself to covering a President, but is incapable of covering Congress. It is all about the pictures.

((((Barbara and Garry))))

Amen! &^%%#$#@#$%* There!

Doesn’t fix anything. But I feel better. Thanks!

Good Morning Christy and Puppies.

Some of these darling folks like Yoo make it dreadfully hard for me to maintain my determination to be a pacifist soul.
My inner demons say, slap that sucker around somethin’ fierce,
And Gonzo and Addington can’t find a job?
Gee. Um. Thank dog! I wouldn’t let them take out my garbage.

No one ever outlawed the right for a pacifist to be cranky once in awhile, as I recall. Well then…

Ah yes. You’re so eloquent!.. What you said. Amen indeed, thrice-fold! ;->

(((Christy))) I haven’t read thoroughly upthread, but I wonder and worry.

I hope your lil’ Peanut’s feeling better.

I’m imagining her new goldfish, patting his tummy thinking he’s found a dandy home, as long as the filter keeps working, heh.

In this Counterpunch article, weekend edition, 02/20-22/2009, article by Marjorie Cohn, President of National Lawyers Guild, entitled

And their lawyers, too!
War Criminals Must Be Prosecuted

snip>

When the United States ratified the Convention Against Torture, we promised to extradite or prosecute those who commit, or are complicit in the commission, of torture. We have two federal criminal statutes for torture prosecutions – the Torture Statute and the War Crimes Act (torture is considered a war crime under U.S. law). The Torture Convention is unequivocal: nothing, including a state of war, can be invoked as a justification for torture.

Yoo redefined torture much more narrowly than U.S. law provides, and counseled the White House that it could evade prosecution under the War Crimes Act by claiming self-defense or necessity. Yoo knew or should have known of the Torture Convention’s absolute prohibition of torture.

There is precedent for holding lawyers criminally liable for giving legally erroneous advice that resulted in great physical or mental harm or death. In U.S. v. Altstoetter, Nazi lawyers were convicted of war crimes and crimes against humanity for advising Hitler on how to “legally” disappear political suspects to special detention camps.

IANAL, but I’d put my money on Ms. Cohn being right on this. Good article, worth reading all of it.

(((Barbara and Barry)))

My view is: feel free to share your troubles here OT; we’re kindred souls here, even the scruffiest pups (well, mostly) and KSs need each other. Who knows, your example of strength and caring under such pressure may be a guiding light to others facing similar adversities.

There is great strength and comfort in knowing that you have done all that one human can do and the pillars of your own principles have stood the test and remain undamaged.

Hold on, Barbara, you’re one of the precious people

Yes, to your concern; ditching our “absolutist monarchy” (or as it is currently called, faddishly, the “unitary executive”) is our greatest task. (All while trying to survive the aftermath of economic war with Asia.)

She’s feeling a little better today — home with me from school and still running a fever, but it’s a lower one so we’re on the mend. Thank goodness for momma’s sake. This ick has been going around school and I was hoping she’d fought it off but, alas…

btw, thanks for all the diggs gang!

((Barbara))
((Barry))
Good Vibes and Healing White Light coming from my heart to both of you.
Yes, I agree that you may and should post your concerns and updates here.
I believe we have a lot of lurkers who not only will be lifted up by your patience but who will also send good vibes your way.

There are so many bugs going around. I just recovered from totally toxic sinuses.

I can’t understand how things are supposedly getting worse since the Obama election.

A freed Guantanamo prisoner has said conditions at the US detention camp in Cuba have worsened since President Barack Obama was elected, claiming guards wanted to “take their last revenge”.

It’s not right. And yes, some of us do need to have a British hissy fit a la Glenn Greenwald.

Thanks for this post, Christy. This is just my core issue with the last eight years of US History. The lawlessness. Lack of respect for the rule of law.

“[w]herever Law ends, Tyranny begins.”

This will have to replace “Even Bush deserves a fair trial” as my favorite tee shirt slogan.

It would make for an excellent t-shirt slogan, wouldn’t it? I know I’d wear one…

IANAL so please take the following post as a discussion catalyst re: FTCA & Evidentiary Rules 808(3) re: trustworthiness. Real lawyers please use it as grist for the mill. I do think it provides an interesting take on how to order (regard) each of the main players and to determine whether or not Yoo did his job.

I concur w cite at 56 (Cohn article @ Counterpunch). It’s so blatantly obvious that Yoo did not make his findings inclusive of his oath to uphold the Constitution, which would have compelled his duty to report, you know, every other holding by courts national and international, specifically: JusCogens, truths held to be self-evident and all that. If he had, there’s no way he could have penned what he did.

In order to cut through the chicken-egg runaround about the players and who did what based on who did what, let’s work backwards from the Rules of Evidence, e.g., 1) Gov’t, 2) Yoo as compiler, 3) those who acted on compilation of “evidence.” The Gov’t is on the hook for how Yoo did (or did not do) his job. His failure in duty to report is evidence of lack of trustworthiness. The Gov’t never should have taken his advice.

Again, that might be a creative reading of 803(8), but to me, there has to be a way to nail down the obvious for all of these cases, once and for all.

Yoo’s scope of duties was to compile data, Evidence, that would either justify or not justify other’s actions.
He failed at his job.

Is this a useful? Maybe kick it around at live chat @ 3PM EST. I’d be interested to hear…

Summary:
Rule 803(8) of the Federal Rules of Evidence is an exception to the hearsay rule for records, including data compilations, of agencies setting forth the activities of the office or agency or matters observed pursuant to duty imposed by law as to which matters it has a duty to report. In civil cases, this includes factual findings resulting from an investigation made pursuant to authority granted by law, absent evidence of lack of trustworthiness.

Rule cite:

Rule 803(8) of the Federal Rules of Evidence is an exception to the hearsay rule for records, including data compilations, of agencies setting forth the activities of the office or agency or matters observed pursuant to duty imposed by law as to which matters it has a duty to report. In civil cases, this includes factual findings resulting from an investigation made pursuant to authority granted by law, absent evidence of lack of trustworthiness.

I, too, have read that political idealogues are exploiting not only the think tank strategy, but the non edited and non reviewed “Law Reviews” of various institutions to give radical ideas the cover of some kind of institutional legitimacy. So one could submit a transcript of one of Rush Limbaugh’s shows and it would be published as a serious treatise of international relations and domestic policy. Such tripe. This then enables political operatives to pick it up and intimidate the madding crowd who have to make do with a crappy underfunded education.

Christy since I was banned at the mother ship over a year ago for bringing up the I/P conflict and not backing down to a moderator.

Here are my questions for you Salon.

Jamel,
1. There were three investigations into false pre -war intelligence Silberman/Robb, Phase I and Phase II of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. Yet not one person, not one person has been held accountable for that false pre-war intelligence .

Maybe I missed something? Was someone held accountable for those Niger Documents?

Why has the false pre-war intelligence and the individuals who created, cherry picked and disseminated this false intelligence been swept under the rug by the Obama administration, congress and the so called progressive blogosphere?

P.S. to 65 imvho, the Rules of Evidence provide a de facto outline for Yoo’s job description.

Chat with ACLU’s Jameel Jaffer has begun for folks who are interested…