Bush Joins Bid to Block Senate Release of CIA Torture Report
Source: Bloomberg
By Chris Strohm Dec 8, 2014 2:38 PM ET
Current and past U.S. officials, including former President George W. Bush, have mounted a campaign to try to block the release tomorrow of a Senate report detailing harsh interrogation tactics previously used by the CIA on suspected terrorists.
The opposition comes as Democrats on the Senate intelligence committee plan to release an executive summary of the 6,200-page report, which found the CIA used extreme interrogation methods at secret prisons more often than legally authorized and failed to disclose all the activities to lawmakers and other officials.
Despite warnings of retaliation abroad against Americans from those opposed to making the report public, the Obama administration supports its release, White House spokesman Josh Earnest said today.
The president believes that, on principle, its important to release that report, so that people around the world and people here at home understand exactly what transpired, he said. Earnest said the administration has taken steps to improve security at U.S. facilities around the world.
Read more: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-12-08/bush-joins-effort-to-block-senate-release-of-cia-torture-report.html
SoapBox
(18,791 posts)Hearing the response from Pukes and Baggers.
NOW they are worried that it will make the world angry.
What makes me angry is that the WAR CRIMINALS from the Bush Reign of Terror, still walk free.
duhneece
(4,113 posts)Wolfie, Rumsfled being tried for crimes against humanity by World Criminal Court at The Hague?
I can dream.
cstanleytech
(26,291 posts)ever having to appear before a court as our country like many others doesnt tend to punish those who were in extremely high offices of power very often.
I mean hell look at how Nixon were protected not to mention Reagan and Bush Sr.
belzabubba333
(1,237 posts)duhneece
(4,113 posts)that would be better than nothing.
I thought dictators who hadn't signed could still be arrested and tried...no?
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)belzabubba333
(1,237 posts)albino65
(484 posts)yeoman6987
(14,449 posts)The Hague has 100 present ZERO authority over the United States. We never joined it.
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)It would be a statement showing that the rest of the world won't turn a blind eye towards US war criminals, even if our own 'leaders' are too cowardly to prosecute such.
duhneece
(4,113 posts)duhneece
(4,113 posts)dirtydickcheney
(242 posts)And THANK GOD for that said with absolutely *NO SARCASM* at all!!
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)THANK GOD
mountain grammy
(26,621 posts)harun
(11,348 posts)Volaris
(10,271 posts)It will so discredit the Bush Admin (and by proxy, the whole of the GOP) that they won't win the White House back for half a century.
And they know it.
Run, you fuckers, run.
=)
Turbineguy
(37,331 posts)Bush can always deny his involvement.
Renew Deal
(81,859 posts)So he has nothing to worry about.
Of course it doesn't mean people weren't sent elsewhere to be tortured.
sakabatou
(42,152 posts)blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)jmowreader
(50,557 posts)I guess if you have Halliburton and DynCorp employees doing the torturing, or if you don't consider people you suspect of terrorism to be people, then "this government doesn't torture people" is a sorta true statement.
It doesn't change the fact that Bush, Cheney, Rummy, Condi, Colin and anyone else who held a job in the Bush maladministration higher than Coffee Pourer needs to sorta be scrubbing pots in a prison kitchen for the rest of his or her natural life.
blm
(113,061 posts)in order to protect what gains have been made with Iran deals, and to better prepare worldwide embassies and bases for backlash. Bushies only think of themselves.
And some here claim there is no difference.
okaawhatever
(9,462 posts)Iran nuke deal. Also, if a single American is killed abroad it will be Benghazi all over again.
Comrade Grumpy
(13,184 posts)I'm sure they already think the worst of us. They've been subject to the CIA's tender mercies in the past. It's not news to them.
Elmer S. E. Dump
(5,751 posts)AzDar
(14,023 posts)okaawhatever
(9,462 posts)the Iranian system. Your constant cheerleading for brutal regimes says a lot about you comrade.
blm
(113,061 posts)relying on mainstream corporate media for information about what has been going on between Kerry and Iran's negotiating team the last 2 years? If you have your knowledge of Kerry's persistent pursuit of common ground with Iran would be sorely lacking.
Kerry has been keeping much of the efforts out of the media line of fire because anytime he makes an advancement the GOP and their poodle puppets say and do whatever they can to undermine the developments.
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)It is always better to face the truth.
onwardsand upwards
(276 posts)On substantive issues, anyway.
The Democratic and Republican wings of the Corporate Party work together -- the good cop and the bad cop.
To hope that the Democratic wing will, somehow, bring its Republican brethren to justice is just a naive pipe-dream.
This will be a whitewash -- like the Warren Commission, the 9/11 Commission, the Hutton inquiry Report, etc., etc., etc., ...
Bush's protest is just for show ... enjoy the show!
blm
(113,061 posts)it was Kerry who doggedly investigated and ended up exposing IranContra, BCCI, which also led to uncovering problems with S&Ls and CIA drug running. Now he's no different than Bush. Right?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/10/gary-webb-dark-alliance_n_5961748.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rick-ross/how-john-kerry-exposed-th_b_2469665.html
onwardsand upwards
(276 posts)Where does Kerry stand on Cuba, or the Israeli apartheid, or the NSA?
Both Bush and Kerry are Skull and Bones boys -- they're on the same team.
blm
(113,061 posts).
onwardsand upwards
(276 posts)billhicks76
(5,082 posts)The Kerry and Clinton types are delaying so a Republican led Senate can torpedo it later. Don't be foolish.
blm
(113,061 posts)nation's historic record more positively, especially in regard to investigating and exposing government corruption, than John Kerry has over the last 4 decades, can't you mr not bill hicks?
Of course, to the ignorati, Mr. Kerry is no different than W, eh, mr not bill hicks?
Bare-naked cynicism should have a basis in REALITY, mr hicks.
billhicks76
(5,082 posts)I used to agree that Kerry was that guy. But now I agree with what Lenin suggested. To control the opposition become the opposition. Kerry globbed onto all those investigations like IranContra cocaine dealing but them all those investigations went nowhere at the last minute. He didn't say crap about Ohio in 2004, he begged for war in Syria based on false WMD claims (the rebels easily got nailed for using gas too) and he is a Skull & Bones member. He looks beaten down and it's probably because his conscience is screaming out(at least he has one) but looks to me like he has given into the forces that control things.
blm
(113,061 posts)BTW - you TOTALLY misread what was going on in Syria, too. Lavrov and Kerry knew what they orchestrated - gee - too bad that you glom onto corporate media 'analysis' and didn't have enough insight to recognize what was actually occurring.
Sorry about that - must suck to not know and rely on spin - from both sides.
billhicks76
(5,082 posts)Unlike you. My take is diametrically opposed to the mass media take which totted the Kerry line. He looked scary actually as he clamored for war. War War War. That's all they think about and when it comes to foreign policy democratic leaders act like Neocon poodles.
blm
(113,061 posts)Last edited Wed Dec 10, 2014, 11:51 AM - Edit history (1)
and what Kerry and Lavrov had been negotiating in the year prior the hyperventilating news reporting. If you had paid attention you would have known that Kerry and Lavrov were working together to PREVENT a military confrontation in Syria. Some of us were posting about the corporate media's disinterest in the diplomatic groundwork being laid quietly as it was happening, and they didn't engage until the neocons thought they could push an invasion of Syria. Kerry's public upbraiding of Syria using military threats was exactly what Lavrov needed to get the increasingly paranoid Assad under firmer control.
Lead posters to the information lake, but, you can't make them drink. You passed over those postings, too. Didn't get excited till you thought war was the goal, eh?
billhicks76
(5,082 posts)He wants it delayed until the Rethugs take over. I understand they were worried about before the election because the CIA would provoke or foment some riots or attacks to deflect their crimes and say,"See we told you not to release it". But we already let the Rethugs win for not acting like real Dems so what's the point now? The fact is he wants it delayed. Facts are facts.
blm
(113,061 posts)SOOOOO easy for BSers to get away with their particular brand of BS.
billhicks76
(5,082 posts)And we can thank activists for keeping the pressure on.
blm
(113,061 posts)That evil Kerry 'no different than Bush' had to rush preparations for backlash at embassies around the world, but, he never lifted a finger to BLOCK the release now, did he? He always supported the investigation and the release of the report but, because he wanted time to prepare embassies and secure his diplomatic efforts with Muslim nations, the knee-jerk crowd had to spend their energy labeling him and Obama as tools for covering up for Bush and Cheney.
billhicks76
(5,082 posts)You're analysis is seriously flawed and you obviously do not get it. Obama tried to prevent the release but once he realized the inevitable political winds he stopped trying to delay and went into damage control on behalf of his Neoconning handlers. It's the same reason he won't fire Brennan or hold anyone in the intelligence community accountable for anything. You're naive to say the least. More NSA spying, more drones and more BS too.
blm
(113,061 posts)I refuse to give credibility to morons who prefer people stop studying National Security Archives and rely, instead, on THEIR sophomoric analysis and views.
billhicks76
(5,082 posts)Because I pointed out Obama hasn't held anyone accountable in the CIA and lets them rule his foreign policy? He tried to stonewall but the pressure from ethical democrats was too much. Brennan should've already been fired. Go look in the mirror.
cstanleytech
(26,291 posts)ColesCountyDem
(6,943 posts)Duval
(4,280 posts)Brigid
(17,621 posts)WillyT
(72,631 posts)slumcamper
(1,606 posts)Flag-waving nationalists and self-described "patriots" can no longer hide behind the opaque curtain of founding principles or arrogant notions of "American exceptionalism." The painful but triumphant march of justice is unrelenting, and truth is the victor.
Peace, all.
karynnj
(59,503 posts)Articles that said they were - all had no on record source. Here Earnest and Psaki are the official spokesmen.
The president believes that, on principle, its important to release that report, so that people around the world and people here at home understand exactly what transpired, he said. Earnest said the administration has taken steps to improve security at U.S. facilities around the world.
<snip>
Secretary of State John Kerry supports releasing the findings, State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki told reporters today. Kerry discussed the policy implications of the release in a phone call with Senator Dianne Feinstein, a California Democrat and chairman of the intelligence panel, and said it was up to her to decide when to do so, Psaki said.
(From your link)
duhneece
(4,113 posts)KoKo
(84,711 posts)Obama is the Current President and therefore he has every right to demand the release inspite of Bush objections.
It was supposed to be released before the election wasn't it and the holdup was that the information on CIA participants hadn't been redacted as fully as CIA wanted. Yet others said that more redactions would make the report unreadable. And, others felt that the CIA was stalling because there were ways to hide the identities of those involved and they needed more time. Perhaps it was because that report had names of higher ups who were not CIA Ops who would be personally harmed by the revelations. That would certainly be why Bush doesn't want it released.
Elmer S. E. Dump
(5,751 posts)karynnj
(59,503 posts)Elmer S. E. Dump
(5,751 posts)OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)despite your wishful thinking.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=7410267&page=1
As lawmakers call for hearings and debate brews over forming commissions to examine the Bush administration's policies on harsh interrogation techniques, Attorney General Eric Holder confirmed to a House panel that intelligence officials who relied on legal advice from the Bush-era Justice Department would not be prosecuted.
"Those intelligence community officials who acted reasonably and in good faith and in reliance on Department of Justice opinions are not going to be prosecuted," he told members of a House Appropriations Subcommittee, reaffirming the White House sentiment. "It would not be fair, in my view, to bring such prosecutions."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/feedarticle/8470942
Associated Press Writer= WASHINGTON (AP) â Attorney General Eric Holder left open the possibility Thursday to prosecuting former Bush administration officials but ruled out filing charges merely over disagreements about policy.
"I will not permit the criminalization of policy differences," Holder testified before a House Appropriations subcommittee.
"However, it is my responsibility as attorney general to enforce the law. It is my duty to enforce the law. If I see evidence of wrongdoing I will pursue it to the full extent of the law," he said.
~snip~
"It is certainly the intention of this administration not to play hide and seek, or not to release certain things," said Holder. "It is not our intention to try to advance a political agenda or to try to hide things from the American people."
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/06/cia-exhales-99-out-of-101-torture-cases-dropped/
This is how one of the darkest chapters in U.S. counterterrorism ends: with practically every instance of suspected CIA torture dodging criminal scrutiny. Its one of the greatest gifts the Justice Department could have given the CIA as David Petraeus takes over the agency.
Over two years after Attorney General Eric Holder instructed a special prosecutor, John Durham, to preliminar(ily) review whether CIA interrogators unlawfully tortured detainees in their custody, Holder announced on Thursday afternoon that hell pursue criminal investigations in precisely two out of 101 cases of suspected detainee abuse. Some of them turned out not to have involved CIA officials after all. Both of the cases that move on to a criminal phase involved the death in custody of detainees, Holder said.
But just because theres a further criminal inquiry doesnt necessarily mean there will be any charges brought against CIA officials involved in those deaths. If Holders decision on Thursday doesnt actually end the Justice Departments review of torture in CIA facilities, it brings it awfully close, as outgoing CIA Director Leon Panetta noted.
On this, my last day as Director, I welcome the news that the broader inquiries are behind us, Panetta wrote to the CIA staff on Thursday. We are now finally about to close this chapter of our Agencys history.
By SCOTT SHANE
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/31/us/holder-rules-out-prosecutions-in-cia-interrogations.html
Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. announced Thursday that no one would be prosecuted for the deaths of a prisoner in Afghanistan in 2002 and another in Iraq in 2003, eliminating the last possibility that any criminal charges will be brought as a result of the brutal interrogations carried out by the C.I.A.
Mr. Holder had already ruled out any charges related to the use of waterboarding and other methods that most human rights experts consider to be torture. His announcement closes a contentious three-year investigation by the Justice Department and brings to an end years of dispute over whether line intelligence or military personnel or their superiors would be held accountable for the abuse of prisoners in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.
The closing of the two cases means that the Obama administrations limited effort to scrutinize the counterterrorism programs carried out under President George W. Bush has come to an end. Without elaborating, Mr. Holder suggested that the end of the criminal investigation should not be seen as a moral exoneration of those involved in the prisoners treatment and deaths.
Based on the fully developed factual record concerning the two deaths, the department has declined prosecution because the admissible evidence would not be sufficient to obtain and sustain a conviction beyond a reasonable doubt, his statement said. It said the investigation was not intended to, and does not resolve, broader questions regarding the propriety of the examined conduct.
The Obama administration even got to torture some folks like Chelsea Manning. P.J. Crowley was forced to resign as State Department spokesman when he called Manning's treatment ridiculous and counterproductive and stupid.
karynnj
(59,503 posts)There are differences of opinion on whether the treatment of Manning could be called torture - and her father questioned some of the accounts of her advocates.
OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)but let's just ignore that to support your claim.
As for the differences of opinion of what constitutes torture (I'm sure the Obama administration thought it was OK), here's an opinion that really matters:
Bradley Manning's treatment was cruel and inhuman, UN torture chief rules
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/mar/12/bradley-manning-cruel-inhuman-treatment-un
The UN special rapporteur on torture has formally accused the US government of cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment towards Bradley Manning, the US soldier who was held in solitary confinement for almost a year on suspicion of being the WikiLeaks source.
Juan Mendez has completed a 14-month investigation into the treatment of Manning since the soldier's arrest at a US military base in May 2010. He concludes that the US military was at least culpable of cruel and inhumane treatment in keeping Manning locked up alone for 23 hours a day over an 11-month period in conditions that he also found might have constituted torture.
santamargarita
(3,170 posts)Mike Nelson
(9,956 posts)...the Dems did not hold him accountable when they could.
azureblue
(2,146 posts)Maybe this is why he didn't prosecute the war criminals when he took office. Now that he is on the way out, he can open an investigation, bring it all to light, and pursue charges. Which, of course will throw the GOP into a fit. You know damn well they will be in the oval office with a change of tune to try to get him to soft pedal or delay the investigation and "maybe we can trade, you know? Like we won't try to impeach you or something? No, with promise we'll play nice with you and keep our word this time--"..
This is rich - this man who they reviled from the day he took office, now has them by the short and curlies, and he knows he has the upper hand. The baggers will try to press with impeachment or some other way to take Obama down, but the GOP establishment knows they are are checkmated and they will do all they can to keep that report quiet.
Stay tuned - I have a feeling the party is just getting started
Quackers
(2,256 posts)This is from last year.
A federal case in San Francisco, filed by an Iraqi single mother and refugee now living in Jordan, alleges that President Bush and much of his administration should be tried for violating international law in the execution of the Iraq War.
However, the Obama administration's Department of Justice has moved to request that such Bush-era officials, and the former President, be shielded with immunity.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/08/22/1233110/-DOJ-Asks-Court-to-Grant-Immunity-to-Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld-for-Iraq-War
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)in it.
Bush and Cheney showed no mercy, no compassion, for the victims of torture. But now that a report on the conduct they condoned and approved is to be made public, they are afraid.
What cowards. If you do something, the least you can do is admit it and apologize when you are caught.
If it was right when they ordered, they should stand by the correctness of their decision or apologize for it.
But they cannot run from it. It will come out sooner or later.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)mountain grammy
(26,621 posts)my oh my, what a surprise.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)wagepeace
(15 posts)Bush + CIA Torture Report - http://demu.gr/1014960474
My God, the arrogance of "W" and his inept band of "chicken-hawks" the "rethuglican" is stunning & appalling. Of course they want to keep hidden, keep secreted the horror they unleashed, they allowed, that they sanctioned. The American people need to know every detail of their wanton criminal behavior, "done in our name" I believe that this report will validate, vindicate the brave, unselfish actions of Chelsea Manning, Eric Snowden, Julian Assiage and will hopefully allow they to come home. Their actions were not treasonous, unlike the outing of CIA agent Valeria Plume but that's a whole other rant!
BTW: have any of you noticed that unlike prior presidential administration, the "Bush Gang-Cabal" have not travel outside the United States (if they have they surely must have used Harry Potter's Cloak of Invisibility) Hell even Tricky-Dick-Water-gate-Impeached Richard Nixon traveled all over the world, especially to China after he left office. Could it be that in the eyes of the World Community The Merry Band of Bush Misfit guys and gals have been tried in absentia and found guilty of "war crimes" and as such they could arrested upon arrival?? Because if that's true, I'd gladly empty out my bank account and buy Bush, et al a one-way-ticket, heck I'd even upgrade them to first class to The Hague...Guantanamo... maybe the best post-administration service they can do a this time is simply to sit down shut up or as the wordsmith of the Bush Administration Dick cheney said..go fuck yourself ( yep he said that to Democratic Senator Patrick Leahy)
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)Joey Liberal
(5,526 posts)And maybe it'll stop us from becoming a torture country again in the future.
peacebird
(14,195 posts)Described in it.
Don't want to look bad and cause damage to international relationships by releasing a report on torture? Then maybe you should have refrained fromACTUALLY TORTURING people????
tavernier
(12,388 posts)the real crime is the deaths and destruction he caused to thousands of Iraqis and to our own soldiers, sending them into a country that did us no harm.
DemandsRedPill
(65 posts)Torture would be one of the least of the crimes perpetrated by The Bush Crime Family
Bush family crimes go as far back as the civil war
Warpy
(111,261 posts)He's skated through this administration. He might not be as lucky with the next.
Major Hogwash
(17,656 posts)It might change people's minds about what a great guy he would be to have a beer with!
But, I doubt it.
Ruby the Liberal
(26,219 posts)yurbud
(39,405 posts)sorry, I mean "Bush."