Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Scott Horton: Torture Prosecution Turnaround?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-12-09 10:32 AM
Original message
Scott Horton: Torture Prosecution Turnaround?
http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-07-12/torture-prosecution-turnaround/p/


Torture Prosecution Turnaround?
by Scott Horton
July 12, 2009 | 9:22am

The attorney general is leaning toward appointing a special prosecutor to investigate Bush-era torture policy, sources tell Scott Horton. Inside the logic driving Eric Holder’s possible conversion.


The Obama White House has deflected calls for appointment of a special prosecutor to investigate the formulation and implementation of Bush-era torture policies with an argument that they want to “look forward, not backward.” But Justice Department lawyers took careful note of a different statement President Obama made yesterday in Ghana: “You have the power to hold your leaders accountable.” Now two sources in the Justice Department confirm to me that Holder is preparing to appoint a special prosecutor to conduct a comprehensive investigation and, if necessary, bring charges. They caution that the final call has not been made. And senior Justice Department officials remain concerned that meddling by the White House’s political wing would undermine the appearance of the Justice Department’s independence.

Holder’s path to a decision was described as prolonged and surprising. Holder began his review mindful of the clear preference of President Obama’s two key political advisers—David Axelrod and Rahm Emanuel—that there be no investigation. Axelrod and Emanuel are described as uninterested in either the legal or policy merits of the issue of a criminal investigation. Their concerns turn entirely on their political analysis. They have advised Obama and other senior figures in the administration that the torture issue is a “distraction,” and that any attention on it would detract from Obama’s ability to push through his agenda—especially health-care reform. Holder initially appeared prepared to satisfy their wishes.

But, then, Holder decided to take a close, personal look at the issues, and his perspective began to change. Holder is said to have been closely engaged with three sets of documents—a group of memoranda from the Bush-era Office of Legal Counsel, since repudiated by the Justice Department; the report of the Office of Professional Responsibility on these memoranda, which has been on his desk, awaiting review and release for months; and the report of the CIA’s inspector general reviewing in great detail the actual techniques used, guidance given by the Justice Department, and results or lack of results obtained.

Holder released the first set of memoranda and his Justice Department publicly suggested that it would release both the related report and the CIA inspector general’s report—often viewed as the Rosetta Stone of the torture controversy. As he read through the latter two documents, my sources said, Holder came to realize the focal and instrumental role that Department of Justice lawyers had played in constructing the torture regime and in pushing it through when career lawyers raised objection. He also took note of how the entire process was orchestrated from within the Bush White House—so that more-senior lawyers in Justice, sometimes even the attorney general, did not know what was being done. And he noted the fact that the United Nations Convention Against Torture, to which the United States is a party, requires that a criminal inquiry be undertaken whenever credible allegations of torture are presented.

snip//

In the days after Obama’s speech at the CIA, both Axelrod and Emanuel insisted that the White House had made the decision that there would be no prosecutions. According to reliable sources, that incensed Holder, who felt that the remarks had compromised the integrity both of the White House and Justice Department by suggesting that political advisers made the call on who would or would not be criminally investigated. After Axelrod and Emanuel made their statements, Holder realized, a source said, that the Justice Department might have to appoint a special prosecutor to uphold its reputation for independence.

Observers caution that even if a special prosecutor is appointed, actual indictments would still be far off. The Bush torture policy was implemented with the advice of lawyers well skilled in the ways of Washington bureaucracy. Any prosecutor would face considerable legal obstacles in bringing charges. A review of the torture memoranda themselves shows that a consuming concern was thwarting the possible bringing of charges by a future prosecutor. Now, perhaps, the defenses they devised may be put to the test.


Scott Horton is a law professor and writer on legal and national-security affairs for Harper's Magazine and The American Lawyer, among other publications.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
mod mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-12-09 10:34 AM
Response to Original message
1. I hope Holder prosecutes. I wrote him yesterday:
Dear AG Holder,

I just read that you make probe Bush Era Torture. I want to whole heartedly endorse this probe. The law is only worthy if it pertains equally to all. I have been horrified of the reports by Sy Hersh that children were raped to force their parents to give information. I read that this torture might legally include crushing a child's testicles if the president ordered it (Notre Dame Professor Doug Cassel debating John Yoo). What barbarians are behind this reasoning and these atrocities? This was done in our name, and I for one will not rest until those who instigated this horrific crime are brought to justice!

I hope you will read the following by journalist/attorney Scott Horton:

This administration did more than commit crimes. It waged war against the law itself. It transformed the Justice Department into a vehicle for voter suppression, and it also summarily dismissed the U.S. attorneys who attempted to investigate its wrongdoing. It issued wartime contracts to substandard vendors with inside connections, and it also defunded efforts to police their performance. It spied on church groups and political protesters, and it also introduced a sweeping surveillance program that was so clearly illegal that virtually the entire senior echelon of the Justice Department threatened to (but did not in fact) tender their resignations over it. It waged an illegal and disastrous war, and it did so by falsely representing to Congress and to the American public nearly every piece of intelligence it had on Iraq. And through it all, as if to underscore its contempt for any authority but its own, the administration issued more than a hundred carefully crafted "signing statements" that raised pervasive doubt about whether the president would even accede to bills that he himself had signed into law.

No prior administration has been so systematically or so brazenly lawless. Yet it is no simple matter to prosecute a former president or his senior officers. There is no precedent for such a prosecution, and even if there was, the very breadth and audacity of the administration's activities would make the process so complex as to defy systems of justice far less fragmented than our own. But that only means choices must be made. Indeed, in weighing the enormity of the administration's transgressions against the realistic prospect of justice, it is possible to determine not only the crime that calls most clearly for prosecution but also the crime that is most likely to be successfully prosecuted. In both cases, that crime is torture.

There can be no doubt that torture is illegal. There is no wartime exception for torture, nor is there an exception for prisoners or "enemy combatants," nor is there an exception for "enhanced" methods. The authors of the Constitution forbade "cruel and unusual punishment," the details of that prohibition were made explicit in the Geneva Conventions ("No physical or mental torture, nor any other form of coercion, may be inflicted on prisoners of war to secure from them information of any kind whatever"), and that definition has in turn become subject to U.S. enforcement through the Uniform Code of Military Justice, the U.S. Criminal Code, and several acts of Congress.1

1. In addition to being illegal, torture is profoundly un-American. The central premise of the American experiment is the belief, informed by Enlightenment principles, that the dignity and worth of the individual is at least as important as that of the state. This belief weighed heavily on the minds of the Founders. The new American military was to be a force of yeoman soldiers, citizens in peacetime who were to be regarded as no less than citizens in wartime. Enemy soldiers likewise were to be treated with respect. George Washington, in the winter of 1776, sent a written order to officers overseeing prisoners: "Treat them with humanity." And in 1863, at another time of crisis, Abraham Lincoln included the prohibition of torture in the first American codification of the laws of war, which he also issued as a direct order to his field commanders. By way of such American leadership, the prohibition on torture was gradually absorbed into international law.

-snip
http://www.harpers.org/archive/2008/12/0082303

You have to wonder how the rest of the world views us after reading this British report:

Luke Harding
The Guardian, Thursday 20 May 2004

The scandal at Abu Ghraib prison was first exposed not by a digital photograph but by a letter. In December 2003, a woman prisoner inside the jail west of Baghdad managed to smuggle out a note. Its contents were so shocking that, at first, Amal Kadham Swadi and the other Iraqi women lawyers who had been trying to gain access to the US jail found them hard to believe.
The note claimed that US guards had been raping women detainees, who were, and are, in a small minority at Abu Ghraib. Several of the women were now pregnant, it added. The women had been forced to strip naked in front of men, it said. The note urged the Iraqi resistance to bomb the jail to spare the women further shame.

Late last year, Swadi, one of seven female lawyers now representing women detainees in Abu Ghraib, began to piece together a picture of systemic abuse and torture perpetrated by US guards against Iraqi women held in detention without charge. This was not only true of Abu Ghraib, she discovered, but was, as she put it, "happening all across Iraq".

In November last year, Swadi visited a woman detainee at a US military base at al-Kharkh, a former police compound in Baghdad. "She was the only woman who would talk about her case. She was crying. She told us she had been raped," Swadi says. "Several American soldiers had raped her. She had tried to fight them off and they had hurt her arm. She showed us the stitches. She told us, 'We have daughters and husbands. For God's sake don't tell anyone about this.'"

-snip

Earlier this month it emerged that an Iraqi woman in her 70s had been harnessed and ridden like a donkey at Abu Ghraib and another coalition detention centre after being arrested last July. Labour MP Ann Clwyd, who investigated the case and found it to be true, said, "She was held for about six weeks without charge. During that time she was insulted and told she was a donkey."

-snip

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/may/20/iraq.gender


and finally I want to leave you with a quote by our current president:

“Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we've been waiting for. We are the change that we seek.”
Barack Obama


It is up to us to force the change we desire. I will continue to voice my outrage until justice is served. It is up to you to bring these monsters to justice. I urge you to act.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlueMTexpat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-12-09 10:42 AM
Response to Reply #1
5. Thank you! nt
:yourock:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Liberation Angel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-12-09 10:35 AM
Response to Original message
2. cool and thanks
k&r
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RUMMYisFROSTED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-12-09 10:37 AM
Response to Original message
3. I'll believe it when I see it.
And even then...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MannyGoldstein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-12-09 10:39 AM
Response to Original message
4. Holder admitted to signing off on outsourced torture under Clinton
Just how eager can the man be to prosecute war crime, when he's comitted his own?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-12-09 10:44 AM
Response to Original message
6. "Their concerns turn entirely on their political analysis." (Axelrod and Emanuel) - wow. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-12-09 01:24 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. You forgot that their attitude incensed Holder. I hope that gives him
more determination to fight this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-12-09 04:07 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. Don't know how you got that from "wow." nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ZombieHorde Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-13-09 11:24 PM
Response to Original message
9. I was led to this reply page under weird circumstances.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6061949">This OP led to the reply page on your OP. Kind of interesting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Liberation Angel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-13-09 11:39 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. My error
When I cut and pasted the url I hit the wrong button

but it is actually a pretty cool mistake

Maybe this will fix he problem
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ZombieHorde Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-13-09 11:44 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. It is a cool mistake, I like it, I may do it myself some day. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Liberation Angel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-13-09 11:41 PM
Response to Original message
11. Frankly the prosecution issue is one I feared would get marginalized
like my no nukes posts
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Liberation Angel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-14-09 12:14 AM
Response to Original message
13. Did the unrec btton marginalize this issue?
I think it may have
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HughMoran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-14-09 06:44 AM
Response to Reply #13
14. Actually, I think your little rant pointing to this page
...may have actually lead people to hesitate before promoting this as it is a fine topic, though not the only thread on this topic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
conscious evolution Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-14-09 07:13 AM
Response to Original message
15. kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 04th 2024, 06:50 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC