Glenn Greenwald: Obama deserves "real credit" for releasing torture memos

[beachmom]

Praise from Glenn Greenwald is pretty rare, so I think this is a big deal:

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/radio/2009/04/16/aclu/

In a just-released statement, Barack Obama announced that -- in response to an ACLU FOIA lawsuit -- he has ordered four key Bush-era torture memos released, and the Associated Press, citing anonymous Obama sources, is reporting that "there is very little redaction, or blacking out, of detail in the memos." Marc Ambinder is reporting that only the names of the CIA agens involved will be redacted; everything else will be disclosed. Simultaneously, and certainly with the intend to placate angry intelligence officials, Attorney General Eric Holder has "informed CIA officials who used waterboarding and other harsh interrogation tactics on terror suspects that they will not be prosecuted," and Obama announced the same thing in his statement.

I will add more detailed commentary, along with an interview with the ACLU's lead counsel, Jameel Jaffer, as soon as the documents themselves are available. If the report about the OLC memos are accurate, Obama will have done exactly the right thing here and will deserve real credit.

I don't always agree with Glenn, but it is also true that he is very principled in his views, and has been consistent about them during the transition from the Bush Administration to the Obama Administration. Even if there is some disappointment about Pres. Obama saying he will not prosecute CIA officials, Glenn says that does not take away from what he did:

Just to get a sense for the pressure being exerted on Obama, here is Gen. Michael Hayden -- the NSA Director when the illegal spying program was implemented and then CIA Director -- arguing vehemently against release of the memos today on MSNBC. He clearly does not believe in open government and these are the objections Obama had to override.

...

One can certainly criticize Obama for vowing that no CIA officials will be prosecuted if they followed DOJ memos (though that vow, notably, does not extend to Bush officials), but -- assuming the reports about redactions are correct -- there is no grounds for criticizing Obama here and substantial grounds for praising him.

The video he refers to of Hayden is at the link.

Short version of this post: even the fiercest critics of Pres. Obama from the Left think he's done good today.

[katmondoo]

1. I am happy he released them

Had me worried for a while. I think I have to learn to have more patience with our President.

[Egnever]

9. lots of people seem to have the same problem

there seems to be a serious lack of patience with most things obama does. It has been going on since the primaries. Time after time people have gone after him trying to paint him as doing this or going to do that , and time after time they have ended up with the short end of the stick. One would think that by now folks would have figured out Obama is a long term planer not a short term reactionary.

I wouldn't be too hard on yourself you have lots of company.

my prediction is on this issue everyone trashes him for not prosecuting the officers that carried out the torture. When the real target should be those that gave the orders not the flunkies that carried them out. They will pretend that he is giving everyone a free pass on this when thats not what he is saying at all. He is crafty I think when we see the end result of all of this most people will be very pleased. till we get to the end of it i predict all kinds of hysterics about what a sell out he is.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

2. He pretty much had to, didn't he?

After his early article this morning demanding that Obama do it.

My guess- Greenwald's choking on his bile.

[beachmom]

4. Based on some lefty posts I've just read on dkos, ah, no, he didn't have to.

I am reading utter crap by lefties saying it's a "betrayal" because Obama said he wouldn't prosecute CIA officials while ignoring his courage in releasing the memos largely intact. I think that Pres. Obama respects Glenn, frankly. Glenn sticks to his principles, but is no hack. Obama listened to writers like Glenn when he decided not to nominate Brennan as CIA Director.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

5. There's one right now in GDP.

[Cha]

14. Here's a quote about republicons not having any

credibility if they don't allow it when President Obama does his job well and the same can be applied to anyone.

"Here's the problem: If Republicans can't allow that the president did his job well in this unambiguous case, why should we believe their complaints about anything else? If they can't pat him on the back for this one, why should we even listen to their arguments about the budget, about health care, about energy?"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x8343620#8343671

[AtomicKitten]

3. Credit where credit it due.

n/t

[hlthe2b]

6. I think Glenn and Scott Horton (Harper's) and the ACLU's

pressure made substantial difference..

[Uzybone]

8. I doubt it....ACLU yes...a blogger? No

Holder and Larry Craig were very much for the release. I think they had more influence than a blogger.

[hlthe2b]

16. Larry Craig?????????????

And, Glen Greenwald is not just a blogger. He is a constitutional scholar in his own right of some acclaim. The administration was hearing from many on Capitol Hill--who, in turn were undoubtedly hearing directly or indirectly (and thus being influenced) from the likes of Jonathan Turley, Glen Greenwald and Scott Horton, among others.

[vaberella]

23. I find that O is just doing what he always said he would do. End of story. n/t

[Arkana]

28. Larry Craig was for release all right.

:giggity:

[Uzybone]

34. LOL...I mean Greg Craig

this guy



not "wide stance"

my mistake.

[Uzybone]

7. I bet Greenwald was gritting his teeth as he typed that

good for him.

[Zodiak]

10. I agree

Obama did the right thing here.

As far as Greenwald is concerned, it doesn't surprise me in the least that he would give credit where it is due. Believe it or not, the left wants Obama to succeed, but success is based on good policy. Greenwald pushes for good policy.

[glitch]

11. Most excellent.

I care more about the people who ordered the torture being prosecuted than the creeps following orders.

[Thrill]

12. Someone must have held a gun to his head to make him say something nice about President Obama

[vaberella]

25. Ain't that the truth. This is the FIRST time I've seen him say anything nice.

If he's on Rachel's show today. I wouldn't be surprised if he adds a bash in, no matter what.

[chill_wind]

13. K & R. Praise for President Obama's decision

and praise for the convictions of Americans like Greenwald and the ACLU and many, many other civil libertarian and human rights groups who have long been vocal about the Bush admin crimes... holders of feet to the fire.

[politicasista]

15. Yes, Kick

for President Obama. :kick:

[starroute]

17. The CIA destroyed Jimmy Carter -- and Obama knows it

Of course, the situation was a little more extreme in the Carter administration. The CIA was still smarting from the post-Watergate investigations and reforms, and many of them had continued taking their orders from George H.W. Bush after Carter replaced him.

In contrast, there was no love lost between the CIA and the younger Bush -- so Obama has an excellent chance of getting them on his side. To do that, he has to publicly protect them from reprisals for what was done under the Bush administration, while privately letting them know who's the boss and what the new standards are.

For an idealist, Obama has a exquisitely Machiavellian streak. He doesn't seek power for its own sake, but he knows how to use power -- and he either has or is quickly developing an extremely sure-footed sense of how to navigate the Byzantine labyrinths of the DC power-brokers.

It isn't just the CIA that he's working on winning over, either. You can be sure it's no coincidence that the Navy SEALS have been played up as the heroes of the Somali pirate incident just at the moment when the Joint Special Operations Command had gotten labeled as Cheney's private assassination ring. The desire to be seen as the hero of the story is one of the strongest human motivations, and as long as Obama controls the message, he can have these guys just eating out of his hand.

[SpartanDem]

19. They destroyed more than Carter.

I think for most part people who work at the CIA are good people who want protect the country, but given their history I would have a hard time trusting them completely. I think Obama would be risking a bullet if he didn't provide some protection to the rank and file.

[MasonJar]

18. I do not see why releasing the documents is in any way related to

prosecuting toturers. We prosecuted torturers from Germany and Japan, but excuse our own bunch. It is poor policy and pathetic precedence. IT WAS CORRECT TO RELEASE THE DOCUMENTS, but wrong to exonerate perpetrators. That should be done by a jury of peers if in fact such exoneration is warranted.

[HopeOverFear]

20. Sorry, but Obama is not putting his life in danger

Just because you want revenge.

[Generator]

21. Yeah Obama is a fucking hero

Human rights organizations disagree with that easement of the miraculous one. Obama talks a good game and does shit about it.

http://edition.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/04/16/torture.cia.immunity/

From your hero's lips:

This is a time for reflection, not retribution," he said. "I respect the strong views and emotions that these issues evoke. We have been through a dark and painful chapter in our history. But at a time of great challenges and disturbing disunity, nothing will be gained by spending our time and energy laying blame for the past."

Amnesty's Cox rejected that argument.

"The United States has had plenty of time for reflection -- there is very little information in the newly released material that hadn't leaked out long before," he said. Obama "also said that the United States is a nation of laws. But laws only have meaning if they are enforced.

(hello Congress and Obama and John Kerry or whatever Democrat you worship have known about this for years)


"The United States has laws prohibiting torture, and two-thirds of Americans support an investigation into what has been done in their name. That is not seeking to lay blame; that is a call for justice long overdue.

The Center for Constitutional Rights, a nonprofit agency founded by attorneys who worked for the civil rights movement of the 1960s, also panned the decision not to prosecute.

"It is one of the deepest disappointments of this administration that it appears unwilling to uphold the law where crimes have been committed by former officials," the organization said.

[ProSense]

22. "Human rights organizations disagree with that easement of the miraculous one. "

You should read more. CCR statement:

“It is one of the deepest disappointments of this administration that it appears unwilling to uphold the law where crimes have been committed by former officials. Whether or not CIA operatives who conducted waterboarding are guaranteed immunity, it is the high level officials who conceived, justified and ordered the torture program who bear the most responsibility for breaking domestic and international law, and it is they who must be prosecuted. In the president’s statement today, the most troubling contradiction is the contrast of the words, ‘This is a time for reflection, not retribution,’ followed shortly by, ‘The United States is a nation of laws.’ Government officials broke very serious laws: for there to be no consequences not only calls our system of justice into question, it leaves the gate open for this to happen again.”

Luckily, Obama didn't grant those officials immunity.

Also, what in the OP implies that Obama is a hero, worthy of this ridiculous assertion:

Human rights organizations disagree with that easement of the miraculous one?

[vaberella]

26. Reason doesn't work. This is DU. n/t

[Jennicut]

29. Oh geez. Freeper phrases creep me out.

This is not another country. This is the country where John Kennedy was assassinated. I want Obama to be careful and take it slow. Does that poster realize the right wing hatred of this man yet? Did that poster watch the stupid tea parties yesterday?

[Cha]

30. Yeah, he is..whereas you're

not.

[beachmom]

31. Enough with your condescending tone. Obama is not my "hero",

and nothing in my post suggested that. Basically I was quoting someone who normally is extremely critical of him, but had praise for him today.

[Pirate Smile]

24. John Dean said the same thing. Keith seems to think he has a better legal grasp then either Dean,

Greenwald or Obama. Sure, Keith.:eyes:

[slipslidingaway]

27. Check the updates on his site...

releasing them is the first step.

"UPDATE III: My interview with the ACLU's Jameel Jaffer can be heard by clicking PLAY on the recorder below. Jameel (a) calls for a Special Prosectuor on behalf of the ACLU and (b) emphasizes that nothing said by Obama or Holder today should be understood to foreclose criminal prosecutions. For all the reasons Jameel describes, I agree with that assessment, and Marc Ambinder reports that senior Obama officials told him (anonymously, of course) that nothing Obama or Eric Holder said today was intended to foreclose prosecutions. Russ Feingold made a similar point.

Needless to say, I vehemently disagree with anyone -- including Obama -- who believes that prosecutions are unwarranted. These memos describe grotesque war crimes -- legalized by classic banality-of-evil criminals and ordered by pure criminals -- that must be prosecuted if the rule of law is to have any meaning. But the decision of whether to prosecute is not Obama's to make; ultimately, it is Holder's and/or a Special Prosectuor's. More importantly, Obama can only do so much by himself. The Obama administration should, on its own, initiate criminal proceedings, but the citizenry also has responsibilities here. These acts were carried out by our Government, and if we are really as repulsed by them as we claim, then the burden is on us to demand that something be done.

More than 250,000 Americans attended protests yesterday (ostensibly) over taxes and budget issues. If these torture revelations are met with nothing but apathy, then it will certainly be reasonable to blame Holder and Obama if they fail to act, but the responsibility will also lie with a citizenry that responded with indifference.

Finally, it should be emphasized -- yet again -- that it was not our Congress, nor our media, nor our courts that compelled disclosure of these memos. Instead, it was the ACLU's tenacious efforts over several years which single-handedly pryed these memos from the clutched hands of the government. Along with a couple of other civil liberties organizations, the ACLU (with which I consult) has expended extraordinary efforts to ensure at least minimal amounts of openness and transparency in this country, something that was necessary given the profound failures of these other institutions to do so."

[beachmom]

32. Thanks for his update. I tend to agree with him. Sadly, I don't think the citizenry

is going to be up for it. Most I talk to don't seem to have a problem with torture. Just because Obama won the election does not mean the people have changed their minds about this. They don't care about the Geneva Conventions, apparently, or the legacy of WWII that it represented. Sigh.

[slipslidingaway]

33. I think that is generally because the citizens are not as informed

as they should be, our media plays a large role and not everyone has time to read a varety of sites on the internet. I just posted this about the person who blew the whistle on torture, we owe these whistleblowers our support.

And YW :)

Sergeant Joseph M. Darby....the whistleblower

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=5473765&mesg_id=5473765

snip>>

"But to fully honor Darby's courage, it is essential to determine how the values he and other American soldiers are defending came to be trampled on at Abu Ghraib. A number of military investigations have been completed and low-ranking soldiers prosecuted, but so far little attention has been paid to the linkage between what happened in the prison and the high-level policies adopted two years earlier that swept aside international standards for interrogating prisoners in the war on terrorism."