Upper reaches of the Executive Branch. Inside the White House, in fact.

[kpete]

The Official Story Unfolds

BY Scott Horton
PUBLISHED January 18, 2008

There is a concerted effort in Washington to keep the focus of the investigation away from torture. Both Democrats and Republicans are struggling to do that, as if there is nothing on the tapes.

The destruction of the CIA torture tapes is still a fairly young scandal as Washington scandals go. It hasn’t even acquired a “gate” suffix. But the Administration is already busily choreographing it, with the dozens of shiny metal parts clicking away in synchronicity, like a finely designed mechanical watch. There is an admirable efficiency to the political process. If only these people were a fraction as good at the work of government as they are at political shenanigans, I keep thinking. The Bush Administration plan is simple: let’s think of this as a movie–Abu Ghraib, The Sequel. Instead of offering up a group of young grunts for the sacrifice, this time it will be a retired senior management figure at the CIA and some of his subordinates. And this sacrifice will, in the White House’s view, divert attention from the real source of both scandals, which is high in the upper reaches of the Executive Branch. Inside the White House, in fact.

The Meeting

As Michael Mukasey was being prepared to be nominated for the post of attorney general, the White House strongly encouraged him to meet with a group of “movement conservative” lawyers to try to address their “concerns” about his suitability to be the nominee. When the meeting took place, Mukasey found himself being pressed aggressively. They wanted his assurance that there would be no special prosecutors to look into wrongdoing by Team Bush. Several of those who were pleading against the appointment of a special prosecutor had more in mind than just good prosecutorial ethics. They played a role in the U.S. attorney’s scandal and potentially other mischief. If a prosecutor were appointed, they might well find themselves in the crosshairs.

Mukasey hasn’t yet completed his second month in office, but already there’s reason to be concerned about just what came out of this meeting. The scandal surrounding the destruction of CIA blacksite tapes continues to unfold. And at this point, the Bush Administration’s strategy for dodging a bullet couldn’t be clearer. Here are its parameters:
...............

more at:
http://harpers.org/archive/2008/01/hbc-90002165

[yellowcanine]

1. Horton's article is somewhat inaccurate, however.

He says "Craig Morford, a career prosecutor who has been tied to a series of politically volatile cases and has a remarkably thin job history for so high a position, though plenty in his résumé that would appeal to a Republican theocon (including a Bible college degree and church missionary work)."

I don't know squat about Craig Morford, but according to the link provided by Horton, Morford graduated from Hope College. Hope College is not a Bible college. It is a Christian (affiliated with the Reform Church) liberal arts college, not the same thing at all - though I will concede that some Bible colleges associated with theocons try to sell themselves as Christian liberal arts colleges - but I think any fair minded person who looks at the link provided by Horton would say that Hope College does not fit that description. (It was founded in 1851 as an elementary/secondary school for the children of Dutch immigrants and chartered as a college in 1866, for example - hardly the sort of pedigree of a theocon Bible college) Morford in fact got an economics degree and went on to Valparaiso University for a law degree. I also could find nothing to substantiate the "church missionary work" in the link to the resume provided by Horton, unless he means this:

"He and his wife of twenty 24 years have four children and have actively served their community in a number of church ministries and community youth programs."

At the least, Horton appears to play fast and loose with the facts so I think we should take his analysis with a grain of salt, even if he does say things we like to hear about the Bush administration. There is enough actual negative information on Bush & co. without inventing stuff.