Today’s Qs for O’s WH – 4/21/2009

I heard the President make his remarks on prosecution with the King of Jordan . .the man can’t make up his mind. The left have hammered him so badly on this matter, I guess he just said: “let’s have an investigation”. He could have said, the issue is behind us and I am going to move on and I hope you will move on in your reporting,
If an attorney files a brief in good faith; and believes what he is writing is in adherence to the law, how can you in conscience prosecute a man or woman who has made a decision in good faith and with the proper academic knowledge in giving the brief.
Hate is infectious. This is not about torture, per se. This is sadistic per se because there is a fringe that would go to hell just to see these people get prosecuted and convicted. Unfortunately, we have a few people in the press and anchors who would do the same thing.

Let me get this straight: when it comes to lawyers in the OLC, the President doesn’t decide who gets prosecuted and who doesn’t; because no one is above the law.
Then how can he say the CIA agents won’t be prosecuted for actually engaging in the water boarding?
Jake, you should really start calling him Glibbs.

Come on, lefties!
From the Wapo:
The CIA’s Questioning Worked
Who’s Blogging» Links to this article
By Marc A. Thiessen
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
In releasing highly classified documents on the CIA interrogation program last week, President Obama declared that the techniques used to question captured terrorists “did not make us safer.” This is patently false. The proof is in the memos Obama made public — in sections that have gone virtually unreported in the media.

We will never be able to “move on” until we repair our country’s reputation in the world — and we will never do that until prosecutions of these war crimes are carried out and we prove to the world that Bush’s America no longer exists.

This is messy business and I hate it that it is happening in the good old USA. I know President O wants to get out of this with his head but I think the matter is bigger than we know. It will take on a life of its own.Some of those in on this will be a shock to us, I just bet it gets into both parties. And it is an evil and sick thing, no matter what Cheney says.

Posted by: hang | Apr 21, 2009 4:17:39 PM
What war crimes? The ones in your head?

I saw this on tv and had to shake my head in sorrow. When GIbbs said, with a straight face (minus that annoying smirk he so often sports), “the president was clear…” I about fell off my chair laughing. Get ‘em, Tapper. And today, you will notice, Jake had plenty of company among the press corps in asking tough, persistent questions and not letting up on Gibby. Have to smile at “I am the fourth of four to point out…” Way to go!
JEremy, you are so right that there are people who would move heaven and earth to have Bush and company prosecuted, and that some of those people are in the media. It is a shame that their witch hunt just got the Obama seal of approval. Serious people with deep security concerns made serious decisions about difficult moral and legal issues in good faith and other serious people carried out those decisions in good faith. Now, because the political party that held the WH when those events occurred no longer holds the WH, there is serious talk of prosecuting those people. Do you want future administrations investigating Obama and the Navy Seals over the Somali pirate incident? No, neither do I. This is not simple or easy and we need to look forward, as our president likes to say when he’s not busy looking backward and badmouthing the Bush administration or blaming Bush for some problem.
BTW, Smith, there are a lot of us cynics out there, aren’t there?

“Who’s Blogging» Links to this article
By Marc A. Thiessen”
ROFLMAO!
Former Bush speech writer.
I am shocked that former Bush officials and boot licking neocons like Bill Kristol are defending this.
Notice they are the only ones doing so.

God, this Press Sec. is joke!
Tapper must be in heaven knowing he can goad this guy day after day!

CIA today: Waterboarding the 9/11 mastermind, allowed us to get enough information to PREVENT a 9/11 style attack on Los Angeles
Take that to your friggin facist president Gibbs…
Obama’s ’09 apology tour continues

“Cheney is right. Release all of the tapes, don’t pick and choose the ones that suits someone’s agenda.”
The Obama administration denied Tuesday that former Vice President Cheney had directly asked the CIA to declassify memos that he claims would vindicate Bush-era techniques for harsh interrogation of suspected terrorists.
A senior U.S. intelligence offical e-mailed: “The Agency has received no such request from the former Vice President.” (Politico)

Great job comparing the $100 million to A Rod – $100 million is a pathetic figure and I don’t think most people realize how large a deficit is proposed. Yes Bush/Democratic majority from 2006 and Rebublicans left us with a large deficit but almost tripling it is absurd! And Gibbs is on the top of the list on the misunderstanding of what is being asked of the US taxpayer.
I agree that we need good and honest people in the press – especially the “Main Stream” – THANK YOU.

Ryanc,
Waterboarding KSM did elicite intel that led to the capture of Hambali, who murdered more than 200 in Bali in 2002.
He himself said he would have done it again if not caught, and had more operations in the works.
If these facts in the memos are true, waterboarding KSM saved lives, whether we condone it or not.

Good job today, Jake. Now will you call him on all his inconsistencies? Thanks!

As usual with Obama we only get half the story. Of course it’s the half that fits his needs. Also, Gibbs must go, the sooner the better.

“I repeat…according to the memos, we caught Hambali based on the ‘take’ from KSM and it stopped more attacks…dispute it with facts.”
I repeat according to the Bush administration Iraq has WMDs and is an immediate threat to this country.
I repeat that any and all Bush administration claims supporting their policies should be looks at as dubious until proven otherwise.
I repeat that today a Bush toadie in the Wapo is claiming that waterboarding KSM in 2003 stopped an attack on LA in 2002.
Apparently when you torture it gives you the ability to timetravel.

I guess all of that backlash from his base scared the heck out of him.
Just more proof that anything Obama says has an expiration date.

“He has virtually zero support from Republicans and is losing Independents.”
Dem Self Id: between 38 & 40%
Ind Self Id: 30 to 32%
GOP Self Id: 24% to 32% (reflects finger on the scale self iding by Rasmussen even though 4 other polls have GOP Id between 25 & 28%)
The last self id breakdown by Gallup had Obama’s approval rating at 90% with Dems, 60% with Ind and 27% with Republicans.
Rasmussen has similar numbers with GOP approval at 26% and Dem approval at 84%.

“(athough, if you check, the word ‘imminent’ was never used..it was ‘gathering’)”
Yeah he just implied that it was impossible to know that attack was imminent.
“Some have said we must not act until the threat is imminent. Since when have terrorists and tyrants announced their intentions, politely putting us on notice before they strike?”
But let”s see who else in the admin said it was an imminent threat
“Absolutely.”
• White House spokesman Ari Fleischer answering whether Iraq was an “imminent threat,” 5/7/03
“This is about imminent threat.”
• White House spokesman Scott McClellan, 2/10/03
“Well, of course he is.”
• White House Communications Director Dan Bartlett responding to the question “is Saddam an imminent threat to U.S. interests, either in that part of the world or to Americans right here at home?”, 1/26/03
“The world is also uniting to answer the unique and urgent threat posed by Iraq whose dictator has already used weapons of mass destruction to kill thousands.”
• President Bush, 11/23/02
“I would look you in the eye and I would say, go back before September 11 and ask yourself this question: Was the attack that took place on September 11 an imminent threat the month before or two months before or three months before or six months before? When did the attack on September 11 become an imminent threat? Now, transport yourself forward a year, two years or a week or a month…So the question is, when is it such an immediate threat that you must do something?”
• Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, 11/14/02
“There are many dangers in the world, the threat from Iraq stands alone because it gathers the most serious dangers of our age in one place. Iraq could decide on any given day to provide a biological or chemical weapon to a terrorist group or individual terrorists.”
• President Bush, 10/7/02
“The Iraqi regime is a threat of unique urgency.”
• President Bush, 10/2/02
“No terrorist state poses a greater or more immediate threat to the security of our people and the stability of the world than the regime of Saddam Hussein in Iraq.”
• Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, 9/19/02
“Some have argued that the nuclear threat from Iraq is not imminent – that Saddam is at least 5-7 years away from having nuclear weapons. I would not be so certain. And we should be just as concerned about the immediate threat from biological weapons. Iraq has these weapons.”
• Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, 9/18/02

“The irony here is that Congress has twice had the chance to ban waterboarding, or simulated drowning, but has twice declined to do so. In both the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005 and the Military Commissions Act of 2006, Congress only barred “cruel, inhuman or degrading” treatment. While some Members have said they believe waterboarding is banned by that language, when given the chance to say so specifically in a statute and be accountable for it, they refused.
As usual, Congress wants it both ways. The Members want to denounce what they call “torture,” but the last thing they want is to be responsible if some future detainee knows about an imminent terrorist attack but the CIA can’t get the information because Congress barred certain kinds of interrogation. So they toss their non-specific language into the lap of the executive, and say “You figure it out.”
WSJ 10/29/2007
So Congress twice had an opportunity to ban waterboarding and refused, and had every chance to call it torture and refused, and now everyone wants to prosecute Bush?
Stupid.

Posted by: Ryan C | Apr 21, 2009 6:35:23 PM
Dennis Blair says the techniques got high value targets.
You know who Blair is, right, Ryan?

“I repeat that today a Bush toadie in the Wapo is claiming that waterboarding KSM in 2003 stopped an attack on LA in 2002.”
So does the CIA, Ryan.
Let Obama release the results. Bet he doesn’t because that would exonerate Bush.

Why cant Charles Gibson call President Obama as President rather than use Mr. Obama. Is there a hidden agenda???

“Dennis Blair says the techniques got high value targets.”
You tried this yesterday parroting Bill Kristol but Blair said no such thing.

The Obama administration denied Tuesday that former Vice President Cheney had directly asked the CIA to declassify memos that he claims would vindicate Bush-era techniques for harsh interrogation of suspected terrorists.
A senior U.S. intelligence offical e-mailed: “The Agency has received no such request from the former Vice President.” (Politico)
This is a great example of how easy it is to dupe a liberal. Cheney never said he made the request of the CIA. He is a provate citizen and cannot order anything of the CIA. He suggested that Obama order the complete release.

Posted by: Ryan C | Apr 21, 2009 7:27:40 PM
It was Baier, not Kristol. Just heard him read the letter.

“This is a great example of how easy it is to dupe a liberal.”
Actually its a great example of how to dupe a right winger.
“Cheney never said he made the request of the CIA.”
Cheney yesterday on FoxNews
“I formally asked that they be declassified now”
“And I’ve now formally asked the CIA to take steps to declassify those memos…”
“He is a provate citizen and cannot order anything of the CIA.”
I said as much yesterday and implied that perhaps Cheney was not aware he was no longer in power and had zero authority to formally request anything.
“He suggested that Obama order the complete release.”
No, he clearly states he made the request of the CIA.
I guess he was lying and you bought his excuse for being caught in the lie hook line and sinker.

“Hamdan is an American cover of international law.”
Yes and the Supreme Court held that we were in violation of Common Article 3 (this is what ended military tribunals)
“It does not represent the Geneva Convention, which covers uniformed combatants of a sovereign nation.”
The Geneva convention also covers non uniformed combatants, partisans, militia etc.

The Geneva Convention calls for Military Tribunals, not civil trials.

WASHINGTON — The man tapped to oversee U.S. intelligence pledged to Congress Thursday there would be no torture on his watch, but National Intelligence Director-nominee Dennis Blair refused to say whether he believes waterboarding – a form of simulated drowning – is torture.
(AP)

It wasn’t a convention like the Shriners or the Elks…It is the Geneva Conventions…as in 4 treaties…get it right…

“The Geneva convention also covers non uniformed combatants, partisans, militia etc.”
Yes Ryan, they (then conventions) classify them as spies. Said spies are to be summarily shot without trial on the field of battle.

“The Geneva Convention calls for Military Tribunals, not civil trials.”
Yes and Bush blew that big time.
It remains to be seen, moreover, whether the regulations will also address such issues as the rights of a prisoner of war under the Geneva Convention to be tried by a tribunal which provides “essential guarantees of independence and impartiality” (Article 84); the right to call witnesses (Article 105); the right to confer with his attorney in private (Article 105); and the right not to be coerced into admitting guilt (Article 99). There is also, according to Article 87, the right not to be “sentenced by the military authorities and courts of the Detaining Power to any penalties except those provided for in respect of members of the armed forces of the said Power who have committed the same acts.” This last right, of course, sets an important limit on the use of the death penalty.
See that part about coercion.