Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Evidence Leans Toward Bush/Cheney Torture Conspiracy

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 » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-02-09 07:50 PM
Original message
Evidence Leans Toward Bush/Cheney Torture Conspiracy

Evidence Leans Toward Bush/Cheney Torture Conspiracy

by Patriot Daily News Clearinghouse



When government officials agree to torture prisoners, issue sham legal opinions to "authorize" the torture contrary to law and then enact laws designed to prevent prosecution, the law calls that conspiracy. Evidence that started as a sporadic trickle and is now flowing steadily indicates that former administration officials, including President Bush and Vice President Cheney, conspired to commit torture.

Rep. John Olver (D-MA) has recognized the possibility that our "President, Vice President and other top officials conspired to create a policy" to sanction torture.

<...>

The engine of that conspiracy is the War Council of lawyers for Bush and Cheney.

<...>

Former defense and Bush administration officials have stated that the torture program was primarily the work of the "War Council," a group of five lawyers with key positions in the administration who "reinterpreted or tossed out the U.S. and international laws that govern the treatment of prisoners in wartime" in compliance with orders issued by Bush and Cheney. The War Council was convened by Cheney’s legal counsel, David Addington and included White House counsel Gonzales, Gonzales’s White House Deputy Tim Flannigan, the Pentagon’s General Counsel William Haynes and OLC lawyer Yoo.

<...>

Torture Conspiracy Law

The U.S. anti-torture statute criminalizes torture and torture conspiracy. We can thank Bush (pdf file) for adding torture conspiracy as a crime in 2001.

<...>

Thus, the statute of limitations clock starts to run only when Bush and Cheney have stopped trying to maintain their torture program. Technically, that day has not yet arrived because Cheney is still campaigning to persuade America and Obama to continue torture. However, even absent the Dickie/Lizzie pro-torture campaign, at the very least the crime continued until the end of the second Bush term, that is, noon on January 20, 2009. Former federal prosecutor Elizabeth de la Vega summarizes:

<...>

The statute of limitations for torture and torture conspiracy is eight years for noncapital cases. However, there is no time limit when the "commission of such offense resulted in, or created a foreseeable risk of, death or serious bodily injury to another person." Given that there has been only one torture prosecution under this law, I interpret the statute of limitations conservatively and thus would prefer a prosecution commenced within eight years or any legislative time extension as proposed by House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers to avoid a 5 o’clock surprise.

more



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-02-09 09:02 PM
Response to Original message
1. Cheney ‘Fesses Up that Rapport, Not Torture, Got Intelligence
Edited on Tue Jun-02-09 09:02 PM by ProSense

Cheney ‘Fesses Up that Rapport, Not Torture, Got Intelligence

By: emptywheel Tuesday June 2, 2009 8

Greg Sargent catches Cheney parsing carefully about whether the two CIA documents he's trying to get released will prove that torture works.

The key moment came when his interviewer said: “You want some documents declassified having to do with waterboarding.” Cheney replied:

“Yes, but the way I would describe them is they have to do with the detainee program, the interrogation program. It’s not just waterboarding. It’s the interrogation program that we used for high-value detainees. There were two reports done that summarize what we learned from that program, and I think they provide a balanced view.”

Greg speculates:

My bet is Cheney is planning to cite the valuable intel in the docs and say that the program — of which torture was only a part — was responsible for producing it. He’ll fudge the question of whether the torture itself was actually responsible for generating that information. Cheney is as experienced as any Washington hand at using precise language to obfsucate, and this is the game plan. You heard it here first.

Greg's right--Cheney's making a key retreat off his claims. That's because we know the CIA got a ton of intelligence from some of the detainees, particularly KSM. But I've shown repeatedly, with my half-completed review of the KSM intelligence used in the 9/11 Report, that the bulk of this information came long after KSM was waterboarded in March 2003. The first big chunks of intelligence came from him in July 2003, and there were big chunks in the months that followed. This is important because the CIA started using rapport as well as abuse. Though we don't know when they did so, it is likely that much of the intelligence they got from KSM came at least partly because of this rapport based interrogation.

So I'm not surprised that the program--including rapport--got intelligence. I'm just curious why Cheney is backtracking on his big claims now.






Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rhett o rick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-02-09 11:34 PM
Response to Reply #1
5. Cheney wants to limit the focus on "the interrogation program that we used for high-value
detainees." Because he is hoping that intelligence we might have gotten from the "high-value" detainees, might justify the torture program. This is wrong on many levels. First, even if we got good intelligence from the torture of "high-value" detainees, it doesn't justify torture. No where in the law does it say that torture is ok if you get good intelligence. Second, how would this justification carry over to justify the torture of the "low-value" detainees. Wild guess, I am saying that 90% of the detainees were "low-value". Probably all the detainees that were tortured to death were "low-value".

Cheney is as low a life form as Stalin, Hitler, and Pol Pot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
havocmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-02-09 10:36 PM
Response to Original message
2. Kick
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-02-09 10:50 PM
Response to Original message
3. Very interesting and dare I say encouraging?
I recall being annoyed with a woman on Countdown suggesting that a Special Prosecutor should not be appointed right away to allow time for information to leak out - drip, drip, drip. I can see her point now that some devastatingly incriminating evidence has come to light.

The perpetrators deserve at the very least to be treated as pariahs, but prosecution would be the best and most just remedy. Fingers still crossed.

K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-02-09 10:58 PM
Response to Original message
4. How cravenly draconian do
you have to be to set this up?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Senator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-03-09 01:32 AM
Response to Original message
6. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYC_SKP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-03-09 01:59 AM
Response to Original message
7. Rec Ten and a kick.
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Festivito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-03-09 08:13 AM
Response to Original message
8. Last defense. It was Bush's fault and you can only impeach him.
Can't jail him for presidential acts. Can't jail the rest because they all followed Bush's lead.
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 Thu May 02nd 2024, 03:44 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) 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