Holder Just Made Me a Promise

As Attorney General Eric Holder left an appropriations subcommittee hearing on Thursday I spoke loudly from the third row as he prepared to leave the room:

"We need a special prosecutor for torture, Mr. Attorney General. Americans like the rule of law. The rule of law for everybody."

He replied as he approached and walked by, surrounded by bodyguards:

"And you will be proud of your country."

I was joined by others in replying simultaneously:

"Yes, we want to be proud of our country. We're ready. No need to wait."

Holder knew exactly what it would take for me to be proud of my country, and he told me directly that I would be.

Will I? Time will tell.

Some friends from Code Pink and Veterans for Peace and I had held up signs during the hearing: "Torture Is Illegal", "Special Prosecutor", "Justice for ALL", "Are Laws for Everyone?", "Special Counsel for War Crimes", "No Torture", etc.

But I had come with a coalition of groups led by the ACLU in an attempt to present a petition to Holder asking for a special prosecutor.

Pre-hearing we presented the petition to an assistant attorney general who then sat in the front row with a few other DOJ staffers. He promised to hand Holder the petition, and I asked him again in the hallway afterwards, and he promised to hand it to him.

Here's the opening of the ACLU's press release:

"A broad coalition of advocacy groups today will deliver petitions containing a quarter million signatures to Attorney General Eric Holder demanding that he appoint an independent prosecutor to investigate the Bush administration’s use of torture on terrorism suspects. The petitions were gathered by the American Civil Liberties Union, MoveOn.org Political Action, the Center for Constitutional Rights, Firedoglake.com, Democrats.com and other advocacy groups. The petitions will be delivered during Holder’s testimony before a House Appropriations Subcommittee."

And here's what I said in that press release:

"David Swanson, Washington Director of Democrats.com: 'Torturing people to compel agreement with fictional justifications for war suggests that we have not advanced greatly during the past millennium. And yet I know that we have, and that we can prove it by enforcing our laws in the face of fear and misunderstanding. A delay cannot be justified by a lack of evidence (the evidence is overwhelming) or by a political calculation. Appointing an independent special counsel to enforce our laws would give a new basis for progress in our relations with the world, a rationale for improving our criminal code moving forward, and the necessary space for congress to properly pursue accountability and prevention of future abuses of power.'"

This was my blog of the hearing. A number of congress members said and asked very good things, but the questioning was not very pointed, and the answers were either vague or put matters off until June when task forces finish their work. (Do I have to wait until then to start being proud of my country?)

2:40 p.m. Rep David Obey opens with story of political prosecution in WI.

2:45 pm Rep Frank Wolf (R., Va.) talked about 9-11.

2:50 Holder says OPR report should be done "relatively soon."

2:55 Obey is asking about prosecution for torture team.

2:59 Holder says DOJ task forces on interrogations and detentions will report in July, but does not actually answer the question of whether there will be prosecutions.

3:01 Wolf is worried that enforcing the law might make employees in the future feel they had to be careful to obey laws. So, Wolf repeats the question: will you pursue the prosecutions? AND are there docs that show torturing saved lives?

3:02 Holder will not prosecute people who acted in good faith on justice dept memos, but claims to enforce the rule of law blah blah and MIGHT be open to prosecuting the people who wrote the memos. Holder has not seen and is unfamiliar with any memos that back up Cheney's claims but he hopes to make all OLC memos public. Wolf wants ALL memos, OLC and otherwise.

Let him have em!!! Here's how crazy Cheney's claim is.

3:09 hearing's being played live on MSNBC right now, and covered on CNN and Fox. Fattah is now asking about massive funding of prisons and pittance for re-entry programs, and about mortgage fraud.

3:10 Holder answers re mortgage fraud.

3:13 Asked again, Holder says he supports the Second Chance Act. He supports schools and parenting. (Not really his department?) He supports educating prisoners. (So why not fund it?)

Questioning drifting from topic of torture. I'm reading the news. NY Times has an op-ed from Roger Cohen, who wants immunity for torturers.

3:21 Schiff nails it. Holder said water boarding torture. Torture has occurred. Laws must be enforced.

3:25 Holder hems and haws.

3:25 Culverson wants to know if CIAers who did not act in good faith might be prosecuted. Holder says yes.

3:31 Serrano: if we do not prosecute torture we provide a recruiting tool to terrorists, and we leave people unable to travel outside the country for fear of arrest. But Serrano asks no question and moves on to immigrants issues.

3:40 Rep Ruppersberger asks about the torture again and Holder answers about his task forces through July again.

I just posted an excellent article the AG should read.

I'm going to turn this off and try to talk to Holder when he leaves.

More to come.

(See above.)

Good luck.......to all of us who hunger for justice.

:applause:

Those words of hope feel so good.

Thank you for being there for those of us who could not.

No need to watch CSPAN. We have you. :)

Thanks for your work and a kick.

:kick:

:-)

:thumbsup:

She made me think twice about what could possibly happen if a special prosecutor & grand jury were assigned this case.

She pointed out that prosecutors & grand juries would require secrecy & progress/information being kept from the public eye. Plus, those in congress who do not want de-classified documents to be released publically will have the perfect opportunity to say, "Well, we're not going to doing anything else," & although she didn't think Obama would be inclined to do so, it could give his administration the perfect excuse to bury the case.

She thought it was essential to have this out in the open, on the front pages with public narrative. She said having a grand jury doesn't guarantee indictments. She cited the Libby case, something the progressives thought was a sure bet for accountability, which produced only a perjury indictment.

If you missed it, you can find the video on the http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677/#30356123">Countdown page.

And, thanks for such impressive work, David.

Response to Elizabeth de la Vega: Disagreement with a Friend and a Hero
By David Swanson

There are lots of supposed reasons not to appoint a special prosecutor. The first set of such supposed reasons to come from someone intelligent and well-informed with good intentions has come from Elizabeth de la Vega. Here is a response.

1. If we do not extend the statutes of limitations, the careful and considered delay could end up becoming immunity. Simply claiming that the clock doesn't start ticking until the last act of conspiracy to conceal does not do it, since half the legal experts like that reasoning and half do not and we would have to argue each case, including cases that do not clearly involve conspiracies to conceal. In fact, the most egregious crimes have involved open confessions from the highest officials.

2. The Senate as a whole will never ever approve any useful investigation except in committees, but it might convict following an impeachment that changes public awareness.

3. Congressional hearings produce relatively little.

4. Congress should extend the statutes of limitations, bust the media monopolies to produce more reporting, and reissue and enforce the outstanding subpoenas into which lots of careful work went over the past 2 years.

5. Leahy joined the DOJ in pushing a commission as a substitute, not as a first step, and anything like that begun before a special prosecutor is begun will be treated as a substitute.

6. Impeaching Bybee should begin at once.

7. A House select committee looking into restoring Congressional power and restricting presidential should begin at once or after a prosecution begins, but Conyers' or Leahy's proposal for a commission created by both houses will not go anywhere.

8. House and Senate committees should hold hearings, including to reissue all the outstanding subpeonas.

9. We should not let a hearing begin that can be seen as a substitute for enforcing laws, and there is no reason to delay enforcing laws -- certainly not a deficiency of evidence!

10. De la Vega knows the law and means well and I'm open to being convinced by her, but haven't been yet.

defendants, and due process is what this is all about. What is the point in denying due process to the Bush/Cheney suspects (and they are only suspects at this point, in spite of all the evidence we have)? That in itself would be a betrayal of our values. And it is the values that we are trying to uphold. This is not a matter of getting vengeance for people who embarrassed or disappointed us. This is about upholding our rule of law. Part of our rule of law is the rule that the accused is entitled to defend him- or herself.

:yourock:

You deserve a Medal of Freedom. :grouphug:

And keep the pressure up.
And I hope many more will join in on this.
K&R

:)

I STAND with you.
:patriot:

K&R

We're going to hold you to holding him to that promise. :)

to that

:patriot:

:fistbump:

ROCK

:yourock:

Nominated.

still their move

There is so much injustice but this kind of depravity is just insane. We CANNOT let it go unpunished and survive as a country. So thanks again!

on those petitions, and among all those many DUers here grateful for your tremendous commitment to this issue.


K & R.

This could be a turning point in history.

Carpe the Holder and don't let him back down in the face of a cesspool of Bushtards!

what did he say about the political prosecutions, those serving time because bushco politicized the DOJ?

:applause:

i think it's gonna happen. really starting to think it will happen. i emailed AG Holder today. figure i'll do that about every other day until it does happen. or i pass away.

I am thrilled at his specific wording in response to you.

with sincerity,
Divine Discontent (formerly known as themartyred)



more at www.cafepress.com/warisprofitable

Broad Coalition Of Advocacy Groups Present Attorney General With Petition

http://www.aclu.org/safefree/torture/39446prs20090423.html

"...David Swanson, Washington Director of Democrats.com: "Torturing people to compel agreement with fictional justifications for war suggests that we have not advanced greatly during the past millennium. And yet I know that we have, and that we can prove it by enforcing our laws in the face of fear and misunderstanding. A delay cannot be justified by a lack of evidence (the evidence is overwhelming) or by a political calculation. Appointing an independent special counsel to enforce our laws would give a new basis for progress in our relations with the world, a rationale for improving our criminal code moving forward, and the necessary space for congress to properly pursue accountability and prevention of future abuses of power."

Thank you so much for posting, this is very encouraging!

perhaps you might add next time, something along the lines of "the country can handle it, trust me." ;)

seeps out before the special prosecutor is named.

We intend to hold you to that promise.

Thank you.

K&R x 1,000

:toast:

Sounds good but there are problems. One, we get shut out. A grand jury gets to hear all there is and we get nothing. Just like with the outing of the CIA agent, Plame.

Two, the investigation is not an investigation of a current government so there is no special need. Making it a speical case would keep congress from doing anything, again like with Plame.

The best way to get about this is having a donny-brook. Keep it public and let anyone who wants to make a case make one.

IMO, of course.

Mr. Holder, you made a promise, I hope you are a great success!

the torture itself. The rights of the accused are not properly protected before a commission.

A commission is appropriate in cases in which there is no defendant whose rights must be respected. That is not the case here.

Thank you, David....you're a fighter and we appreciate you!

THANK YOU for representing us so well.

K&R

we can't stop. we have to pursue this until it happens.

So this will have to do:

:applause: :yourock: :woohoo:

AND THIS IS A BAD THING?