about | news | work | blog | contact | home

Dec 31, 2007

Shame on Yoo
Posted by: Alex Gibney

In "Taxi to the Dark Side" we see the interview with John Yoo, the man who, while serving at the office of legal counsel, wrote many of the opinions that sought to legitimize the ability of the executive branch to authorize torture. 

Yoo has consistently said that he was just acting as a lawyer, dispensing legal advice to his "clients," the President of the United States and the Executive Branch.  

But many of Yoo's critics have charged that he went way beyond dispensing advice.  Rather, he bent and twisted the law in order to facilitate the commission of a crime: torture.  For this he, Alberto Gonzales and Dick Cheney's counsel, DAvid Addington may themselves be guilty of crimes.  It is illegal for a lawyer to help a client figure out how to fudge the law in order to commit a crime, particularly when the lawyer knows that his/her advice may reasonably lead to the commission of a crime.   

Scott Horton, in his wonderful column for Harpers, "No Comment," cites a precedent for the potential prosecution of Yoo and Addington.  I include an excerpt below.  It is also interesting to note that much of the written record from the Office of Legal Counsel and the counsel to the president spent a great deal of time trying to render  opinions that would allow the executive branch to avoid prosecution for war crimes.  

Horton: 

"In 1946, the United States prosecuted two Justice Department lawyers for a peculiar crime. They had written memoranda which, in disregard of international law, facilitated the torture and abuse of prisoners. They were sentenced to ten years in prison, less time served. That was in the days when the Justice Department lived up to its name. The case is called United States v. Altstoetter. It would be a good case for Michael Mukasey to read; his underlings could benefit from a reading, too, since the time is approaching when it’s going to have some direct impact in their own lives.

In George Bush’s America, however, lawyers who specialize in making torture and abuse possible are promoted. Indeed, they become attorney general and get appointed to Court of Appeals judgeships. And one of the key figures in this disgraceful saga is Steven Bradbury, the “acting” head of the Office of Legal Counsel. Many senators demanded that Michael B. Mukasey withdraw his nomination to head the office after it was learned that he had issued memoranda enabling waterboarding and other torture practices. In fact, it was later learned that Bradbury was brought into the job in a rush when his predecessor, Daniel Levin, started exploring the need to impose limits on waterboarding. Levin was fired so that Bradbury could come in and confirm that under Bush torutre knows no limits.

However, Mukasey’s decision to wink at the process of torture and abuse is nowhere more evident than in his decision to proceed with the promotion of one of the prime torture lawyers, Bradbury. President Bush was prepared to use his recess appointment power to reward Bradbury with an order which would take away the word “acting” and make his position permanent—within the time limits of the recess appointment.

But the Senate figured this out, and by convening every day, it has blocked the appointment. As the Associated Press’s Laurie Kellman reports:

    A nine-second session gaveled in and out by Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va., prevented Bush from appointing as an assistant attorney general a nominee roundly rejected by majority Democrats. Without the pro forma session, the Senate would be technically adjourned, allowing the president to install officials without Senate confirmation.

Bravo for the Senate."
 
Nov 12, 2007

More on Mukasey
Posted by: Alex Gibney

In Talking Points Memo 


Greg Sargent reveals the hidden reason behind Sen. Reid's decision to call a quick vote in the Senate on the Mukasey nomination - a decision that may have been partly responsible for the fact that none of the five Senators who are Presidential candidates voted.  

The reason: Reid swapped the Mukasey vote for an agreement by the Republican Leadership to allow a vote on the Defense Appropriations Bill.  The Democrats were eager to vote for $459 billion in military funding that doesn't fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.  That way the Democrats could avoid criticism from Republicans that they (Dems) don't support our troops and are soft on defense while still remaining true to their recently discovered anti-war "principles."  

OK, let me see if I understand this: Sen. Reid gave up an opportunity for a filibuster on Mukasey so that he could avoid the possibility of being criticized by Republicans.  Makes sense inside the beltway I guess: whenever you have a chance to jettison a principle in favor of avoiding criticism, go for it!

Man, these Democratic senators are sooo sensitive.  Don't want to be criticized.  That would really hurt.  All those tears might spoil Charlie Schumer's chardonnay while he's toasting the tax breaks he gave to his hedge fund pals at Blackstone.  

When it comes to the Senate, the only sensible response comes from the Marx Brothers:  

I don't know what they have to say,
it makes no difference anyway -
whatever it is, I'm against it!
No matter what it is or who commenced it,
I'm against it!
 
Run Awaaay!
Posted by: Alex Gibney

I was dismayed to see that, in the vote on the confirmation of Judge Mukasey last night, every one of the Senators who is a presidential candidate did not vote.  That's McCain, Clinton, Obama, Dodd and Biden.  

Apparently for presidential contenders, the professional advice - when faced with the prospect of defending a vital American principle - is to do what the knights did when faced with the White Rabbit in "Monty Python and the Holy Grail": "Run Awaaay!"

What a despicable comment on the absence of leaders in our political system.  Who do we look to to inspire us?  Or even to stand for something? Anything? 

To quote the Boss: "Is there anybody alive out there...?" 

 
Jan 16, 2007

Festival Recap
Posted by: Alex Gibney

The sneak preview of the rough cut of "Taxi to the Dark Side" (premiering at the Tribeca Film Festival) and the Mountaintop Film Festival was a great success.  The film seemed to have a powerful impact on the audience there.  "Tears of rage" were on display.

Claudia Becker's festival is really a treasure.  Everyone should put it on
their festival schedule.

Two notes on the appalling policy of detainee abuse that "Taxi" deals with:

First, everyone should be outraged at the recent remarks by Charles D.
Simpson, the deputy assistant secretary of defense for
detainee affairs.  He recently called for a boycott of law firms that are
aiding in the defense of any Guantanamo detainees.  What's next: an official
policy of lynch mobs?  This is an outrageous affront to the rule of law and
the presumption of innocence.  Every concerned American should call their
representatives and demand his immediate resignation.

Second, David Garten, a wonderful photographer whom I met at the festival
passed on an interesting bit of history.  When he was a senior at Yale,
George W. Bush defended "branding" at DKE, the jock fraternity at yale.
When I say "branding," I don't refer to the clever marketing practice; I am
talking about searing naked flesh with a red-hot coat hanger.  George W.
Bush reassured concerned parents that each wound was "only a cigarette
burn."  It's  interesting how early GW - the most vociferous advocate of
"coercive interrogation" ever to occupy the White House - started bobbing
for a few bad apples.

 

Previously...