February 12, 2010
— DrewM Consider this a bit of a serious follow up to Crazy Uncle Larry's rant below.
Mukasey takes apart, piece by piece, what the administration is trying to pass off as it's legal and political (at least the "Bush did it too!" bits) justifications for how they dealt with Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab.
Now excerpt can do it justice so read the whole thing but here's the former AG on John Brennan's contention that eveyone should have known that "In FBI custody" meant "read his full rights". After running through the history of detaining enemies on our shores in WWII and Bush era policies and concludes...
Contrary to what the White House homeland security adviser and the attorney general have suggested, if not said outright, not only was there no authority or policy in place under the Bush administration requiring that all those detained in the United States be treated as criminal defendants, but relevant authority was and is the opposite. The Supreme Court held in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld that "indefinite detention for the purpose of interrogation is not authorized" but also said in the same case that detention for the purpose of neutralizing an unlawful enemy combatant is permissible and that the only right of such a combatant -- even if he is a citizen, and Abdulmutallab is not -- is to challenge his classification as such a combatant in a habeas corpus proceeding. This does not include the right to remain silent or the right to a lawyer, but only such legal assistance as may be necessary to file a habeas corpus petition within a reasonable time. That was the basis for my ruling in Padilla v. Rumsfeld that, as a convenience to the court and not for any constitutionally based reason, he had to consult with a lawyer for the limited purpose of filing a habeas petition, but that interrogation need not stop....There was thus no legal or policy compulsion to treat Abdulmutallab as a criminal defendant, at least initially, and every reason to treat him as an intelligence asset to be exploited promptly. The way to do that was not simply to have locally available field agents question him but, rather, to get in the room people who knew about al-Qaeda in Yemen, people who could obtain information, check that information against other available data and perhaps get feedback from others in the field before going back to Abdulmutallab to follow up where necessary, all the while keeping secret the fact of his cooperation. Once his former cohorts know he is providing information, they can act to make that information useless.
Nor is it an answer to say that Abdulmutallab resumed his cooperation even after he was warned of his rights. He did that after five weeks, when his family was flown here from Nigeria. The time was lost, and with it possibly useful information. Disclosing that he had resumed talking only compounded the problem by letting his former cohorts know that they had better cover their tracks.
No doubt Homeland Security Adviser John Brennan thinks Mukasey is serving the goals of al-Qaeda with this op-ed but that's because Brennan is an ass.
The constantly changing and often conflicting stories (Abdulmutallab was 'a lone extremist', they got all the intelligence they needed in the first 50 minutes, now they are are getting intelligence 6 weeks later with the help of his family, Bush did it too!, etc) from this administration shows they simply have no clue what to do.
It seems they know exactly what they want to do...treat a man sent by an international terrorist organization to kill hundreds of Americans exactly as they would treat an American citizen who stole a car. The problem is, it's politically untenable and so they have to fashion all of these stories in an effort to look tough and effective in order to hide their true views.
This is a fight Dick Cheney started almost the day after he and Bush left office and he along with others have had this administration on the run since then. It's funny what you can do when the facts and the American people are on your side.
Posted by: DrewM at
09:00 AM
| Comments (83)
Post contains 713 words, total size 4 kb.
Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at February 12, 2010 09:08 AM (B+qrE)
Posted by: Methos at February 12, 2010 09:08 AM (Xsi7M)
Are you saying that Obama would risk the lives of Americans and compromise terror intelligence for political gain?
Inconceivable!
Posted by: Jim in San Diego at February 12, 2010 09:08 AM (F09Uo)
Well, maybe not unprecedented.
Posted by: Methos at February 12, 2010 09:09 AM (Xsi7M)
So, if I get this right, the current administration only remembers the stuff they think will help them, make up the rest, and then claim that "Bush did it!"
Yep, unprecedented.
Posted by: 141 Driver at February 12, 2010 09:13 AM (JFNQ7)
Okay, I misread that as Uncle Jimbo and just assumed he had written a post on the topic. What? It's not like ace reads the blog either.
Posted by: Methos at February 12, 2010 09:13 AM (Xsi7M)
Personally, I think this is on par with starting a land war in Asia.
It seems they know exactly what they want to do...treat a man sent by an international terrorist organization to kill hundreds of Americans exactly as they would treat an American citizen who stole a car. The problem is, it's politically untenable and so they have to fashion all of these stories in an effort to look tough and effective in order to hide their true views.
And the more they try to cover that view, the more apparent it is.
That poor chicken.
Posted by: alexthechick at February 12, 2010 09:14 AM (8WZWv)
Posted by: Jane D'oh at February 12, 2010 09:14 AM (UOM48)
IOW, just how fucked-up can you make things until fuck-ups can righteously be interpreted (or proven to be) as plans? You don't even need to extrapolate other issues and conflate them into this one. How screwed up is Team Obama's policy towards terrorism? They cannot seem to make a move unless it's the wrong one. That's how screwed up it is.
Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at February 12, 2010 09:15 AM (swuwV)
One might think they've painted themselves into a political corner with this "all terrorists get full rights" rhetoric, but I wouldn't underestimate the ability of the current administration to wax hypocritical whenever convenient.
In other words, I'm still holding out some hope they hold the next one for interrogation regardless of this indefensible rhetoric about terrorist civil rights.
Posted by: looking closely at February 12, 2010 09:15 AM (PwGfd)
Posted by: Dick Cheney's Cock at February 12, 2010 09:16 AM (wgLRl)
and when that happens, there should be some heavy repercussions
Posted by: Unclefacts, Summoner of Meteors at February 12, 2010 09:17 AM (erIg9)
"It's funny what you can do when the facts and the American people are on your side."
Sadly - facts were what John McCain was loathe to use in the last campaign. Let us pray we have someone who is not afraid to speak the truth even if it means the Larry ODonnell's of the world will screech liar and pee their pants on national television.
Posted by: Joe at February 12, 2010 09:19 AM (YwBI6)
Posted by: The Public at February 12, 2010 09:20 AM (qf/U+)
Posted by: Unclefacts, Summoner of Meteors at February 12, 2010 09:20 AM (erIg9)
Posted by: The Public at
February 12, 2010 01:20 PM (qf/U+)
Don't I know it
Posted by: George Hussein Onyango Obama at February 12, 2010 09:22 AM (erIg9)
Posted by: Gramma Dunham at February 12, 2010 09:22 AM (GwPRU)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 12, 2010 09:22 AM (0GFWk)
Posted by: maddogg at February 12, 2010 09:23 AM (OlN4e)
Posted by: The Keynesian Kenyan at February 12, 2010 09:23 AM (xxgag)
Posted by: Jane D'oh at February 12, 2010 09:23 AM (UOM48)
Not so surprisingly, McClatchy dropped "Speaking Truth to Power" from their online corporate banner at some point in the past year.
Posted by: The Public at February 12, 2010 09:26 AM (qf/U+)
Posted by: alexthechick at February 12, 2010 01:14 PM (8WZWv)
Thanks for the thought.
Posted by: The chicken at February 12, 2010 09:29 AM (7t+Ws)
Posted by: Dr. Spank at February 12, 2010 09:30 AM (0FiCa)
Posted by: Vicious Wicked Terrorists at February 12, 2010 09:30 AM (yQHa6)
Posted by: Barack Mussolini Obama at February 12, 2010 09:34 AM (LdYLm)
Don't rub it in.
The last 12 months have been, politically and economically speaking, the absolutely most ruinous I've seen during my adult lifetime (I remember the Carter era, but was really too young to fully appreciate how lousy things were).
Three more years like the last? Ouch.
Posted by: looking closely at February 12, 2010 09:34 AM (PwGfd)
Posted by: maddogg at February 12, 2010 09:34 AM (OlN4e)
Posted by: pudding at February 12, 2010 09:38 AM (HMAS1)
Posted by: ATaLien at February 12, 2010 09:38 AM (SkRi5)
Posted by: USA at February 12, 2010 09:45 AM (YZISw)
Damn, Drew, what can we do but write our wills? Not that there will be anyone around to execute them.
Some days it all gets to me.
Posted by: pudding at February 12, 2010 09:49 AM (HMAS1)
Posted by: the chicken at February 12, 2010 09:50 AM (0uuwS)
Posted by: Andrea M. at February 12, 2010 09:51 AM (fqxV7)
You know what else is treason now that didn't use to be? Speaking truth to power.
Not so surprisingly, McClatchy dropped "Speaking Truth to Power" from their online corporate banner at some point in the past year.
I realize that everybody changes their story when power changes hands, but these people are breathtaking. After raising the level of hysteria to unprecedented heights, after playing politics with EVerything, fter all the horseshit. To now change your story to the exact opposite of what it was? It's mind-blowing. It's enough to give you whiplash.
Posted by: Obi-Wan Kennedohbi at February 12, 2010 09:52 AM (1fanL)
Obama and Holder should be treated as enemy combatants.
Posted by: real joe at February 12, 2010 09:52 AM (IAOAn)
Posted by: agnostica at February 12, 2010 09:53 AM (gbCNS)
Posted by: FUBAR at February 12, 2010 09:54 AM (1fanL)
Thanks for the thought.
Posted by: The chicken at February 12, 2010 01:29 PM (7t+Ws)Get back to work. Lazy fucker.
Posted by: Barbed Cock of Satan at February 12, 2010 09:56 AM (wOGfT)
Dem Sen. Rockefeller on Obama: 'He's beginning to not be believable to me'...
No shit.
Posted by: Tami at February 12, 2010 09:58 AM (VuLos)
Your hash says HaMAS1. HE'S A SPY. Get him!
Posted by: CUS at February 12, 2010 09:58 AM (wOGfT)
Dem Sen. Rockefeller on Obama: 'He's beginning to not be believable to me'...
No shit.
Posted by: Tami at February 12, 2010 01:58 PM (VuLos)
Better headline: Dem Senator Rockefeller Removes Head From Ass, Hilarity Ensues
Posted by: Unclefacts, Summoner of Meteors, and Buckets of Scorn for the Left at February 12, 2010 09:59 AM (erIg9)
I bought new knee pads just for you Dick Cheney!
Oh, and did you know my false teeth come out easy when you lightly bat the back of my head?
Posted by: Nancy P. at February 12, 2010 10:00 AM (fqxV7)
Posted by: Noah at February 12, 2010 10:01 AM (mhD2v)
Posted by: People's Fromt of Judea at February 12, 2010 10:02 AM (0FiCa)
Posted by: People's Fromt of Judea at February 12, 2010 02:02 PM (0FiCa)
FUCKING SPLITTER
Posted by: Unclefacts, Summoner of Meteors, and Buckets of Scorn for the Left at February 12, 2010 10:03 AM (erIg9)
http://tinyurl.com/yhwgjpb
Posted by: CUS at February 12, 2010 10:03 AM (wOGfT)
Don't listen to those assholes, we're the real voice of the people.
Posted by: Judean People's Front at February 12, 2010 10:03 AM (1fanL)
Posted by: People's Front of Judea at February 12, 2010 10:08 AM (0FiCa)
Posted by: Guy Fawkes at February 12, 2010 10:09 AM (cpuvG)
A Fundamental Transformation in baby steps, if you will.
Posted by: Sir Falderol at February 12, 2010 10:11 AM (hk0e+)
Posted by: People's Front of Judea at February 12, 2010 10:13 AM (0FiCa)
Posted by: agnostica at February 12, 2010 10:17 AM (gbCNS)
OT: Harriet Reid tells the ABA to "get a new life"
WASHINGTON -- Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., criticized the American Bar Association on Thursday, saying it should "get a new life" in how it rates prospective federal judges, after one of his choices got a mixed review.
Posted by: conscious, but incoherent at February 12, 2010 10:18 AM (Vu6sl)
Posted by: Judean People's Front at February 12, 2010 10:20 AM (1fanL)
Posted by: Unclefacts, Summoner of Meteors, and Buckets of Scorn for the Left at February 12, 2010 10:21 AM (erIg9)
@63,
Here's a hint Dude!
The Obama adminstration desperately wants an attack to happend within the mainland. Why? They know he has squandered all of his political capital, and they know that if an attack happends, and he gets up on top of the rubble heap, and says exactly what GW said after 911, he officially gets a "Do Over," and also can use the War on Terror to push his Domestic Agenda.
If that can't happend, look for him to change his position with Israel/Iran, and actually start some sort of conflict.
Yes......It's Pathetic......It's Sad....But Poltics is a BloodSport, and the Commies aint stoppin for no reason!
Posted by: Jimi at February 12, 2010 10:23 AM (fqxV7)
Posted by: Samarian People's Front at February 12, 2010 10:23 AM (Xsi7M)
Ice ages would kinda begin like this...I'm just saying.
Posted by: Purple Avenger at February 12, 2010 10:24 AM (qf/U+)
Posted by: s'moron at February 12, 2010 10:25 AM (p1s9n)
Oh no you don't. PMS will haunt you to your dying day, kufir!
Posted by: People's Middle of Samaria at February 12, 2010 10:25 AM (1fanL)
WASHINGTON -- Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., criticized the American Bar Association on Thursday, saying it should "get a new life" in how it rates prospective federal judges, after one of his choices got a mixed review.
Posted by: conscious, but incoherent at February 12, 2010 02:18 PM (Vu6sl)
Of course, Harry conveniently forgot he said this about the ABA and Sotomayor:
Today, Senator Graham suggested that Judge Sotomayor has a poor judicial temperament and suggested she may be a “bully” on the bench.
Judge Sotomayor has demonstrated in this hearing her even and pleasant temperament in the face of difficult questioning.
The ABA’s unanimous “well qualified” rating is the best indicator of Judge Sotomayor’s temperament.Posted by: Tami at February 12, 2010 10:26 AM (VuLos)
Posted by: Unclefacts, Summoner of Meteors, and Buckets of Scorn for the Left at February 12, 2010 10:31 AM (erIg9)
Ice ages would kinda begin like this...I'm just saying.
You need to remember. Weather in NOT Climate! So after it snows for the next hundred years and keeps building up, get back to me.
And I'll prove it was caused by global warming...
Posted by: guy with a degree in climatology at February 12, 2010 10:31 AM (1kwr2)
Posted by: Guy Fawkes at February 12, 2010 10:33 AM (cpuvG)
Posted by: Jean at February 12, 2010 10:39 AM (vb5IK)
I'd go with Apology accepted.
Posted by: toby928 at February 12, 2010 10:49 AM (PD1tk)
I'd go with Apology accepted.
Or "2012!"
Posted by: Methos at February 12, 2010 11:02 AM (Xsi7M)
Posted by: kevin at February 12, 2010 03:34 PM (Wr9rm)
Posted by: five fingers at July 30, 2010 05:59 PM (MgFtU)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.2323 seconds, 211 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.








Posted by: negentropy at February 12, 2010 09:03 AM (27KAF)