Monday, June 8, 2009

A few "bad apples"?

I don't think so. Greenwald looks at the torture memos and the response by the career DOJ folks. It goes all the way to the top:

...

But the real story here is obvious -- these DOJ memos authorizing torture were anything but the by-product of independent, good faith legal analysis. Instead, those memos -- just like the pre-war CIA reports about The Threat of Saddam -- were coerced by White House officials eager for bureaucratic cover for what they had already ordered. This was done precisely so that once this all became public, they could point to those memos and have the political and media establishment excuse what they did ("Oh, they only did what they DOJ told them was legal"'/"Oh, they were only reacting to CIA warnings about Saddam's weapons"). These DOJ memos, like the CIA reports, were all engineered by the White House to give cover to what they wanted to do; they were not the precipitating events that led to and justified those decisions. That is the critical point proven by the Comey emails, and it is completely obscured by the NYT article, which instead trumpets the opposite point ("Unanimity at DOJ that these tactics were legal") because that's the story their leaking sources wanted them to promote. [my ems]

...


All the evidence is out there in black and white. All we're waiting for is the political will by AG Holder and the President to see these assholes in jail. It's time to use this to finally drive the stake through the neocon heart.

No comments: