Pelosi: President Should Reject Legal Advice Seeking to Justify Torture

[struggle4progress]

House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi released the following statement today on media reports that Bush Administration lawyers advised the White House in internal memos that the war on terrorism might justify torturing suspected terrorists:

<snip>
"Having served on the Intelligence Committee for 10 years, I know that the American people expect that their security at home and the safety of our troops overseas will be safeguarded by the best possible intelligence. However, Americans also expect that intelligence to be obtained in a manner consistent with the law.

"The notion that the law is whatever a President determines it to be is so contrary to our Constitution and our experience as a nation that President Bush should have rejected it out of hand. He must do so now, clearly and unequivocally.

"If other countries adopted the approach his lawyers recommended in one memo -- that 'criminal statutes infring on the President's ultimate authority' -- it would put our troops at risk. Laws regulating the treatment of prisoners are necessary to protect our own soldiers, not just the rights of suspects."

[TahitiNut]

1. Too late, Nancy.

:shrug:

[struggle4progress]

2. I think she's just getting her ticket punched.

:)

[Solly Mack]

3. Even if he does now reject it, he's still guilty...

getting on TV and telling america he nows thinks it was a bad idea won't change the harm he has caused...

I don't want Shrub to be given a backdoor.

I agree he should have rejected the ah.."reasoning"(behind the memos)...from the git-go...but Chucklenuts could claim tomorrow he rejects the ah...logic... behind the memos...and tomorrow's headlines will read: "Bush rejected Counsels Memos on Torture".....and that will be what the rightwing will hammer home...

fact is, Shrub approved the torture...and he should be held accountable for it.

[struggle4progress]

5. I think there's not much chance Bush'll follow Pelosi's advice.

It's more in keeping with WH style to simply try changing the topic.

Anyway, we'll see. This might actually be fun!

[Mechatanketra]

7. Sigh.

You're right -- the fact is, he both sought and took the advice already. Nothing's going to change the harm it's caused, and this kind of tepid chiding is only going to make it worse, by destroying whatever sense of urgency people might feel. It's just depressing to hear, after all of what we've learned since this mess broke, the best the Dem leadership can come up with is "Oh, you should say something bad about it now."

WAKE THE F*** UP, NANCY! Bush isn't going to "reject" a legal theory that gives him absolute power no matter how anti-Constitutional it is, because it gives him absolute power. Are you getting the picture? People need to stop assuming Republicans are going to start acting like decent human beings if you just remind them nicely that what they're doing is evil. Stop treating these people like they're on our f***ing side. That's what got Bush in office in the first place -- nobody (nobody in a place to do anything about it, that is) was willing to stand up and face the situation for what it was: a criminal conspiracy in action.

[oldhat]

4. Good for you Pelosi

You're my representative in my fine city of San Francisco, Pelosi. Good to see you step up and show your guns.

Fight harder, now.

Impeach these motherfuckers.

[salin]

6. Link:

http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/040608/dctu059_1.html

[Media_Lies_Daily]

8. Pay close attention to this...this is part of the case being built for...

...impeachment AFTER Beavis and Butthead are indicted in the Plame case.

All of these other issues like this will be lumped together as part of the "high crimes and misdemeanors" trigger.

The game is afoot.

[Catfight]

9. heehee...Beavis and Butthead..very appropriate!

[John_H]

10. Crap. Nancy's back to being gunshy. n/t

[gratuitous]

13. Perhaps

But there's another way to read this: A first step. In a couple of days, Pelosi can say, "Earlier this week, I called on the president to reject the legal advice of his Justice Department, seeking to justify torture. He has not done so. I can only conclude that he endorses the use of torture. If he does not, I again ask him to state unequivocally his opposition."

And then, in a couple more days. "It's clear that the president, with the support of his Justice Department, believes he is above the highest laws of our land, and the American traditions of jurisprudence in endorsing torture. I again call on President Bush to state publicly that it is not the policy of his administration to use torture, and to discipline or fire those members of the Justice Department seeking to establish a legal basis for it."

Finally, hit him with the "high crimes and misdemeanors" charge. If you roll that accusation out first, everyone tunes out. "Blatant partisanship," the talking heads will sniff, and dismiss it out of hand. But by going slowly, and building the case day by day, you bring the commentators around to your point of view, and the impeachable offense soon builds its own momentum.

Of course, that presumes that Pelosi actually has a plan, and will follow through. Also, that the presstitutes will actually give a flying fuck about torture officially sanctioned by the U.S. government. So there are two stretches right there. But it could happen.

[bobthedrummer]

11. Torturers hiding behind that broadest of shields-national security

Then there are the mercenaries employed by the administration of George W.Bush aka The War President from companies like CACI and TITAN, they've been revered untouchables too to some.:grr::puke::argh:

Some of the documentation of these horrific crimes wound up on the Internet for $$$, other pictures were used as screen-savers on US military computers.

And who pays for the mercenaries employed by the administration of George W. Bush aka The War President?

Cui bono.

NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW.

[Bandit]

12. "that 'criminal statutes infring on the President's ultimate authority' "

This is what we need to hammer on. The torture is just a side issue. When they start saying the President is above the law we are in very deep shit. torture is minor compared to this way of thinking. This has to be hammered on again and again. They need to be asked on every talk show "Do you really feel the president is above the law as he claims?"