White House Pressures GOP on Detainees

[sabra]

http://www.casperstartribune.net/articles/2006/09/12/ap/washington/d8k3jjlo0.txt

White House Pressures GOP on Detainees

WASHINGTON - President Bush dispatched the vice president and top aides to the Capitol on Tuesday to try to break an election-season deadlock with Republicans over the surveillance and prosecution of terrorism suspects.

But officials met stiff resistance from senators and House leaders who say they refuse to give the White House a blank check over the war on terror. The standoff raised questions about whether the president could unite Republicans on his anti-terror agenda before November's midterm elections.

Vice President Dick Cheney and White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten appealed to Senate Republicans during their weekly policy lunch to pass legislation that would let Bush begin prosecuting terror suspects. The legislation also would limit the circumstances under which a government interrogator could be prosecuted for mistreating a detainee.

Also meeting with lawmakers this week on detainee treatment was CIA Director Michael Hayden.

[Monkeyman]

1. Lets march to the same song Bullshit

[Kagemusha]

2. Quibble: since when are we not calling him Gen. Hayden?

Did he retire? Or did we stop calling ex generals, generals, even when describing their current duties?

[TomInTib]

5. Good point. They are trying to remove the public link.

Is General Hayden the first active military head of CIA?

[TomInTib]

3. Multi-pronged attack

You can bet that they are pushing hard for legislation to sidetrack any War Crimes prosecution.

[Gman]

4. So basicly to hell with the GOP congresscritters' reelection campaigns

They're more worried about covering their asses in case the Dems take back Congress.

[PassingFair]

6. They're pretektin our famlies, see.

They're just preteckin us.

You are mean and a bully like that
dark-eyed Matt Lauer guy.

[LynnTheDem]

7. WHY?

WHY "limit the circumstances under which a government interrogator could be prosecuted for mistreating a detainee"?

If we don't do it, why allow special protection for anyone who does???

Gee. Could be because under US PRESIDENTIAL AUTHORITY America in fact DOES TORTURE?

Gee. Could be.

[HuffleClaw]

8. unlike bush THEY have hopes of being reelected

and to vote FOR torture is not gonna earn 'em any friends.

[rodeodance]

9. i hope they dicker for LONG time.

"I think we've made a pretty good case that giving something to a jury to convict a defendant (with hidden evidence) is a nonstarter," Graham added.

Sens. Susan Collins, R-Maine, and Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pa., said they agree all evidence should be shared with a defendant.

Graham and others said the biggest sticking points left on the bill were on the circumstances under which an interrogator could be prosecuted for mistreating detainees.

The administration would forbid what critics call a bare bones list of violations _ such as torture, murder and rape _ under the 1996 War Crimes Act that potentially leaves open the door for harsher interrogation methods. Warner, Graham and McCain are pushing more precise definitions, as well as a ban on coerced testimony, to ensure tough interrogations do not lead to abuse or violate the Geneva Conventions.

[kainah]

10. sabra...

FWIW, in the future, I'd grab an AP link from just about anywhere but the Casper Star Tribune. While it's a good newspaper -- and the one I read daily -- their website sucks and they have a very annoying habit of changing links multiple times.

I appreciate the article, though. Just want to make your excellent work on LBN a little easier as it's likely this link will soon be broken.

[gratuitous]

11. Bush to Congress: Fuck your agenda! Cover my ass!

Sure, Congress is scheduled to meet for the fewest legislative days in something like half a century, and the schedule is jammed full of hometown pork to try to shpritz a little perfume on the Republican incumbents' bullshit; but what is that compared to making sure that Bush and his corrupt cabal aren't indicted for war crimes and crimes against humanity?

Congress to stop writing blank checks for the White House? Absolutely the worst thing Stupidhead could ever dread to hear.

[DeepModem Mom]

12. Cheney sent to Capitol Hill to break up surveillance, tribunals deadlock

CNN/AP: Cheney sent to break up surveillance, tribunals deadlock
September 12, 2006

WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Bush dispatched the vice president and top aides to the Capitol on Tuesday to try to break an election-season deadlock with Republicans over the surveillance and prosecution of terrorism suspects.

But officials met stiff resistance from senators and House leaders who say they refuse to give the White House a blank check over the war on terror. The standoff raised questions about whether the president could unite Republicans on his anti-terror agenda before November's midterm elections.

Vice President Dick Cheney and White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten appealed to Senate Republicans during their weekly policy lunch to pass legislation that would let Bush begin prosecuting terror suspects. The legislation also would limit the circumstances under which a government interrogator could be prosecuted for mistreating a detainee....

***

The administration is also pressing separate legislation that would let it track terrorists by electronic surveillance.

Several versions of that legislation are expected to advance through the Senate and House Judiciary Committees this week. They would give legal status to the controversial surveillance program, as well as impose new rules and congressional oversight....

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/09/12/congress.terrorism.ap/index.html

[pinto]

13. In the absence of adequate disclosure (?) - permitting the defense to see

evidence against the accused - if any of the tried and convicted detainees end up in a prison in the United States there'll be a successful appeal to the courts. Bushco knows that and wants the law amended for a pass on basic American legal rule of law, legal rights and procedure. I find it blatantly subversive and the Republican Congress ought to stand up on this one.

[Robbien]

14. The Nation article lays out the case in better detail

When the Capitol police start politely clearing the hallways outside the Senate floor on a Tuesday afternoon it usually signals that Vice President Dick Cheney has decided to attend the Republicans' weekly policy lunch. But the gentility went out the window around noon today as the cops grabbed bystanders and pulled them out of the way as they rushed to empty the area not just for Cheney and White House chief of staff Josh Bolten, but for a special guest: Lady Margaret Thatcher.

The Senate Republican leaders weren't breaking out the top tier invitations for nothing. Three moderate GOP Senators have split with them and the White House over how to treat detainees at Guantanamo Bay and around the world. At the lunch, Senators John Warner, John McCain and Lindsey Graham were scheduled to present their case for a detainee bill that conforms to the Geneva Conventions. The White House and Senate leaders are pushing one that would allow interrogations using methods that strain — or break, depending on whom you ask — the Conventions' rules against abuse.

Rolling out former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, who famously urged George H. W. Bush not to "go wobbly" ahead of the first Gulf War, was a particular bit of political hardball by the President's Hill allies as they try to stiffen spines in their caucus. And the stakes are high. The November mid-term elections may hinge on national security, and McCain and company are depriving their party of its best weapon — a vote that makes Democrats look weak. More important, the White House claims, is that McCain and company could outlaw methods of gaining intelligence that have been effective in preventing attacks against the U.S.

But some Senators and legal experts see another reason for the heightened concern at the White House. On paper, at least, White House officials and CIA officers could be vulnerable to prosecution for past or future use of illegal methods of interrogation — unless Congress changes the law.

The threat of prosecution comes not from some left-wing activists or even the House Democrats, but from the highest court in the country. In his concurring opinion in the Hamdan v. Rumsfeld case last summer, Justice Anthony Kennedy said that the administration had to live within the Geneva Conventions. "Violations are considered 'war crimes,' punishable as federal offenses, when committed by or against United States nationals and military personnel," he wrote. And for emphasis, Kennedy pointed to paragraph 2441 of the U.S. code, which lays out the penalties for those violations, including life imprisonment and the death penalty.

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1534291,00.html

[bleever]

15. Jihad H. Christ

The wave is breaking, and it's a big big wave.

K&R.

[DeepModem Mom]

16. Whoa. Thanks for posting, Robbien! nt

[Canuckistanian]

20. Another key paragraph

When the key swing vote on the Supreme Court goes out of his way to say you are breaking the law, and enumerates the penalties you face, you pay attention. Says Tom Malinowski, of Human Rights Watch, who has advised Senators and their staffs on the matter, "The White House now knows they were operating under pretty bad legal advice from the Justice Department," which told them Bush had near-limitless authority when acting as commander-in-chief during times of war. "They're worried about some rogue prosecutor in the future who might hold specific individuals responsible," Malinowski says. Privately, some senior GOP senators say they believe that is what is motivating the White House resistance to the McCain/Warner/Graham bill.

Abu Gonzales is going to be in biiiiig trouble.....

[0007]

25. Is this the reason Cheney voted against "Head Start"

Torture of a Philippine child

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

26. "Rogue" prosecutor?

11. no longer obedient, belonging, or accepted and hence not controllable or answerable; deviating, renegade: a rogue cop; a rogue union local.


Upholding domestic and international law now makes one a "rogue."


:grr::mad::grr:

[sofa king]

17. Why now, I wonder?

No Member of Congress wants to put his John Thomas on the chopping block like this just before a tricky election. What's the rush? It's not as if these criminals are going to prosecute themselves, anyway, and if Diebold can't win the elections for them in November Congress still has two months to pass all sorts of CYA legislation.

So what's the angle?

[Robbien]

19. The WH is in real trouble here

They need the cover. The Nation article lays out the case.

[Straight Shooter]

18. Cheney the thug sent to Capitol Hill to rape Lady Justice.

That's the way I read it.

[Pachamama]

21. Cheney was accompanied by Maggie F*cking Thatcher?

A dick and a c_nt....how appropriate....

Wow....now you know things are getting really crazy and the Neo-cons are in overdrive. In case anyone has ever forgotten what ole' Thatcher is capable of doing and her role in history.

[aquart]

22. I hope photos were taken of Cheney with every one of them.

Embracing.

[formercia]

23. Lawmakers might be held liable under International Law

for passing legislation that would approve interrogation measures that violate the Geneva Conventions. That would be sweet.

[tanyev]

24. Did he take his shotgun along?

[formercia]

27. I'd bet when they clap the cuffs on Cheney

he will turn into a wimpering sack of goat shit.