Rand Paul is reported to object to both Pompeo's and Haspel's appointment. Foreign policy sanity from an isolationist gold bug but not from Democrats.
I'm pretty sure there are Democrats who object to both of those.
Chris Murphy from Connecticut has been consistently* good on issues of war and peace, for example.
* as far as I know
Chuck Schumer, specifically, has said that he's not pressuring Senate Democrats to take a stand against either (I think he's said until after a hearing). Which is pusillanimous of him, but he's the at the weakly centrist edge of the party -- there are many better Democrats out there.
She should have been prosecuted and thrown in prison with the lot of them.
4, 6: I honestly don't know how hard to judge him. Usually, I think 'using up political capital' is a bullshit excuse, but on this stuff? Punishing torturers might have made it even harder to accomplish anything.
You could kind of tell where Schumer's heart is by looking at the roll call for the bank bill.
the roll call for the bank bill
Guaranteeing civil wars in the D primaries with the Bernie wing for at least another 4 years
I thought we were all supposed to look forwards, not backwards. Has she presided over torture in the future? There's literally no way to know until we get there.
Ball's in your court, liberals.
I spent a lot of the early years of the blog thinking "people on the 'other side' can't just be monsters, so let's understand their good-faith motivations." Turns out, they're actually monsters.
So much nostalgia for my early days of political blogging. Come to think, if I could remember how to edit my biography on the site, I should -- it's still all warm and fuzzy about engaging with rightwingers.
You could try to take up golf first.
Ron Wyden is firmly against her. Harris is negative but waffling.
The best argument is that she can't be held liable because the justice department issued an opinion that it wasn't wrong, and also that the people in the justice department who issued the opinion can't be held liable, because do you want to criminalize the practice of law?
Harris is waffling? I'm calling.
I know she's mostly wonderful, but I would really like our society to get over electing prosecutors.
Feinstein, wow: "I think hopefully the entire organization learned something from the so-called enhanced interrogation program. I think it's something that can't be forgotten. And I certainly can never forget it. And I won't let any director forget it."
I can only assume what she means is "cover your asses better, but don't worry, we've got your back regardless."
15: Well, that's how I interpret:
"Senator Harris takes her role in confirming a president's cabinet very seriously," said a spokesman for Democratic Senator Kamala Harris."She plans to critically evaluate Ms. Haspel's full record, including troubling press reports on her involvement with torture programs."
14. John Yoo has not even been sanctioned much less disbarred. He's still a professor at Berkeley.
14: and also that the people in the justice department who issued the opinion can't be held liable, because do you want to criminalize the practice of law?
Similarly the defense so aptly characterized by The Editors at The Poor Man Institute:
We've got what amounts to a reverse Nuremberg defense, where Bush administration officials are let off the hook because they were only giving orders.(Quote found in a comment by one politicalfootball in a thread at Crooked Timber. Surrounded by mcmanus comments.)
Remember when people said funny things about torture revelations? Those were the days.
Just called Feinstein's office. They actually took the time to respond rather than just taking down my message - quoted a "we must have the complete picture" statement released today. I said that sounded like hedging and did not seem to be communicating any kind of values.
I think the best argument is that nobody was held liable because nobody was sure that attempting to hold someone liable wouldn't result in legalizing torture.
22: As opposed to not holding people liable for torture, which ensures that it remains illegal.
I assume Trump wants an experienced torturer running the CIA so we'll be able to adequately deal with the Martians when Space Force conquers Mars.
So much nostalgia for my early days of political blogging.
Yes, I miss that optimistic feeling that I could accomplish something by blogging!
The mainstream media are the real torturers.
Hashtag, I guess.
That's just a fancy name for the pound sign.
I could accomplish something by blogging!
I completely believed that. All those arguments with McMegan, leading inevitably to her installation on the WaPo op-ed page.
You trained her and didn't even get paid for it.
I wasn't here then obviously, but I think it's probably more ogged's fault than your fault.
I don't think I ever thought blogging could achieve anything, but I do remember thinking it was somehow important to "engage" the "other side" in "good faith" discussion. Might as well just have worn a big sign on my back reading SUCKA MOTHA FUCKA.
You sound like the kind of guy who probably has a nice suit on. A sign would run the look and waste all that money and effort.
34: So your advice is that Halford shouldn't wear a big sign on his back reading SUCKA MOTHA FUCKA?
Counterintuitive!
21 Thanks Minivet!
This gets me so upset that I can understand the implulse behind those people who self-immolated in protest of the Vietnam War.
Not to bring you down, Barry, but I think Tibetans are self-immolating to protest the Chinese occupation in numbers that the Chinese government takes trouble to obscure if not wholly conceal.
Wikipedia has a list of political self-immolations.
There should be a separate category of "metaphorical self-immolation in blog comment sections." That's today's better form of protest. I'm going to be incoherently melting down and insulting people and saying crazy shit until torture lady resigns from consideration as CIA chief!
Also, Kuyili from 1780, you count as a suicide bomber, NOT a political protest self-immolator. Get off of the Wikipedia page. Nice use of ghee, though.
She applied ghee, set herself ablaze and jumped into the armoury of the British, securing victory for Velu Nachiyar
LB, Obama made Brennan CIA director.
Stupidest political self-immolations: based on my scan of the Wikipedia page, it's a tie between:
an Indian man who was mad they were screening a movie after the movie's star criticized then-Gujarat chief minister Modi's building of a dam, and
"a French Canadian novelist, who committed suicide publicly by self-immolation in a major street of the Old Port of Montreal, Place Jacques-Cartier, while screaming 'Vous avez détruit la beauté du monde!"'"
Personally I'm always getting confused about who runs the secret torture prison in Thailand.
Does John Yoo need a different job?
ProPublica issued a correction. She did not oversee the waterboarding of Abu Zubaydah.
https://www.propublica.org/article/cia-cables-detail-its-new-deputy-directors-role-in-torture
All the more reason why a full accounting and investigation into torture should have happened years ago. What we know of that era is based on scraps pulled together from media outlets from various shadowy sources. And, of course, there are active efforts to undermine this reporting. Mistakes will be made.
OT: I'm not a big fan of going to the movie to see a historical event reënacted on big screen, but I'm going to have trouble missing a movie where Khrushchev is played by Steve Buscemi.
Speaking of promotions, decided to leave job of 10+ years for a new company.
I'm sure Arby's is grateful for your service.
Wait, SP is now running the torture prison in Thailand?
Since this is the career thread, I think I'll just mention that I was told four months ago that my job was going to be ending, but still have no idea when. I've just decided it will end July 1, so I can plan. It's the end of the fiscal year and also I can go out drinking to celebrate Canada Day and not worry about a hangover at work on the second. Theoretically, this seems like it should be stressful, but I can't quite manage it. They keep paying me and giving me work.
In theory, I should have also started applying for other jobs because the 7/1 date was entirely pulled out of my own ass.
If you're really desperate, the National Security Advisor position is rumored to be opening up.
53: Good luck!
59: I hope you're able to land on your feet.
The Arby's is closed until 2019. They're replacing it with an apartment building that will have a street level Arby's.
Theoretically, this seems like it should be stressful, but I can't quite manage it.
To be clear, I mean I can't manage to feel that I am being stressed, not that I can't quite manage the situation.
I don't think I would do well to live in a building with a street-level Arby's. I lived across the street from a Burger King once, and that was bad news.
66: Did you become like one of the childish eaters in the other thread?
53: Congrats! Newly existing company or just new for you?
Just new for me. When I actually start I'll post it at the other place.
I've been having a great time since I quit my job without having another to jump to. (Requires adequate savings, of course.) I did apply to another job today, but I'm in no rush.
I have enough savings that I should be able to take a break when I decided to leave this job, and I'm really looking forward to it. I still like my job, and I am nowhere close to being ready to leave the projects that I'm working on. But that is my daydream.
The classy buildings have the Arby's on the top floor, rotating.
I recommend not racking up a lot of medical bills while on unemployment, but the actual unemployment piece is kind of nice. And it's what's given me time to address the medical stuff, so win-win except kind of neither.
(1) Thank you Minivet -- I also called Harris' office and registered my succinct opinion "we shouldn't be putting war criminals in charge of the CIA"
(2) As I understand it, Haspel wasn't in charge when Zubaydah was waterboarded. Only in charge when al-Nashiri was waterboarded. Whew, that's all better then.
(3) Nuremberg, indeed. And yet people think "just following orders" is a defense. It's surreal.
(4) of course, I'd already called Feinstein.
Argh, what a world.
79.3 I fully support keeping these people out of high ranking positions. That train left the station with Ms. Haspel a year ago, but maybe some hay will be made.
Beyond reasonable doubt is, and we want it to be, a tough standard. The legality of an order might not be clear, and if the people tasked with determining its legality render an opinion, a prosecutor is going to have a steep hill to climb. If the people giving/following the orders stick within what the lawyers said was legal, which press reports seem to indicate they did not always do.
The incoming O admin thought, I suppose, that the perps would slink away, happy to never talk about it again, since by 2009 everyone knew that (a) it hadn't been legal and (b) even if legal (which it wasn't) it wasn't justified based on results. A failed policy by any measure.
Except one: it makes white men feel good about themselves to not only adopt but play act Dred Scott logic. So instead of them slinking away in ignominy, we get 'it didn't work and it was a crime but hell yes I'd do it again.'