Durham Torture Tape Case Dies, US Duplicity in Geneva & The Press Snoozes

From the best available information as to the original destruction date of the infamous “Torture Tapes” having been on November 8, 2005, the statute of limitations for charging any general crime by employees and/or agents of the US Government for said destruction will expire at midnight Monday November 8, 2010 as the general statute of limitation is five years. By operation of law, the statute would have run yesterday were it not a Sunday. So, by the time you are reading this, it is over. Absent something extraordinary, and I mean really extraordinary, a criminal statute of limitation is effectively a bar to subject matter jurisdiction and that is that. Ding dong, the John Durham torture tape investigation is thus dead.

Last week, I wrote a letter to the DOJ and saw to it that it was delivered to the main contacts, Dean Boyd and Tracy Schmaler, as well as John Durham’s office. None of them responded. Finally, late Monday afternoon I called Durham’s office, and they acknowledged having received the letter. Although extremely cordial, there was simply no meaningful information or discussion to be had on the subject. “We have no comment” was about the size of it. I asked about the remote possibility of the existence of a sealed indictment; there was “no comment” on that either, and there is absolutely no reason in the world to think anything exists in this regard.

Oh, there was one thing; when I asked why there had been no formal response to my letter, I was told perhaps it was a “little edgy”. Apparently actually phrasing an inquiry with legal specificity and facts makes it too “edgy” for the United States Department Of Justice. Who knew? Ironically, at the same time this discussion was transpiring today, the very same Obama DOJ was in US Federal Court, in front of Judge John Bates of the DC District, arguing for their unfettered right to extrajudicially execute an American citizen, and do so in secret without explanation. But my letter asking about the dying Durham investigation was edgy. The DOJ’s priorities, morals and duties seem to be a bit off kilter when it comes to their assignment of the term “edgy”.

Apparently TPM got the same brick wall. The open and shut criminal case against Jose Rodriquez is gone. The clear potential for cases against the four Bush/Cheney White House attorneys involved in the torture tapes destruction, as well as the two CIA junior attorneys, gone. Same for any case against Porter Goss. Gone, and the DOJ has no explanation and nothing to say. At this point, the excuse for not commenting is not that there is an ongoing investigation into destruction of tapes, the criminal subject matter of that investigation is gone, outside of the statute of limitations.

But the irony of the DOJ’s position on the Durham investigation does not end with a misplaced sense of what is “edgy”, an even rarer instance of irony played out last Friday in Geneva with the US presentation at the UN Universal Periodic Review. On Friday, November 5th, the US defense to its human rights and torture record was given by Harold Koh, the chief Legal Advisor to the State Department. What did Koh rely on as evidence of US accountability for its now proven torture regime? Why the DOJ John Durham Investigation of course. From AFP:

“I think that the Obama administration defines waterboarding as torture as a matter of law under the convention against torture and as part of our legal obligation… it’s not a policy choice,” Koh told journalists after being asked about the report.

Asked whether the United States was still considering investigation or federal prosecution of those who might have ordered such a practice in the past, Koh said the matter was being examined by Special Prosecutor John Durham in Connecticut.

“Those investigations are ongoing. So the question is not whether they would consider it, they’re going on right now,” he explained.

Yep, the DOJ’s John Durham investigation. The very same intrepid arm of justice and accountability that couldn’t bring itself to indict up the Jose Rodriquez ham sandwich served up to them on a silver platter on January 2, 2008, nearly three years ago. The same DOJ/John Durham investigation so derelict in duty that it just let the statute of limitations on his original special prosecutor jurisdiction, the criminal destruction of the torture tapes, bleed out on the table in front of him. That certainly ought to be reassuring for the UN UPR, the UN Special Rapporteur, and the other world defenders of human rights.

So, just how inattentive and asleep at the wheel does the government think the American media and citizenry are, to brazenly engage in the simultaneous duplicity of relying on the Durham investigation in Geneva for the UN UPR On Human Rights at the same moment it was using the Durham investigation to bleed out the statute of limitation on the primary jurisdiction of the investigation at home? Well, they think the media and people are completely asleep and, sadly, they are quite correct.

Look at how the New York Times covered the initiation and early stages of the DOJ John Durham criminal investigation into the destruction of the torture tapes. Here is CBS News, the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, Jonathan Turley, the list is endless. At several times since the initiation of the Durham torture tape investigation, there has been wide and excited coverage of leaks that Durham was “wrapping up” or on other aspects leaking out; here is the New York Times, Washington Post, more New York Times, Politico; again, the list is potentially endless. the torture tape investigation of the DOJ and John Durham has had constant coverage by any number of endless media sources until it came time for the expiration of the statute of limitations that effectively terminates the entire original jurisdiction of John Durham. Somehow, the end of the road merited no coverage whatsoever by the ever present American media. None. Nada. Zip.

So, where did the American media that has been covering the John Durham torture tape destruction investigation since its inception suddenly go; what hole did they crawl into when the actual statute of limitation, on the base acts for the whole investigation, was expiring? That is a question worth hearing an answer to. It is not that they didn’t know, because you can bet they saw the letter last week. Why would the media stand by as the government whistles past the graveyard point of the primary jurisdiction of the John Durham Special Prosecutor jurisdiction?

(Graphic by the one and only Darkblack)

Bmaz is a rather large saguaro cactus in the Southwestern Sonoran desert. A lover of the Constitution, law, family, sports, food and spirits. As you might imagine, a bit prickly occasionally. Bmaz has attended all three state universities in Arizona, with both undergraduate and graduate degrees from Arizona State University, and with significant post-graduate work (in physics and organic chemistry, go figure) at both the University of Colorado in Boulder and the University of Arizona. Married, with both a lovely child and a giant Sasquatch dog. Bmaz has been a participant on the internet since the early 2000’s, including active participation in the precursor to Emptywheel, The Next Hurrah. Formally joined the Emptywheel blog as an original contributing member at its founding in 2007. Bmaz grew up around politics, education, sports and, most significantly, cars; notably around Formula One racing and Concours de Elegance automobile restoration and showing. Currently lives in the Cactus Patch with his lovely wife and beast of a dog, and practices both criminal and civil trial law.
  1. alinaustex says:

    Bmaz does this mean the investigation is over and there will be no final report or findings issued by Team Durham ? Does this mean you have won our bet ? Wasn’t there some amendment introduced by Sen Durbin that passed that extended the SOL on such war crimes as the Durham investigation was to encompass ? Btw you ask where the media is now that the SOL has run out-also where the heck is Sen Whitehouse and the other legislators that over the years have demanded accountability for the bushcheney torture and other war crimes ? Or we missing something here as we declare the investigation a dead letter ?

    • Mary says:

      Whitehouse is a very smart guy and very sharp lawyer, but he’s playing for Team Whitehouse, not so much for anyone or anything else. After his speech (when the country was in a “change” mode) about how horrified everyone would be if they knew the same things he knew from his briefings, he’s been silent. He was to the fore on making sure telecoms got their immunity. He’s waiting to see who he needs to be for re-election.

      bmaz – one of the worst things Obama has done, imo, is to seduce the voices of people like Koh. That, and putting Kagan on the bench. Palin couldn’t have done it, but he did. That’s why I don’t give a damn anymore when I get the fearmongering flyers and emails on how “we” “have” to defeat Palin and Rove (Rove???? what kind of old script have they been using?) President Palin wouldn’t have silenced Koh, much less converted him into a proponent of Executive branch sponsored torture and murder. For that, we have Obama to thank. And he hasn’t even done it by being a big scarey Cheney-Addingtonesque guy who dominated the outcome. He’s done it by being a candyass incapable of leadership who jumps anytime someone like Brennan yanks his chain and whose lawyers, like Koh and Jeh Johnson and Holder and Lederman, end up tossing their profession and institutions into the garbage to save from himself. At whatever cost.

  2. alinaustex says:

    Bmaz former federal prosecutor Elizabeth de la Vega states that the Patriot Act keeps torture and other war crimes from having a SOL expiration date. In your opinion is that a wrong read of the Patriot Act -that Ms dela Vega is wrong in asserting the Patriot Act prevents an expiration of the SOL re torture and other war crimes ?

    • bmaz says:

      The destruction of the torture tapes is not a war crime, and it is not torture. Whatever De la Vega has to say is inapplicable here. Is she right about other acts that do constitute “war crimes”? Maybe, it depends on the acts and what crimes are being contemplated; for some that would be correct. To the best of my knowledge, there is nothing that is within John Durham’s contemplated purview falling under those provisions. And why you would continue to hold out hope for some asshole like Durham that is proven to be derelict in his duty is beyond me. Your bet is on other matters not this.

  3. scribe says:

    A headline we;’ll see soon: “Obama nonminates John Durham for seat on federal bench.”

    This is, after all, how you get to be a federal judge.

  4. Stephen says:

    I get the feeling that I’m experiencing some of the same fears that many Germans had as they watched the rise in power and control of an evil that couldn’t be stopped. The American populace is so fractured and divided now and has no reigning leadership with any integrity or compassion for humanity. It seems to me both parties are in a race to fascism and the winner will be the one who declares marshal law first if there is a national crisis, orchestrated or not.

    • JamesJoyce says:

      It is time to embrace and listen to those that lived the horror of Nazi Germany. You are spot on with your comment. We are witnessing the erosion of law, just like that which took place in Nazi Germany. The fucking press is complicit. “Enhanced interrogation?” A great Nazi term! Meanwhile, “I know/see nothing,” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UgcxGFmYyPs

  5. tjbs says:

    Question is would a through and competent investigator take a full five years and then can’t bring the case to conclusion ?

    The tape destruction is not a war crime but it’s obstructing justice in regards to war crimes. Nice hair splitting DOJ.

    So who’s running the actual war crimes investigation ?

  6. JamesJoyce says:

    “The press snoozes.” They are not snoozing. They are being Silent, like those “silent Germans” who chose not to take a stand against that which they knew was wrong, period. The power of the corporate interest, obliterates truth, for that almighty dollar!

  7. klynn says:

    bmaz, I need to find the article I read but a professional journal addressed that war crime law is constantly evolving. For instance, if the evidence for genocide was a mass grave and then someone goes through the effort to remove the mass grave, the removal of the genocide evidence may be considered as part of the war crime of genocide.

    IANAL, and may have misunderstood the article. I’ll try to find it and post a link.

    Nice that O is out of the country when the SOL runs out. Maybe a smart Guardian journalist will ask the right question.

  8. JamesJoyce says:

    All those American who died fighting, Nazi bastards! This government is pissing on their graves, memories and sacrifices protecting criminals that might have a little more in common with those Nazi bastards, America defeated, than a compromised “free press.” is likely to admit! So much for a free press, controlled by corporate slime with political agendas!

    • masaccio says:

      …[T]here was “only the constant going ahead on the road toward ever-new fields,” so that finally the “purpose and scope of the secret state police” as well as of all other state or party institutions created by the Nazis could “in no manner be covered by the laws and regulations issued for them.”

      Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, p. 394 (Harcourt, 1976)
      She adds that the law become entwined with the “ethics of the state” so that there is no need to issue public decrees.

  9. Jim White says:

    Thanks for making DOJ acknowledge their duplicity up front, bmaz. I’m impressed that you were able to keep the call cordial. I doubt that I would have had such control.

    I need some help, though. On the scale of Washington toadies describing DFH bad behavior, is “edgy” more or less extreme than “shrill”?

  10. profmarcus says:

    i read the joint aclu/ccr statement this morning and felt like crying…

    Obama Administration Claims Unchecked Authority to Kill Americans Outside Combat Zones

    The Obama administration today argued before a federal court that it should have unreviewable authority to kill Americans the executive branch has unilaterally determined to pose a threat. Government lawyers made that claim in response to a lawsuit brought by the American Civil Liberties Union and the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) charging that the administration’s asserted targeted killing authority violates the Constitution and international law. The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia heard arguments from both sides today.

    “Not only does the administration claim to have sweeping power to target and kill U.S. citizens anywhere in the world, but it makes the extraordinary claim that the court has no role in reviewing that power or the legal standards that apply,” said CCR Staff Attorney Pardiss Kebriaei, who presented arguments in the case. “The Supreme Court has repeatedly rejected the government’s claim to an unchecked system of global detention, and the district court should similarly reject the administration’s claim here to an unchecked system of global targeted killing.”

    […]

    “If the Constitution means anything, it surely means that the president does not have unreviewable authority to summarily execute any American whom he concludes is an enemy of the state,” said Jameel Jaffer, Deputy Legal Director of the ACLU, who presented arguments in the case. “It’s the government’s responsibility to protect the nation from terrorist attacks, but the courts have a crucial role to play in ensuring that counterterrorism policies are consistent with the Constitution.”

    The government filed a brief in the case in September, claiming that the executive’s targeted killing authority is a “political question” that should not be subject to judicial review. The government also asserted the “state secrets” privilege, contending that the case should be dismissed to avoid the disclosure of sensitive information.

    as i’m sitting here at my desk in kosovo, a country that has been ravaged by death and destruction and is now being equally ravaged by corruption, i can’t read things like this without wondering what ever happened to the country i thought i was a citizen of…?

    And, yes, I DO take it personally

  11. klynn says:

    bmaz and Marcy, thank you for your efforts in the past week.

    I had hoped that a group of blogs might come together and raise a loud voice– something in the line of StrangeBedfellows. It seemed only the blogs that have traditionally made an effort on this subject were the only ones making noise this past week. A large coordinated effort and letter writing campaign may not have changed the outcome but it would have sent an opposing message to the rest of the world.

  12. skdadl says:

    Jim White was tweeting an hourly countdown yesterday, which I RTd whenever I saw him, so at least my tweeps know (and my tweeps are in some strange places).

    What the rest of the world thinks won’t matter, though, until it matters, if you see what I mean. Our problem, and I mean “our” because it’s similar for us, is that politicians are counting on public apathy on a number of issues, and mostly they’re being confirmed in that cynical view. So on they rampage. It’s so frustrating.

    • klynn says:

      What the rest of the world thinks won’t matter, though, until it matters,

      Yesterday I shared the following from a conversation I had with some conservatives:

      “Has the US ever used human rights as a justification for going to war?” I asked.

      The group gave many “Yes,” responses and noted such times human rights propaganda “sold” wartime efforts. Including Iraq.

      Unfortunately, I do not want it coming down to being the focal point of needing a war to stop our war crimes. I hope it will not come down to that kind of, “…until it matters.”

      I still think a unified, loud voice would have been vital. A governmental crime happened in relation to crimes of war. Our justice department is not even capable of upholding the rule of law. Yesterday, was seriously, the most important day in our US history. It passed not with a bang…

      Everything we care about or are concerned about hinges on the balance of power and an ability to keep a check on power.

      It’s gone.

  13. bobschacht says:

    Its official now. I just heard on NPR that the our so-called DOJ decided there “wasn’t enough evidence” to prosecute anyone about the tape destruction. [sorry, can’t find a link]

    Durham’s office has become a black hole.

    Bob in AZ

    • klynn says:

      Cowardly response.

      DOJ. But a whimper.

      Rename it DoW. Department of Whimper.

      Now, tell me why they did not give that answer to bmaz or Mason yesterday?

      I really do not care DoJ if you found bmaz’ letter a “little edgy”. “Edgy” has never been an excuse for acting unprofessional. You owed a member of the legal community, a citizen of this nation, a taxpaying citizen, a written answer and he had to follow-up with you to only receive no answer. All you could respond with was “no comment” and his letter was a little edgy? Look, the truth and rule of law can sting. Professional behavior required a written response. How unprofessional.

      We have no Department of Justice.

      Gee, I wonder if I can pull “a little edgy” off as an excuse for not responding to anyone sending me a professional letter?

    • Gitcheegumee says:

      Well, Holder certainly has some previous experience with harvesting the fruits of plantation politics-banana plantations, that is;,namely representing United Fruit Company and Carl Lindner.

      “Bull” Durham’s DOJ is witless for the prosecution of malfeasance in office.

  14. klynn says:

    So, if there was a lack of evidence, when in the world did the investigation close? Had to close long before yesterday.

    And I need clarification.

    We know the tapes existed.

    We know the tapes were destroyed.

    We know who destroyed the tapes.

    How on earth was there a lack of evidence?

    IANAL.

  15. xargaw says:

    We have a President that does not have a passionate belief about anything, nor will get out and fight for any principal or goal. He is willing to give and give and give until anything of value has been given up. Why would we expect anymore from his DOJ. It appears their job is simply to make problems die on the vine and decompose. If the process is stretched out long enough, no one in the public or press notices as they have moved on to the next issue that die a slow death in the process.

  16. klynn says:

    Something is wrong with DoJ. Durham’s wiki page has yet to be updated regarding the outcome of the most important investigation in his professional career.

    Usually, the wiki’s get updated quite quickly by the government.

  17. bobschacht says:

    bmaz,
    Obviously your letter was not sufficiently obsequious. Holder’s real title is “High Priest of Law,” and they have obviously discerned that you are not a True Believer, and hence not worthy of a response.

    I think that the axiom that in our legal system, one is not guilty of a crime until proven guilty in court, has morphed into “there was no crime unless one has been charged and convicted of a crime.”

    Bob in AZ

    • knowbuddhau says:

      Bravo! Wish I’d thought to say that bit about High Priest of the Temples of Injustice Holder.

      It’s getting more obvious all the time that our erstwhile human public servants have gone mad with power. Nuclear power, financial power, messaging power — it’s all gone to their tiny little heads. And now they’re playing god in public with no humility at all.

      They’re climbing to record-breaking heights of hubrisand calling it good governance. We’re surely doomed.

      Our MOTU’s unspoken message comes through loud and clear.

      We’re doing DOD’s god’s work over here: bringing worlds into being, and destroying them just the same (right, Lord Blankfein of Wall Street?).

      IOW, we’re god’s own agents, nay, even gods ourselves, here among you mere creatures of a lesser creation. Don’t fuck with us or we’ll make your life a living hell.

  18. knowbuddhau says:

    Nothing we’ve been through recently has sickened me like this announcement has. I feel at my wit’s end.

    (btw, is it just me or is the ampersand in the title messing with anyone else’s ability to retweet? Several attempts cut it off. Finally settled on this: DOJ’s Durham buries rotting corpse in broad daylight while denying rumors of reeking to high heaven @emptywheel http://tinyurl.com/27uusjy .)

  19. kabuki101 says:

    The suituation in the US is becoming “binary”. In either case, it is going to get violent. No doubt about that now. But the outcome – what will that be? Will it be the Lefties triumphing or will it be the fascists? At the moment, you are 60-80% likely to fall into totalitarian fascism. We need a metre to monitor this. The other outcome is cum-by-yah restoration of democracy, equality under the law and of opportunity, a proper welfare state for the needy, and the jailing of criminals of the ancien régime (in their 10’s of thousands). It’s going to be one or the other. Could be you get one as part of the transition to the other. Who knows. But where’s it headed at the moment? Opinions? We need a “metre” based on the wisdom of crowds.

    • onitgoes says:

      But where’s it headed at the moment?

      Hate to say it, but the most “energetic” portion of the population – and most likely to “act” – are the 30% who are totally behind totalitarian fascism at all costs. What these tea-bagging fools don’t get is that when the jack-boots start kicking the serfs, they’re not going to distinguish between T-baggerz and the rest of the serfs. But the out-there nutty reichwing is about as in favor of fascism as they can get without actually using that terminology. However, weird Glenn Beck has definitely been brainwashing them to accept this as the “best” means to their ends.

      I think we can already see it happening by the fact of some of these idiotic tea-baggers winning the elections that they did. It’s my opinion, that the PTB intend to use these T-Party politicians to further brainwash their constituents… not, you know, actually “do” what the constituents “want.” (whatever that is…).

      My opinion.

  20. onitgoes says:

    Thank you for your persistance on this and other similar issues and for extending your efforts with the so-called DoJ. Good commentary here as well; feeling very chilly, indeed, in spite of the bumper banana crop being harvested at the moment. At this time, references to Hitler & the rise of the Nazi party are completely apt and responsible. Caveat emptor.

  21. Fractal says:

    Thank you, bmaz. Obama has become intolerable. He and Eric Holder are a disgrace to their profession. We are now governed by criminals.

  22. Jason Leopold says:

    It’s official folks:

    The following statement may be attributed to Matthew Miller, Director, Office of Public Affairs:

    “In January 2008, Attorney General Michael Mukasey appointed Assistant United States Attorney John Durham to investigate the destruction by CIA personnel of videotapes of detainee interrogations. Since that time, a team of prosecutors and FBI agents led by Mr. Durham has conducted an exhaustive investigation into the matter. As a result of that investigation, Mr. Durham has concluded that he will not pursue criminal charges for the destruction of the interrogation videotapes.”

    • Mary says:

      There’s a big surprise.

      And Koh just lied through his teeth. That adds the sparklies to the whirly twirly skirt DOJ is using for cover these days.

  23. tjbs says:

    A shame and a crying shame at that.

    I guess the torture wasn’t as criminal as we thought, which would explain everything. You can’t cover up a crime that isn’t a crime can you.

    OK the boys roughed up the suspects, some to beyond the point of death, but the suspects are responsible for not having given up the right answers in the allotted time. They brought it on themselves don’t ya see?

  24. Mary says:

    Meanwhile, Obama is telling the Muslim world that he’s Earnest. And reaching out to them.

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20101109/wl_nm/us_indonesia_obama_muslims

    Reaching out with drone bombings, assassination squads, de facto amnesty for torturers and torture murders; reaching out with kidnappings with exotic desitnations like Libyan prisons and GITMO where potential suicides will be counseled with helpful advice; reaching out with more and more military dollars so that more and more horrifically impoverished coutntries will have dictatorial rule that is well armed against them.

    Nothing makes you feel better than the creepy guy in the back of the subway whispering about how he’s going to reach out and touch you. Two administrations peopled with torture facilitators throughout the departments of justice.

    Durham couldn’t do antying about the tape destruction without, among other things, putthing the ED VA lawyers who were “investigating” the criminal referrals right on the line for all the many cases where there were discovery requests that should ahve addressed the videos (however you want to parse) and where there were prof duties, discovery requests notwithstanding, to preserve the evidence for the torture victims. That, aside and apart from the political asses they were covering.

    He comes out of it all with a lot of powerful people owing him. If it costs more decline of a nation, that’s not really any skin off of his nose, is it?

    • Gitcheegumee says:

      Bull Durham says no criminal charges.

      Does that leave the door open for any other prosecuutions or suits to be filed-or does the SOL negate ANYONE filing ANY followup actions?

      It is obvious IANAL.

  25. prostratedragon says:

    ‘Edgy.’ The quintessence of cultural mediocrity, and the reason it is not an innocuous thing when it prevents essential discourses as too ‘edgy.’

    Maybe Mr. Koh is ok with the use to which his name and reputation have been put by the Obama administration. Maybe it was his understanding all along that their purpose was to allow him to be manuvered into place so that monstrous ideas can acquire a certain validity because he has stood up in an open forum to voice it. But some people might regard that kind of behavior by an executive body as too ‘edgy’ for anything short of contempt.

    Anyway, thank you for your efforts on this, bmaz, at least you got an acknowledgement from them.

  26. Mary says:

    BTW – how is it that this guy (Ablavsky) isn’t The Rising Star at DOJ? He threatened to bomb politicians and stole the file from his his cousin’s murder trial and shredded it. I can’t believe Harvard or Boalt haven’t snatched him up to teach crim pro – or Exxon hasn’t picked him up to counterbalance Chevron’s Haynes, or COke hasn’t picked him up to get fizzy with Pepsico’s Thompson, or Lockheed hasn’t picked him up to fill the Comey slot, especially since Comey as it was coming out that a Lockheed contract was the cover for Furlong’s secret mercenaries.

    • Gitcheegumee says:

      I thought “edgy” was supposed to be a “looking forward ” kind of thing- cutting edge,if you will.

      Now, if the term “pricly” had been subsituted for edgy, I would say that the DOJ had been reading bmaz’s pointed commentary for some time. Those desert cactus,ya know kind be quite sharp….*G*

  27. matutinal says:

    So the keepers of law flout the law. Torture is okay as long as (1) you deny it (“We don’t torture”) and (2) nobody lets the evidence get out.

    You can even get around rule 1 if you are, say, a former preznit or such, provided that your admission is vaguely worded, sufficiently delayed, and attaches to the names of “known” evildoers.

    In the memorable words of John Ehrlichman, the rule of law is left to twist “slowly, slowly in the wind.”

    • bobschacht says:

      JimWhite’s diary suggests why “charges could still be filed relating to obstruction of justice or misleading investigators during the investigation” –the Missing Documents [from SCIF] caper.

      What brought Nixon down was not the burglary, but the cover-up.

      Bob in AZ

      • bmaz says:

        Yeah, but I say they are just throwing that bullshit out as cover for not making a report or otherwise discussing their dereliction of duty. You really think the DOJ is going to prosecute Rodriquez or the CIA officers and attorneys, or any of the White hOuse people for some pissant discrepancy in testimony when they wouldn’t touch them on the real charges? Or that if they were, DOJ would wait until the leverage of the real and far more serious charges had expired? Please. This is total bullshit.

  28. b2020 says:

    “The open and shut criminal case against Jose Rodriquez is gone. The clear potential for cases against the four Bush/Cheney White House attorneys involved in the torture tapes destruction, as well as the two CIA junior attorneys, gone. Same for any case against Porter Goss.”

    There is an unfortunate tendency in US “progressive” circles to rely on the courts and the prosecutors to do the work that, at the end of the day, requires activism on the streets. You are facing a corrupt Supreme Court, a whorehouse of a legislature, a DOJ compared to a roach motel, and a tyrant as your executive. It should not really come as a surprise that a system so comprehensively dysfunctional and rotten is not going to help you out here?

    Obama has truly demonstrated the post-modern cover-up – jogging the clock.

  29. Jeff Kaye says:

    “Why would the media stand by as the government whistles past the graveyard point of the primary jurisdiction of the John Durham Special Prosecutor jurisdiction?”

    I agree with Jason, that you forced them to make their shameful confession, bmaz. Good work, if you can get it, you edgy bastard you.

    I also believe scribe @3 is prophetic.

    But so what do we do now? Certainly stop looking to any force within this government for assistance. (Sen. Whitehouse, turn off your pager!) Out into the streets? But who (besides wishy-washy cable comedians) can get the people out into the streets? We await that beast, slouching towards Bethlehem, waiting to be born.

    Once we stop relying on government and courts, as b2020 mentions, it will clear the cobwebs in our head, and we will be able to turn our collective minds towards more effective political action. Let’s not assume we know what that is… today. It will be clear. Just being freed from the shackles of illusion will be a start.

    Great job, bmaz, Marcy, Jason, Jim, and others working and commenting on this.

  30. JClausen says:

    Bmaz,

    Thanks for all your fine work here. I am proud to know ya, you Edgy guy!

    Reflecting back to ASU 1982 and recalling fonder times to numb my all consuming fear that my 7 year old lives in a country without the rule of law.

    • bmaz says:

      Heh, thanks, not sure the fight is all that good; we keep loosing ground at prodigious rates. By the way, I got an inkling they didn’t like your letter either; good work.

      • Mason says:

        Thanks. Well, I didn’t see much point in amping up the false respect component of traditional professional courtesy letters given what I was certain they were up to.

        Me no like corruption in high places.

        I guess we’ll just have to keep on keepin on.

        OT: Did you check out the new Pac 12 schedule for next year? My filthy Dogs play CO and UT next season and don’t play ASU. First conference championship game will be in 2012 at the school with the best record rather than a neutral site.

        Actually, I went to Wisconsin so I’m a Badger, but I lived in Seattle for 30 years after I graduated. Can’t see myself ever becoming a Western Kentucky Hilltopper, partly because I wouldn’t be caught dead in a place called Bowling Green, and I’m not into mountain top removal.

        Heh!

        • bmaz says:

          I liked the Pac-10 as it was; we shall see how it works out. Guess it was inevitable really. Kind of wish we had gotten Boise State and Utah in stead of Colorado, although they would have had to have gotten rid of that gawdawful blue field.

          • Mason says:

            Yeah, that blue field is something else, isn’t it? Yeah, I would have preferred Boise State over Colorado too.

            Meanwhile, I’m living in SEC country and I’m wondering what’s going to happen to the BCS National Championship matchup if Alabama beats Auburn. Could be interesting if TCU and Boise State finish the season unbeaten. Which one gets the chance to get slaughtered by the Quack Attack? Would they play each other for the national championship, if the Beavers eat the Ducks? There are some pretty good 1 loss teams out there, including the Corndogs ranked 5th or 6th and the Badgers who are ranked 7th.

            • bmaz says:

              Everybody has TCU over Boise, but Boise beat TCU with each having similar strength teams with both having the same key impact personnel back this year. I would take Boise over TCU. And I think Boise could give Oregon a run too, although the Ducks are awfully impressive.