State’s Funny View of Our Democracy

In addition to its story about the State Department talking points it “accidentally” got (see my post on that), the AP included the talking points themselves.

The talking points are particularly pathetic for the way they try to turn the torture report — and our treatment of torture more generally — as proof of functional democracy.

The TPs claim the report is evidence of the government’s transparency…

The fundamental facts about this program have been known for some time. The U.S. government is committed to transparency and has released much of this information to the public before. This report adds additional details which confirm the wisdom of our national decision not to use such interrogation methods again.

… of our vibrant democracy…

America’s democratic system worked just as it was designed to work in bringing an end to actions inconsistent with our democratic values.

[snip]

America can champion democracy and human rights around the world not because we are perfect, but because we can say that our democratic system enables us to confront and resolve our problems through open and honest debate. Our Congress issued this report, and the Obama administration strongly supported its declassification, in that spirit.

… and the separation of powers …

These interrogation methods were debated in our free media, challenged in our independent courts, and, just two years after their introduction, restricted by an act of our Congress sponsored by Senator John McCain and overwhelmingly backed by members of both of our political parties.

The last talking point is particularly neat given that 1) it gets the timing of the Detainee Treatment Act (passed in late 2005, and therefore over 3.5 years after torture started, not 2) wrong — not to mention its efficacy at ending torture, and 2) the Executive, including this President, has prevented any court challenge to torture by claiming state secrets and immunity, and as recently as this month claimed the victims of our torture cannot describe their own torture before the Gitmo Kangaroo Court. John Kiriakou, in particular, will likely find this talking point curious.

I’m just as interested in how aggressively State prepares to answer questions posed on CIA’s behalf in these questions:

4. Is the White House in a position to say that no useful information was obtained?
5. Isn’t the CIA in a better position to assess this?
6. Does the CIA believe useful information was obtained?

[snip]

13. Does the CIA still stand by its response to the SSCI, or did the SSCI address the CIA’s
concerns when it revised its report?

Perhaps that’s just State doing its best to prep the questions that CIA will cue compliant journalists to ask. And admittedly, State is going to have to do some of the damage control with countries like UK and Poland, which will be embarrassed by the report.

Still, I can’t help but remember that Maria Harf was CIA spokesperson before she moved over to State — indeed, actually started on the analytical side of the house.

In any case, it’s nice to know that State thinks impunity for torture is a sign of a vibrant democracy.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on Reddit0Share on Facebook0Google+0Email to someone

14 Responses to State’s Funny View of Our Democracy

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
Emptywheel Twitterverse
bmaz @billmon1 Problem is, the recess window is right now, and optics of doing it so fast would be bad. The Noel Canning decision kind of hurts.
6mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @chrisgeidner A nom from the 9th? Yeah, not biting on that.
34mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @JohnPlatner Note Trump's protectionist message should work great in MI, too, which is not only open but w/strong tradition of cross-over
35mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @rwzh_ @nytimes Hey, I saw her here not that long ago. But current is all Harvard/Yale.
36mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @JohnPlatner No need to delete. I think NV is closed, but permits same day reg, as well, btw.
36mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @MikeDrewWhat One possibility is that she believed she WOULDN'T be replaced w/almost self by Obama. Soto's great, but Kagan =/= RBG.
41mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @imraansiddiqi It's cause he used a real gun rather than a fake FBI bomb.
41mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @emptywheel @yeselson @tomwatson A chance, decent, dunno yet. But third factor is Obama would likely kill to have a third Justice in legacy.
43mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @emptywheel @yeselson @tomwatson Eegads, Skeletor Chertoff is on mah TeeVee!
45mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @yeselson Nominee has a decent chance to get lame duck confirmed. @tomwatson @bmaz
46mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @yeselson @tomwatson But if they don't will get someone far less moderate and acceptable in their eyes. But, yeah, don't disagree.
47mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @MikeDrewWhat But you don't know her reasons so how can you judge? Do you know inside workings of court? Convos w/Obama? @bungdan
48mreplyretweetfavorite
July 2014
S M T W T F S
« Jun   Aug »
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031