Cheney’s Torture Apologist Complains Cheney’s Torture Program Necessitates Plea Deals

As I suggested the other day, the news that Majid Khan has negotiated a plea deal raises interesting questions about why the government decided to offer him one.

What I haven’t seen anyone explain, however, is why the government has suddenly offered Khan a plea deal. It suggests they either can’t build a case against him themselves–a possibility given that they’re charging him for an assassination attempt that apparently involved no bomb–or that they’ve decided they don’t have enough untainted evidence against Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and the other 9/11 plotters without someone like Khan testifying. It further suggests they don’t want to rely on Khan’s own testimony given in custody, probably because that, too, is tainted.

That seems to be what has happened. As Jason Leopold reported last week, Gitmo’s prosecutors are, indeed, newly negotiating plea deals with detainees as a way to get untainted evidence.

There are still 171 detainees imprisoned at Guantanamo. More than half have already been cleared for release. Thirty-six are expected to face war crimes charges and the remainder were deemed by an Obama administration task force as being too dangerous to release or too difficult to prosecute because the evidence against them was obtained through torture.

Martins, who became chief prosecutor in October, has informed his staff, according to another email written by the same military prosecutor, that he is interested in obtaining information about detainees he intends to prosecute that will help the government secure convictions. The detainees who cooperate with the prosecution and show a willingness to testify against other prisoners, in a manner that “pleases” the government, would receive plea deals for the terrorist-related crimes they are accused of and could eventually be repatriated to another country.

“Proffer” sessions have already taken place between some defense attorneys and detainees, where the prisoners have discussed what evidence they can offer the prosecution for use in war crimes trials, the prosecutor’s email says.

Leopold goes on to describe Khan’s plea deal in this context (though none of his lawyers have confirmed this is what’s going on).

Predictably, Cheney’s chief torture apologist, Marc Thiessen, is outraged that Gitmo prosecutors are trying to undo the damage that Cheney’s torture program did.

The United States has reportedly offered a plea deal to Majid Khan — a hardened al-Qaeda terrorist and close associate of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed — that could see him released from Guantanamo Bay within a few years.

Giving this killer a reduced sentence is outrageous. Khan is no run-of-the-mill terrorist. He was directly subordinate to KSM and was selected by the 9/11 mastermind to conduct terrorist operations inside the United States.


He had been charged with war crimes, including murder, attempted murder, spying and providing material support for terrorism — all of which could have earned him a life sentence. Instead, he might now be released.

For what? Under the reported deal, Khan has agreed to testify against his fellow terrorists during the next four years at Guantanamo, after which he would then be eligible to be transferred to Pakistan. Khan knows a great deal about KSM and the core 9/11 conspirators — but it is hard to believe that his cooperation and testimony are really necessary to convict those terrorists. KSM has openly admitted — even boasted — of his role in 9/11 and dozens of other plots and attacks.

Thiessen then goes on to list a bunch of evidence collected during the period of the CIA’s worst torture (which also happens to be some of the only reliable evidence traced to that period).

I guess Thiessen missed the entire Ahmed Ghalani trial? While DOJ succeeded–as they reliably do–in winning a lifetime sentence for him, he was not convicted of the most serious charges, largely because key evidence came from the coerced testimony of Ghailani and, apparently, a key witness against him. And contrary to what Thiessen and the other torture apologists have suggested, trying Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in a military commission doesn’t obviate that problem. The judge in Ghailani’s case made it clear the evidence would have been inadmissible in a military commission, too.

Majid Khan’s plea deal was necessitated 9 years ago, when Cheney pushed torture with Khan and KSM even before it became clear whether they would testify willingly.

If Marc Thiessen has a problem with the policies Gitmo prosecutors are currently pursuing, he has only his principal, Dick Cheney, to blame.

5 replies
  1. Bob Schacht says:

    These miscreants have to keep up the pressure or the DOJ might decide to actually start prosecuting war crimes.

    So far as I know, the UN Commission on Human Rights has not yet turned its eyes on the US, probably through the defensive action of Susan Rice. I am hoping for change.

    Yes, I am still hoping! Hoping is a form of intentionality, and I intend to do what I can to make things better. (I used to be a world-class cynic, and even though I got to be right a lot, it didn’t make me happy.)

    Bob in AZ

  2. rugger9 says:

    Well, the thing to remember is that these don’t have statutes of limitations, the various violations of the Geneva Conventions perpetrated by Darth, Rummy, and their thugs. That means it is only a matter of time before these weasels face the music. The thing I find amusing is the clear taunting of Obama’s total effeteness in handling the Bu$hCo crimes, don’t these idiots from Feith on up the evolutionary ladder realize that it’s the best they could hope for? One hopes [against hope given the track record] that an Obama WH no longer needing to run wouldn’t call in a few markers, so to speak, and he’ll have plenty to look at. And it’s only a government change away overseas. I’d start with Arar myself, given that Canada has already done the heavy lifting of the determination of facts in the case and called it torture, or maybe Al-Libi. On Obama’s plate are the drone strikes.

    That of course assumes the GOP doesn’t steal 2012, DailyKos had a very interesting analysis yesterday on the math, 8-10 states in play within 4% polling differential even before allowing for the caging voter challenges and other suppression techniques, so complacency is not warranted. I still think it will be a Petraeus led ticket in November after a brokered convention, the VP I think will be Christie, who knows his days as NJ Governor are numbered. As I’ve noted before, the plan would be to flood the airwaves with GOP dreck, providing no opportunity for the D’s to get their opposition research out. Fairness doctrine has gone the way of the dodo.

  3. bmaz says:

    @rugger9: There is not a chance in hell that any US government official during the Bush/Cheney years of 2000-2008 will ever be prosecuted for war crimes under 18 USC 2441, the War Crimes Act, nor is it likely to occur in any first world country under international law where the preference is to give immunity to upper level exec officials. There is indeed a statute of limitation for charges under the anti-torture statutes in 18 USC 2440 et seq. (except in death cases, none of which will easily lend themselves to prosecutions of Principals level people – not that DOJ will EVER even contemplate charging) and it is effectively expired.

    The day of reckoning you suggest is not coming.

  4. rugger9 says:

    @bmaz: #3
    Maybe not in the USA, but Reagan signed and the Senate ratified the treaty that 1) doesn’t have statutes of limitations, and 2) requires ALL signatories to act when charges are raised, so while I agree with you that the clock may run out here, it doesn’t run out everywhere. After all, some of the Bu$hie travel plans had to be abruptly changed because some charges were to be filed last year in Switzerland. Ask Pinchet, Milosevic, and Ratko.

  5. matt conway says:

    big dick-swingin’ heroes like jack bauer, dick cheney and marc thiessen don’t worry about consequences or legal niceties. that’s for wussies like obama!

    what bull has ever returned to the china shop, let alone helped with the clean up? cheney crapped on everything around him, why would he treat America any differently?

Comments are closed.