The Swamp
-
Text size:  A A A A A

« McCain ♥ Bush in new Democratic ad | Main | New poll: Big leads for Hillary Clinton in Ohio, PA »

DOJ: Waterboarding not legal -- now

Email Print Link
Election 2008
[What is this?]
Posted February 14, 2008 11:09 AM
The Swamp

Andrew Zajac

A senior Justice Department official edged close to saying that waterboarding is illegal, according to his remarks prepared for delivery this morning to the House Judiciary Committee.

"There has been no determination by the Justice Department that the use of waterboarding, under any circumstances, would be lawful under current law," said the Download file text of the statement of Steven Bradbury, acting head of DOJ's Office of Legal Counsel.

But DOJ quickly cautioned against reading that sentence as a declaration of illegality -- which would be the first time the Bush Administration took such an absolute position on the wildly controversial interrogation technique:

"As you can see, Steve Bradbury in his written testimony is not declaring whether waterboarding is unlawful or lawful under the current law. He is simply indicating that DOJ has not reviewed whether it would be lawful under current law because it is not part of the current interrogation program," said chief DOJ spokesman Brian Roehrkasse, in an unusual note appended to a copy of Bradbury's testimony.

Bradbury's statement also says that "the set of interrogation methods authorized for current use is narrower than before, and it does not today include waterboarding."

Taken as a whole, Bradbury seems to be saying that waterboarding is not currently in use and that there currently is no legal sanction for it, which is a bit further than CIA Director Michael Hayden went recently when he said that waterboarding had been used on three detainees in the past but that it currently is of dubious legality.

The operative word in this discussion is "currently." Bradbury says that waterboarding at the moment is off limits -- but could be brought back into use with the personal approval of the CIA director, the Attorney General and the President.

This position may have been crafted to try to placate waterboarding opponents, among them many House Democrats, by emphasizing the absence of a waterboarding option in the present legally-sanctioned interrogation regimen, while reserving the right to employ it in specific cases.

Digg Delicious Facebook Fark Google Newsvine Reddit Yahoo

Comments

"JUSTICE DEPARTMENT SPEAKS"

MR. UM. UM. UM. UM. UM MUKASEY VISITS IRAQ, HIS DEPARTMENT GIVES THE ORDER HE COULDN'T, WOULDN'T AND BOTTOM JUST CAN'T.

MEANWHILE THE HOUSE IS NOT GOING TO GIVE "IMMUNITY" AND THIS IS NOT HOW THIS IS SUPPOSE TO WORK.

IT'S ILLEGAL TODAY, BUT IT WILL BE LEGAL TOMORROW OR UNTIL MR. UM. UM. UM. UM, SPEAKS AGAIN.


Mr. Zajac, the headline of this article bears no rational relation to what Mr. Bradbury actually said.

In fact, the headline is the exact opposite of what Mr. Bradbury said. How do you twist "As you can see, Steve Bradbury in his written testimony is not declaring whether waterboarding is unlawful or lawful under the current law" into a Bradbury declaration that "waterboarding" is "not legal"?


Was legality ever the issue?

After all, in Nazi Germany concentration camps were perfectly legal.

The issue, America, concerns ethics and decency, not legality.


Post a comment

(Anonymous comments will not be posted. Comments aren't posted immediately. They're screened for relevance to the topic, obscenity, spam and over-the-top personal attacks. We can't always get them up as soon as we'd like so please be patient. Thanks for visiting The Swamp.)

Please enter the letter "f" in the field below:

-

News, but funnier

Cartoon

Those were the days
More Handelsman
Editorial cartoons

Galleries

Iraq

Iraq War 5th anniversary

Dog

Campaign trail

Quiz

Obama

Your Obama IQ