Yoo refuses to testify about torture memos.
Yoo refuses to testify about torture memos.
Former Justice Department Office of Legal Counsel lawyer John Yoo, who wrote controversial legal memos authorizing the administration’s torture programs, will not testify voluntarily before the House Judiciary Committee, ABC reports, “paving the way for a possible subpoena and showdown over Executive Privilege. In a letter to Chairman John Conyers (D-MI), Yoo’s lawyer said his client was “not authorized” by the DOJ to discuss internal deliberations:
We have been expressly advised by the Office of Legal Counsel of the United States Department of Justice that Professor Yoo is not authorized to discuss before your Committee any specific deliberative communications, including the substance of comments on opinions or policy questions, or the confidential predecisional advice, recommendations or other positions taken by individuals or entities of the Executive Branch.
After a recent ABC report stating that Bush’s “principal” advisers directly authorized torture in 2002, Conyers also invited John Ashcroft, George Tenet, former Assistant Attorney General Daniel Levin, Douglas Feith, and David Addington to testify.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
All this foot dragging leads me to think there is no one left in DC with the guts, balls and heart enough to bring these scumbags to Justice. F'ing A... Now Conyers has to pen ANOTHER sternly worded letter...
April 23rd, 2008 at 1:04 pmOMG! This is even better than "Executive Priviledge!" I am authorized to write the memos that authorize torture, but I'm not authorized to discuss them!
TAKE THAT, John Conyers!
April 23rd, 2008 at 1:04 pmIt's OK for Yoo to tell people it's OK to torture people - but NOT OK for him to tell us why...?
Oh, I get it. Not really, but if a Republican said it, it must be true, right?
Right?
April 23rd, 2008 at 1:06 pmNo surprise re: him not testifying voluntarily (this administration does whatever it wants to do), but, if this means it's finally time for a "showdown" on Executive Privilege then GOOD!
Might as well tackle that now rather than later when we have a Democrat in the W/H. The way things are going, there seems to be two sets of rules. One set for the Republicans and another, much more constraining set, for the Democrats.
Does the DOJ normally have to answer to Congress? Or does the DOJ report directly to the W/H?
April 23rd, 2008 at 1:06 pmINHERENT CONTEMPT! Throw these villains in the brig until they agree to testify.
April 23rd, 2008 at 1:07 pmIsn't it obvious?
Torture the living f*** out of him until he speaks.
At least that's what the nitwits and pinheads - f**k, the CRIMINALS - in this administration would say.
Poetic justice, for sure, but even a left wing lunatic like me wouldn't allow it.
But these US Constituion hating scumbags are making it difficult......
April 23rd, 2008 at 1:09 pmProfessor Yoo knows he would go to jail if he testified. Now he's teaching UCBerkeley students how it's done, maybe Congress can sit in on a class to learn the answers to their questions. Even the janitor has Executive Privilege with the current White House. This Privilege last for life so Bush and Cheney wont be outed. The Law Makers know what to do and how to do it to bring these criminals to Justice but they have no intention on doing that. The DOJ is headed by a new corrupt Attorney General and Chuck/Diane were paid to make sure he got the votes to get in office. Our Government is a cesspool of criminal and liars.
April 23rd, 2008 at 1:13 pmAs the commercial said, "you can pay me now or you can pay me later". Take your pick Mr.Yoo. You will be paying a price. Hauge 09!!!
April 23rd, 2008 at 1:14 pmJackie Says:
April 23rd, 2008 at 1:16 pmBoalt Hall = The Reichstag?
Defenders of Executive Privilage usually claim the president cannot get "unvarnished advice" if such advice were made public. If Yoo's memo on torture is representative of "unvarnished advice", we need to let in more sunshine on such advice.
April 23rd, 2008 at 1:19 pmtime for a sternly-worded letter!!!
April 23rd, 2008 at 1:21 pm"...paving the way for a possible subpoena and showdown over Executive Privilege."
More likely a strongly worded letter or stern looks from the Dems - nothing more.
April 23rd, 2008 at 1:21 pmgrover nerdkissed, you nailed it before me!
April 23rd, 2008 at 1:22 pmThis is priceless.. We should expect nothing less from John Yoo who condones torture, in all of it's forms. Men like him are usually the biggest cowards. They hide behind executive priviledge and twist the Constitution to shield them from their crimes.
He is a disgrace to his profession. The only true justice will be if gets life behind bars with no possiblity of parole. I don't believe in Capital Punishment; I think he would suffer more in solitary the rest of his life.
April 23rd, 2008 at 1:26 pm>>In his book The Terror Presidency, Goldsmith, now a Harvard law professor, writes that the torture memos had "no foundation" in any "source of law" and rested on "one-sided legal arguments." They were valuable to the Administration nonetheless, Goldsmith says, because the CIA saw one of them as a "golden shield" against criminal prosecution of agents who had used harsh interrogation techniques...<<
http://www.thenation.com/docprint.mhtml?i=20080428&s=gillers
April 23rd, 2008 at 1:26 pmGuilty dogs bark. Or, they refuse to testify based on executive privilege.
Bush may not be held accountable in a court of law, but the world knows what he's all about by now. What a disgrace to this country...
http://newsprism.wordpress.com
April 23rd, 2008 at 1:27 pmI think that Yoo would be a perfect person for the Democrats to practice Inherent Contempt on. Wouldn't you just love to see him frog-marched into the cell in the basement by the Sargent at Arms. For the life of me I can't understand why the Democrats don't use Inherent Contempt. It is their only tool if they hope to get any of these guys to testify before Obama takes office.
April 23rd, 2008 at 1:28 pmMr. Yoo, you work for me.
April 23rd, 2008 at 1:29 pmI give you authorization to discuss this issue with Congress, which also works for me.
This authorization works for me.
mary Says:
Does the DOJ normally have to answer to Congress? Or does the DOJ report directly to the W/H?
I don't know. But the Dept. of Justice normally has to answer to Congressional subpoenas. But then, the Dept. of Justice isn't normally run by a bunch of criminals.
April 23rd, 2008 at 1:30 pmCondi at Stanford, Fcuk Yoo at UCBezerkeley - no wonder the Bay Area is looked upon with such contempt.
Where is today's Elliot Ness now that we need him?
April 23rd, 2008 at 1:38 pmWe have been expressly advised by the Office of Legal Counsel of the United States Department of Justice that Professor Yoo is not authorized to discuss before your Committee any specific deliberative communications, including the substance of comments on opinions or policy questions, or the confidential predecisional advice, recommendations or other positions taken by individuals or entities of the Executive Branch.
Translation = Are you friggin people nuts ? We don't allow mouthpieces for the Chimpy administration who search diligently for every loophole to try and condone , rationalize and conduct criminal acts to speak .................
April 23rd, 2008 at 1:38 pm#17 Bilbo Hussein Baggins Says:
April 23rd, 2008 at 1:28 pm
And this leads me to my next question:
Do these cowardly Dems wish to make anyone testify? My inclination is, if left to their devices... not in hell! This is why it is important the We the People tell them what to do. Congress is the People's tool... not to be confused with the current state of operations... retooling out Liberties and Freedoms...
April 23rd, 2008 at 1:42 pmJohn Yoo is one of the dominators in the game called Empire.
You know the game. They play, you lose.
Your choice is to be visible to Empire.
Two thousand years ago a Roman senator suggested that all slaves wear white armbands to better identify them. “No”, said a wiser senator. “If they see how many of them there are , they may revolt.”
The power of seeing others on the street who have the same beliefs, courage and desires to transform our world will be visible to all easily and quickly
Take a bandana and
Tie it on your car, your briefcase or your bag.
Wear it on your head, your neck or your arm.
Hang it in your house window, tie it to your mailbox.
Join the bandana revolution.
Psssttt.........do something......make yourself visible.
April 23rd, 2008 at 1:45 pmHow did we ever have hearings in the past on important shit?
It's WAY past time to stop "asking" these schmucks to testify. Bring 'em to the hearing in chains.
April 23rd, 2008 at 1:51 pmJust imagine 1996-2000 people in the Clinton administration refuse to testify. The so called left wing media and the reptiles would have been screaming from the rooftops. But now that they have stacked the supremes...don't even think of it.
April 23rd, 2008 at 1:52 pmThere's a reason it is called 'contempt'. What goes around, comes around.
It is time for contempt!
April 23rd, 2008 at 1:54 pm#23 civil behavior Says:
ORANGE bandana...
April 23rd, 2008 at 1:55 pmI'm late to the party (AGAIN!) but this one's easy:
Interrogator: Tell us about the torture memos, schweinhund!!!
Yoo: Never! You'll have to torture me before I tell YOU anything!. Ptoeey!
Interrogater: Verr-rry well! ..Kylie England! Cardinal Biggles! OddJob! Bill Kristol! Dick Cheney! Sean Hannity! and any other assorted henchmen...Gerade Aus! Schnell! Do your duty and do your worst! (or 'Wurst', if you like)
Yoo: Hang on a sec! I'm an American!
Interrogator: So? Bwhahhahahhaaahha !!!!
April 23rd, 2008 at 2:06 pmresponse to Zooey @ 24
"How did we ever have hearings in the past on important shit?"
In that regard look up Watergate and Iran-Contra, and compare. Iran-Contra was a much bigger scandal than Watergate, politically, morally and legally yet Reagan exited an f--ing HERO, and his co-criminal George H. W. Bush succeeded him. Negroponte, who financed death swuads that ckilled thousands, including apolitical US citizens. became Ambassador to Iraq un Bush Juvenile. Felon Ollie North has a radio show and is an employee of Fox News. All the other players in Iran COntra are doing very well thank you.
Nixon resinged BEFORE he could be impeached. Reagan was NEVER impeached, not even accused--he was just a "witness" who apparently heard, saw and did nothing.
Iran-Contra is where and when US democracy failed.
April 23rd, 2008 at 2:21 pmgrover nerdkissed Says:
time for a sternly-worded letter!!!
With exclamation marks. Yegads, don't forget the exclamation marks or they will ignore the letter and a new one will have to be written.
**bangs head on keyboard
April 23rd, 2008 at 2:23 pmre #29...oh my, absolutely awful typos in my post--I throw myself upon the mercy of the court!
April 23rd, 2008 at 2:24 pmWayne..
April 23rd, 2008 at 2:27 pmplease don't bang your head against the keyboard. I know it feels good but if it breaks, how WILL you comment thereafter?
Yoo-hoo! Oh, Mr. Yoo-hoo! Undoubtedly the snakes will remain hidden in the grass. The amount of chutpah these slime vomit about Executive Privilege is absolutely un****ing believable. These 'deliberations' were done in the name of the American people, and we demand accountability!
April 23rd, 2008 at 2:28 pm5th Estate Says:
Wayne..
please don’t bang your head against the keyboard. I know it feels good but if it breaks, how WILL you comment thereafter?
Hmmmm, Maybe thats why my spacebar doesn't work sometimes.
=D
April 23rd, 2008 at 2:30 pmApril 23rd, 2008 at 2:32 pm
Saco - who is going to issue this subpeona? Although I'm a Democrat, I am so fed up with them as well because they're all such pussies. The only one that MIGHT be able to get to the bottom of it would be Wexler, and he has a lot of stuff on his plate.
April 23rd, 2008 at 2:34 pmGeeDubs says correctly:
These ‘deliberations’ were done in the name of the American people, and we demand accountability!
I add that it was made in the name of western civilizacion... remember their argument about "Saddam wanting to destroy our freedom", "they hate our freedom!"
April 23rd, 2008 at 2:36 pm
I know... Democrats in Congress have been a great disapointment... and yesterday Clinton won in Pensylvaia...
April 23rd, 2008 at 2:38 pmChuck (Grandpa Munster) Schumer is a disgrace to the Democratic Party. He should follow "hubby's getting richer from Iraq occupation" Feinstein and retire after his current term.
April 23rd, 2008 at 2:39 pmChuck Schumer will NEVER get my vote again because of that vile Mulkasey endorsement. Let's get a real liberal into that Senate seat the next time he's up for re-election. Thanx for NOTHING, Chuck!
April 23rd, 2008 at 2:42 pmYoo did his work for the DOJ, and that is part of the Executive branch, and therefore they can dictate whether or not he testifies before congress... HOWEVER... The executive branch works for US, and I for one hereby grant Mr. Yoo permission to testify before congress regarding his role in any decision making regarding torture.
April 23rd, 2008 at 2:42 pmExecutive Privilege should not and CANNOT be allowed to be used to secretly come up with bullshit torture rationalizations and then have them all just slink away. We already went through this crap with Nixon's 'if the President does it, it isn't illegal,' melarky 35 years ago. Don't WE own all of them? Either that, or 'For the People, By the People' is just empty rhetoric.
April 23rd, 2008 at 2:46 pmFreeze him on a concrete slab while playing heavy metal full bore and then waterboard the bastard!
April 23rd, 2008 at 2:53 pmOh, that's nice. "paving the way to a POSSIBLE subpoena".
April 23rd, 2008 at 3:00 pmAnd then what??? Criminal privilege?? And then what?? A spineless response? And then what?? Constitutional collapse?? And then what?? Everyone goes home crying??
Obviously Congress is digging a hole that they FEAR they will not get out of. Chickenhawks, all.
Ladies and Gentlemen, Students - your constitutional law professor. Give him a hand, won't you?
April 23rd, 2008 at 3:01 pmA backhand across the face...
April 23rd, 2008 at 3:18 pmHow can one part of the government claim it can't disclose "internal discussions" with another part of the government? Is there more than one government they work for and are paid by.
I mean, what exactly did they think when they advocate a "unitary government."
April 23rd, 2008 at 4:16 pm"refuses to testify" -- somehow most of us-- the ordinary people-- cannot understand how Bushies continually refuse to testify. How can they do this? None of us can. Let's all refuse to testify, ever again, and use Bush & Co. as precedents. What a bunch of lowlifes & liars Bush et al prove themselves to be on a daily basis. Again-- how can these people continue to REFUSE to testify? How can this be legal? Get a Bush job & thumb your nose forever at the law? Is that the rule now? Someone step in and show these criminals that they, like the rest of us, must answer for their law-breaking. Bushies = elite. The rest of us = law-abiders.
April 23rd, 2008 at 4:18 pmI suggest internment for Mr. Yoo. Guantanamo maybe?
April 23rd, 2008 at 8:01 pmExecutive Privilege and Pardons don't mean SHIIIT at the Hague.
April 23rd, 2008 at 11:51 pmHow is this DICTATORSHIP working out for you?
April 24th, 2008 at 2:59 amdude..the guy has stated he beleives the president has the right to sexually torture children....if you believed something like that, would you want to risk going into a public forum where the question could potentially be asked..
April 24th, 2008 at 8:32 amIt's naive to pretend we only started torturing recently. We've tortured since the founding of the CIA. To pretend that this is a new development is the true dishonor to all the victims of clandestine US operations.
However, I do not only blame the U.S. Britain, France and most of the anglo nations share in the benefits of US intervention and also deserve a measure of disgust.
April 25th, 2008 at 5:25 am