Andrew McCarthy Scolds Holder, Obama in refusal email

[WillowTree]

Saying No to Justice








did something today that I’ve never done before. The Department of Justice, which I proudly served for a quarter century as an assistant U.S. attorney and a deputy U.S. marshal, asked me for help, and I declined. Actually, what I declined to do was attend a meeting. My hope is that the dissent I am registering — to the administration’s disastrous policies of releasing trained terrorists and threatening prosecution against government lawyers — will help the department and the Obama administration, even if they don’t want to hear it.

At the start of his term, President Obama directed Attorney General Eric Holder to head up the President’s Detention Policy Task Force to study detention, trial, and other issues relating to alien enemy combatants — though that venerable law-of-war term has been purged in favor of “individuals captured or apprehended in connection with armed conflicts and counterterrorism operations.” The attorney general has assigned lawyers in the department’s Counterterrorism Division to organize the effort. Those lawyers invited me, among other former and current prosecutors experienced in terrorism and national-security matters, to attend a roundtable session next week, to sort through the vexing legal challenges of modern international terrorism.

I’ve declined the invitation. It pained me to do it. I’ve always believed enforcing our laws and defending our nation are duties of citizenship, not ideology. My conservative political views aside, I regularly make myself available to liberal and conservative groups, to Democrats and Republicans, if they think tapping my national-security or law-enforcement experience would be beneficial.








Saying No to Justice by Andrew C. McCarthy on National Review Online

 

[DiveCon]

Nevertheless, it is quite clear—most recently, from your provocative remarks on Wednesday in Germany—that the Obama administration has already settled on a policy of releasing trained jihadists (including releasing some of them into the United States). Whatever the good intentions of the organizers, the meeting will obviously be used by the administration to claim that its policy was arrived at in consultation with current and former government officials experienced in terrorism cases and national security issues. I deeply disagree with this policy, which I believe is a violation of federal law and a betrayal of the president’s first obligation to protect the American people.

Moreover, in light of public statements by both you and the President, it is dismayingly clear that, under your leadership, the Justice Department takes the position that a lawyer who in good faith offers legal advice to government policy makers—like the government lawyers who offered good faith advice on interrogation policy—may be subject to investigation and prosecution for the content of that advice, in addition to empty but professionally damaging accusations of ethical misconduct. Given that stance, any prudent lawyer would have to hesitate before offering advice to the government.


Given your policy of conducting ruinous criminal and ethics investigations of lawyers over the advice they offer the government, and your specific position that the wartime detention I would endorse is tantamount to a violation of law, it makes little sense for me to attend the Task Force meeting.

Read the entire letter here.

You reap what you sow BO, if this is your idea of bringing the contry together and fighting terrorism, you belong in a mental institution.

Could you tell us what was said in Germany to make this man write this email in which he claims Obama is releasing Jihadists on us? It sounds like he is the one that belongs in a mental institution.

Also, I've seen no evidence that the lawyers will be charged with anything, and they shouldn't be charged with anything for giving their opinion. So why is this man trying to scare other lawyers away from working with the Obama administration?

This stuff is getting old...you republicans need a new meme.

well, you should know that Obama sought him out for a panel to work for his administration
so maybe you should learn more about this man before you start attacking him

 

[WillowTree]

Read the entire letter here.

You reap what you sow BO, if this is your idea of bringing the contry together and fighting terrorism, you belong in a mental institution.

Could you tell us what was said in Germany to make this man write this email in which he claims Obama is releasing Jihadists on us? It sounds like he is the one that belongs in a mental institution.

Also, I've seen no evidence that the lawyers will be charged with anything, and they shouldn't be charged with anything for giving their opinion. So why is this man trying to scare other lawyers away from working with the Obama administration?

This stuff is getting old...you republicans need a new meme.

well, you should know that Obama sought him out for a panel to work for his administration
so maybe you should learn more about this man before you start attacking him

all the left needs to know is that this man diagrees with their obamalama!

 

[Ravi]

This stuff is getting old...you republicans need a new meme.

HA HA HA

I'm a Republican now?

Sorry kiddo, that shit won't play with me.

You need something else, as I'm no partisan and you know it.

Maybe you just play one on the internet. Didn't mean to insult you.

I did notice that you didn't answer my questions which leads me to believe you don't know and are just having an emotional response to this guy's column. No biggie.

 

[DiveCon]

This stuff is getting old...you republicans need a new meme.

HA HA HA

I'm a Republican now?

Sorry kiddo, that shit won't play with me.

You need something else, as I'm no partisan and you know it.

Maybe you just play one on the internet. Didn't mean to insult you.

I did notice that you didn't answer my questions which leads me to believe you don't know and are just having an emotional response to this guy's column. No biggie.

your response seemed a lot more emotional than his
you wouldnt be projecting, again, now would ya?

 

[alan1]

given bush's approval rating when he slunk out of office, I'm surprised you think one has to have been a "leftist" to know the man was a moron.

My comment was because of the calling obama divisive. Given the poll numbers, I'd say he's far less divisive than his predecessor. And even the people who don't agree with him like him...

except for the same deadenders who still defend Bush.

But Ravi posts said what I was getting at much more succinctly.

but thanks for the dig.

The issue was about what Mr Obama is doing. Mr Bush is no longer in any position of power, so invoking his name has nothing to do with the current policies.
I wasn't defending anything, merely pointing out that the new sheriff should be judged on his merits alone, not the merits (or lack thereof) of the previous sheriff.
And yes, I will put in digs when I see partisan attacks instead of intellectual honesty. That's one of the reasons you like me.

The issue as I see it a great deal of the time, is that people criticize Obama for the same things they cheered Bush on for. I'm afraid that Bush's being out of office doesn't change what I see as cognizant dissonance.

So I think the whole BS about trying to "separate" the two is just that.

And actually, I like you despite the digs.... never because of, since I have no problem being disagreed with in the first place.

But can you engage in a debate, an argument about a subject concerning Mr Obama's actions without bringing Mr Bush into the issue? That was my original point. And up until you posted, nobody had brought up Mr Bush, the discussion was about Mr Obama's actions. There was no defending of Mr Bush, and there still isn't.
I didn't defend Mr Bush, and neither did Xenophan, in this post or others dealing with this subject matter.

 

[Ravi]

HA HA HA

I'm a Republican now?

Sorry kiddo, that shit won't play with me.

You need something else, as I'm no partisan and you know it.

Maybe you just play one on the internet. Didn't mean to insult you.

I did notice that you didn't answer my questions which leads me to believe you don't know and are just having an emotional response to this guy's column. No biggie.

your response seemed a lot more emotional than his
you wouldnt be projecting, again, now would ya?

How so? I've no problem with people criticizing Obama but if they can't back up their criticisms and just believe what someone with an axe to grind writes how critical is their thinking?

 

[DiveCon]

Maybe you just play one on the internet. Didn't mean to insult you.

I did notice that you didn't answer my questions which leads me to believe you don't know and are just having an emotional response to this guy's column. No biggie.

your response seemed a lot more emotional than his
you wouldnt be projecting, again, now would ya?

How so? I've no problem with people criticizing Obama but if they can't back up their criticisms and just believe what someone with an axe to grind writes how critical is their thinking?

then you are again, ignoring the fact that Obama ASKED HIM to help

 

[Xenophon]

Maybe you just play one on the internet. Didn't mean to insult you.

I did notice that you didn't answer my questions which leads me to believe you don't know and are just having an emotional response to this guy's column. No biggie.

Strike two sweetheart, I was busy laughing at your attempt to paint me as a partisan GoPer.

This wasn't a 'column' it was a letter he wrote to Holder.

My response to it is bravo, more people need to stand up to the stupidity that is Holder/BO.

 

[Ravi]

Maybe you just play one on the internet. Didn't mean to insult you.

I did notice that you didn't answer my questions which leads me to believe you don't know and are just having an emotional response to this guy's column. No biggie.

Strike two sweetheart, I was busy laughing at your attempt to paint me as a partisan GoPer.

This wasn't a 'column' it was a letter he wrote to Holder.

My response to it is bravo, more people need to stand up to the stupidity that is Holder/BO.

Still avoiding the questions, dear.

 

[Xenophon]

Still avoiding the questions, dear.

Everything you asked about was answered in later posts, did you not notice?

Why does it say 'banned' under your name?

 

[Ravi]

Still avoiding the questions, dear.

Everything you asked about was answered in later posts, did you not notice?

Why does it say 'banned' under your name?

No, I didn't notice.

 

[Xenophon]

You need to pay closer attention kiddo.

<>Could you tell us what was said in Germany to make this man write this email in which he claims Obama is releasing Jihadists on us? <>
http://www.usmessageboard.com/1192799-post19.html

<> So why is this man trying to scare other lawyers away from working with the Obama administration?<>
http://www.usmessageboard.com/1192750-post1.html

 

[Ravi]

You need to pay closer attention kiddo.

<>Could you tell us what was said in Germany to make this man write this email in which he claims Obama is releasing Jihadists on us? <>
http://www.usmessageboard.com/1192799-post19.html

<> So why is this man trying to scare other lawyers away from working with the Obama administration?<>
http://www.usmessageboard.com/1192750-post1.html

Read them. Didn't answer my questions.

 

[WillowTree]

Chasing the white rabbit down the hole?

 

[garyd]

Apparently so.

 

[Annie]

Indeed the administration has put Justice and the CIA on alert, while probably shrinking the pool of advice from any sources they'll get. In the meantime, 'Houston, we've a problem.' 'Go ahead.' 'Regarding Guantanamo, the detainees, and trials'....
Lots of links.

JustOneMinute: "Change" We Hope They Didn't Believe In

M

May 02, 2009

"Change" We Hope They Didn't Believe In

The NY Times picks a safe, slow Saturday to put up a few flares about team Obama.

First, an amusing headline:

U.S. May Revive Guantánamo Military Courts​

The US? Who is in charge here? The Times managed more specificity last January:

OBAMA WILL SHUT GUANTANAMO SITE AND C.I.A. PRISONS .
​

That darn U.S., undoing Obama's good work. Oh, blame the headline writer - the text of the story makes clear that this is another Obama reversal. Q&O has more.

Let's stay with Gitmo for a moment. Obviously, closing it will provide a wonderful feel-good moment for the left. Unfortunately, there has been no resolution to the pesky question of what to do with the detainees, not all of whom have been singing 'Kumbaya' with suitable commitment. And now Obama may not be able to hustle up the money to close it! The Times has this:

On Thursday, Mr. McConnell hammered the administration for requesting $80 million for closing Guantánamo as part of an $83.4 billion war spending bill without explaining what would happen to the terror suspects being held there.

“Rather than appear before the Senate to explain why these funds are necessary and what the administration plans to do with the terrorists housed at Guantánamo, Attorney General Holder chose to deliver a speech in Berlin yesterday in which he reiterated the administration’s intent to close it,” Mr. McConnell said.​

“It is clear from these remarks that the administration is putting symbolism ahead of safety,” he said.
John McCain joined in:

“I think they made the announcement [to close Guantanamo] without understanding there’s a number of really difficult issues associated with it,” Mr. McCain said.​

Some Democrats who otherwise staunchly support the administration are uneasy about moving the terror suspects to American soil. Their reluctance, coupled with Republican opposition, could force the White House to strip the money for closing Guantánamo from the larger war funding bill in order to win its quick approval.

I assume the U.S. Obama will get the money eventually.

Posted by Tom Maguire on May 02, 2009

 

[MaggieMae]

Just another BO fiasco in an increasing parade of them.

Say hello to the new boss.

Same as the old boss...

It's so fascinating to me that everywhere I go there are these huge numbers of new non-Republicans! What seems strange is that in all my travels, I never met a libertarian or a conservative non-Republican until George W. Bush pushed the GOP back about a decade.

Typical conversation:

Are you a Republican?
ME?! Ya lookin at ME?! Noooooooo, not ME.

You don't seem like a Democrat or even an Independent.
HATE libs; independent thinker--yeah, that's the ticket.

Then why weren't you doing more to promote Bob Barr for President?
--Did you vote for George W. Bush?
--Did you vote for John McCain?
--Did you not vote at all?

Look, all I know is Obama sucks.

 

[MaggieMae]

Read the entire letter here.

You reap what you sow BO, if this is your idea of bringing the contry together and fighting terrorism, you belong in a mental institution.

Could you tell us what was said in Germany to make this man write this email in which he claims Obama is releasing Jihadists on us? It sounds like he is the one that belongs in a mental institution.

Also, I've seen no evidence that the lawyers will be charged with anything, and they shouldn't be charged with anything for giving their opinion. So why is this man trying to scare other lawyers away from working with the Obama administration?

This stuff is getting old...you republicans need a new meme.

well, you should know that Obama sought him out for a panel to work for his administration
so maybe you should learn more about this man before you start attacking him

In other words, it was McCarthy who used his own political bias to get in the way of proffered bipartisanship (in the beginning). And yet the same club now accuses Obama of having no intention of including opposing opiners in his administration. Figures.

 

[garyd]

Then you are blind in oene eye and can't read out of the other.