RSSUsing PayPal
Where was Cheney During Bush-McCain Press Conference?
Share / Recommend - Comment - Print - Friday, Dec 16 2005, 7:21AM
CLOSE 
SOCIAL WEBSITES
http://digg.com/submit?phase=2&url=http://twn.riverlab.com/archives/2005/12/where_was_chene/&title=Where was Cheney During Bush-McCain Press Conference?&topic=political_opinion" target="_blank">Digg
Del.icio.us
Reddit
Facebook
Newsvine
Stumble UponEMAIL THIS ARTICLE
John McCain has earned his Senate salary these last few months.
Beating the White House is no easy feat, and yet his success and the success of others -- as in the battle against John Bolton's confirmation -- is showing that the White House can be tackled and compelled to stand down.
From the Washington Post this morning:
Bush gave his support publicly in a joint appearance with McCain in the Oval Office yesterday, one day after the House gave veto-proof support for the senator's language in a symbolic 308 to 122 vote. The Senate had already approved the provision 90 to 9. Bush praised McCain's effort."We've been happy to work with him to achieve a common objective, and that is to make it clear to the world that this government does not torture and that we adhere to the international convention [on] torture, whether it be here at home or abroad," Bush said.
Though the White House held out the agreement as a compromise, McCain retained the language he has been proposing all along, which would prohibit the abuse of any detainee in U.S. custody and would also make it a legal requirement that Defense Department interrogators abide by the rules in the Army's field manual on interrogations.
This same article suggests that Senator Lindsey Graham's legislation, which is still working its way through the Congress and which would restrict the habeas corpus rights of Guantanamo detainees, may undo some of what McCain has succeeded.
So, this fight to uphold norms consistent with American democracy as well as to protect basic human rights is still not finished.
But McCain does deserve a salute and applause for standing his ground against Cheney and his henchmen.
Anyone know what Cheney was doing when Bush was telling the world that he strongly supported John McCain's efforts?
-- Steve Clemons
« Previous Article - Congressional Research Service: Congress & President Never Share "Same Intelligence"» Next Article - Amoral Ethics as Competitive Advantage: Korea's Temporary Cloning Crisis
Bush also reportedly asked McCain about how that unexplained Negro child of his was doin', and if his wife was still a drug addict.
Okay Johnny-boy, here's your salute...SA...LUTE!
Americans can be so very proud that you've arm twisted the Bush administration into abiding by simple and basic human dignity. WOW...OH...WOWIE! America is so very lucky this fine morning. Now Johnny-boy, how about you ask Bush why he authorizes spying on Americans? Now Johnny-boy, why don't you ask Bush how come the military is spying on Americas?
Spying, renditions, detentions, torture, and political obfuscation like there was no tomorrow. Wait Johnny-boy, maybe there is no tomorrow for America. Maybe our noble experiment in democracy is over. Signs and political reality seem to suggest exactly that.
A day or two ago it was announced that the Army had approved classified changes to the field manual. This was seen as a slap to McCann. What happened, were the changes recinded, or did McCann cave in. The stories don't really go into this, and I'd like to know.
next to karl rove, i fear cheney the most... both men are ruthless in the extreme, shot through and through with arrogance and megalomania... bush would like to think he's his own man but, the fact is, he's sadly deluded as anyone who pays any attention whatsoever can see... your comments from yesterday about cheney gathering strength once again, i'm sure, are probably spot on...
So in 2 years we can expect to find out about the Executive Order that tells all the pertinent agencies to ignore the language of the McCain bill. Shall we start a pool for the date the story will break in the WaPo?
John McCain carried the banner and waged the fight against torture. Which Republicans will carry the banner and wage the battle against "bypassing the law and directing NSA to collect communications in the United State against US citizens"? When the head law enforcement officer bypasses the law, what do u have?
If I was McCain, I would not turn my back on Bush or his cronies. Keep a watch and see if they keep their part of the bargain.
Whatever these guys may appear to be agreeing to on the surface, watch out. Their modus operandi whenever they get shoved into doing something they don't want is to appear to be cooperating while launching strong efforts behind the scenes to limit damage. Prime Example: the 9/11 commission -- withhold documents, stack the commission with friends, delay, obfuscate, lie.
Example Two: The Plame Investigation: Nobody wants to find out who was behind it more than this President. If any member of my administration was involved, "they will be taken care of."
It's a formula, but it bloody well works in too many instances. When you have a Secretary of State who baldly lies in the face of clear evidence that "We do not torture," you realize that NOTHING they say can ever be accepted as fact....it is always spin.
this is bullshit camera footage for the gullible. these people have nothing but contempt for laws and treaties. john mccain gets his facetime as the conscience of the party, chimpy gets credit for 'backing down'. and all the time, it's business as usual.
The only reason Bush is now in support of the McCain amendment is that he and his advisors know that his veto will be over-ridden.
kimberly,
Sen. McCain's respose to you is, "Politics isn't beanbag, sometimes it can get pretty rough (chuckle, chuckle)." McCain knows that the better man won in 2000, because in the final analysis he didn't have the spine to do ANYTHING to secure Victory. McCain is the lesser of the two because he is a wuss who took a direct hit on his family without responding. Nice guys finish last, or second, and second is still losing.
> McCain knows that the better man won in 2000
I want some of what he's smoking.
Why do I have the sinking feeling that no matter what Congress declares, the Bushies will do whatever they please, while denying that they're doing it.
The better man won in 2000? A 'man' won in 2000? What country are we talking about here?
Okay Johnny-boy, here's your salute...SA...LUTE!
Americans can be so very proud that you've arm twisted the Bush administration into abiding by simple and basic human dignity. WOW...OH...WOWIE! America is so very lucky this fine morning. Now Johnny-boy, how about you ask Bush why he authorizes spying on Americans? Now Johnny-boy, why don't you ask Bush how come the military is spying on Americas?
Spying, renditions, detentions, torture, and political obfuscation like there was no tomorrow. Wait Johnny-boy, maybe there is no tomorrow for America. Maybe our noble experiment in democracy is over. Signs and political reality seem to suggest exactly that.
Posted by Abu Musab al-Sarcastic
Yes, its wonderful, isn't it! Proven liars that have demonstrated that they have no respect for human rights or international law have entered into an agreement with the American people and the world community that they will respect human rights. Oh happy day!
Karl won in 2000...the President is just along the ride for the W.H. pretzels & beer.
Linda above is right! McCain is a publicity seeking hypocrite, this agreement will NOT stop torture. I urge you to see this, Mr. Clemons, and give us your opinion on it:
http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/editorial/13401262.htm
by Bruce Ackerman
Excerpt:
Congress will soon consider two amendments that threaten a descent into hypocrisy. Both have been tacked onto the defense authorization bill. A provision by Sen. John McCain (R., Ariz.) is an unconditional bar on torture - a prospect President Bush finds so damaging he is threatening to veto the entire bill.
But he won't have to, thanks to a recent amendment by Sen. Lindsay Graham (R., S.C.). This one bars Guantánamo detainees from going to federal court to enforce the rights that McCain would declare sacrosanct.
A shabby compromise is in the making. Bush removes his veto threat - as long as Graham's amendment remains in the bill - to transform McCain's principles into a hypocritical gesture: Listen up, world, we are against torture at Guantánamo - as long as nobody can complain about it.
BTW, anyone seen Phase Two????
BTW, anyone seen the Abu Ghraib photos that were COURT ORDERED to be released????
BTW, anyone seen the "missing" two t+housand pages of the Taguba report????
BTW, anyone seen anything vaquely resembling a left wing SPINE lately??
POA, we can't comment on matters that are under investigation.
:^)
Put the champagne back in the bucket. The agreed-on amendment has a truck-wide loophole, in the form of a defense for torturers that they "reasonably believed they were obeying a lawful order."
This is functional impunity for torturers.
Combined with the court-stripping effect of the Graham amendment, this means an end to further disclosures about the possible innocence of detainees, and about their treatment. Virtually all of what we know now about such cases comes from the detainees who have had the resources to get access to U.S. courts. See the outstanding series of posts by hilzoy and Katherine at Obsidian Wings opposing the Graham amendment.
And even worse, it makes torture admissible as evidence against detainees:
the Graham-Levin-Kyl amendment, which is part of the same defense bill as the McCain [anti-torure] provision and is expected to pass along with it … would allow torture testimony to be used to hold and to punish detainees. … [It] allows the use of torture testimony before combatant status review tribunals, which the Bush administration has set up to determine whether a detainee is an enemy combatant.
Emily Bazelon, Slate, December 15
Somewhere plotting on how to gut this before it could do some real "damage."
Martin Garbus
An Incredible Day in America
Today, for two separate reasons, has been an incredible day in America. First, the United States has legitimized torture and secondly, the President has admitted to an impeachable offense.
First, the media has been totally misled on the alleged Bush-McCain agreement on torture. McCain capitulated. It is not a defeat for Bush. It is a win for Cheney.
Torture is not banned or in any way impeded.
Under the compromise, anyone charged with torture can defend himself if a "reasonable" person could have concluded they were following a lawful order.
That defense "loophole" totally corrodes the ban. It is the CIA, or the torturing agency, who will decide what a "reasonable" person could have concluded. Can you imagine those agencies in the interrogation business torturing on their own in trying to decide what is reasonable or what is not? What is not "reasonable" if the interrogator (wrongfully or rightfully) believes he has a ticking-bomb situation? Will a CIA or military officer issue a narrow order if he knows his interrogator believes, in this case, torture will work?
The Bush-McCain torture compromise legitimizes torture. It is the first time that has happened in this country. Not in the two World Wars, Korea, the Cold War or Vietnam did the government ever seek or get the power this bill gives them.
The worst part of it is that most of the media missed it and got it wrong.
Secondly, the President in authorizing surveillance without seeking a court order has committed a crime. The Federal Communications Act criminalizes surveillance without a warrant. It is an impeachable offense. This was also totally missed by the media.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/martin-garbus/an-incredible-day-in-amer_b_12392.html
McCain is trying to walk a political tightrope and is clearly motivated by one thing, his last reaslistic shot at The Big Chair. He has been making cooing noises to the Christ-facsists while still maintaining his phony "maverick" creds. Watching him campaign for Bush while leaking VP overtures from Kerry and then very publicly turning him down was truly revolting. At least Kerry succeeded in bringing out McCain's true colors. He is also quite big on projecting US military power abroad. Nuff said.
"under the compromise, anyone charged with torture can defend himself if a "reasonable" person could have concluded they were following a lawful order"
If this is the case, unlucky low-level scapegoats like Lydie England and her cohorts should walk free and Bush, Cheney, Rove,Addington, Gonzales, Condi and their ilk should be locked up.
Steve: I hope you read this and update your post, it is sadly misinformed!
As a small number of comments have already stated. DO NOT buy into the MSM reporting on the Bush-McCain Bill. McCain caved BIG TIME on two fronts - 1) "Under the compromise, anyone charged with torture can defend himself if a "reasonable" person could have concluded they were following a lawful order.
That defense "loophole" totally corrodes the ban. It is the CIA, or the torturing agency, who will decide what a "reasonable" person could have concluded...
The Bush-McCain torture compromise legitimizes torture. It is the first time that has happened in this country. Not in the two World Wars, Korea, the Cold War or Vietnam did the government ever seek or get the power this bill gives them." Martin Garbus reporting @Huffpost
2) Cheney and Rumsfeld have worked together and personally inserted a "secret" 10 page addendum to the Army Field Manual (AFM). The AFM is the document that
the Bush-McCain bill calls as the guidelines for interrogations.
Bush-McCain, if enacted, would be a major leap backwards in the conduct of interogators not a step forward. I'm writing all my local papers/news services and demand that they report on this bill accurately as a loss for McCain not a victory. Pissing in the wind, but yas do what yas can do do.
Where was Cheney? My guess is that he was in his secure undisclosed location, cussing McCain and then shooting his television like Elvis.
i'm going to make an educated guess and say
the note at 135am is troll-sent spam.
Reader Comments (31) - post a comment