Download | Play    Download | Play

As David already discussed, constitutional-law expert Jonathan Turley joined Rachel last night to discuss the fate of top Bush administration figures involved in "harsh interrogation techniques." The White House has indicated that Bush will not be issuing blanket pardons, but the Wall Street Journal later reported that that's because it's "unnecessary" to do so.

Turley makes a critical point in the interview -- namely, that the moral burden of torture is on the backs of each one of us until these people are brought to justice. And it will be profoundly immoral to let them go:

"We have third world countries that when they have found that their leaders committed torture war crimes, they prosecuted them. But the most successful democracy in history is just, I think, about to see war crimes, do nothing about it. And that's an indictment not just of George Bush and his administration. It's the indictment of all of us if we walk away from a clear war crime and say it's time for another commission."

Turley lays out a powerful case that's pretty hard to argue with. A wave of reconciliation and forgiveness seems to be sweeping Washington, but sanctioning torture and destroying America's moral credibility around the world is something that can't simply be ignored. I'm not opposed to a commission per se, but the commission MUST be granted sweeping investigatory powers and a mandate to prosecute any and all wrongdoing found to have been committed. Anything less is unacceptable.

Full transcript below the fold:

(h/t Heather)

Continue reading »

Download | Play    Download | Play

Rachel Maddow had Jonathan Turley on yesterday to discuss the Wall Street Journal story reporting that the Bush administration had no intention of issuing pardons for the people involved in its torture operations because they don't think it's necessary.

And what Turley observed should be alarming to anyone concerned about whether or not Democrats are going to have the spine to return the U.S. to the rule of law -- by, among other things, holding torturers and the people who enabled them accountable:

Maddow: So the White House says now, at least to the Wall Street Journal, that they are not likely to pardon anyone who might have implemented or taken part in these torture policies because they believe that their Justice Department memos excuse them, so there's no need to pardon anyone. Are you buying that reasoning?

Turley: No. I don't believe that anyone seriously believes in the administration that what they did is legal. This is not a close legal question. Waterboarding is torture. It has been defined as a crime by U.S. courts and by foreign courts. There's no ambiguity in it. That is exactly why they have repeatedly acted to stop any court from reviewing any of this.

And so what's really happening here is a rather clever move at this intersection of law and politics. That what the administration is doing, is they know that the people that want him to pardon our torture program is primarily the Democrats, not the Republicans. The Democratic leadership would love to have a pardon so they could go to their supporters and say, "Look, there's really nothing we could do. We're just going to have this truth commission, and we'll get the truth out, but there really can't be any indictments now."

Well, the Bush administration is calling their bluff. They know that the Democratic leadership will not allow criminal investigations or indictments. And in that way the Democrats will actually repair Bush's legacy, because he will be able to say, "There was nothing stopping indictments or prosecutions, but a Democratic congress and a Democratic White House didn't think there was any basis for it."

There's been a certain amount of dismay expressed by progressives over the past week or so about Obama's emerging Cabinet and the lack of any real liberals within his administration so far; some of this is reasonable, some of it excessive.

But if Turley is right, and the Obama administration and congressional Democrats do what they've been doing all along -- going along to get along, and putting politics over principle -- when it comes to confronting the reality that torture was conducted under American auspices, then the resulting uproar and outrage will be fully deserved.

The campaign is already under way. In this morning's Washington Post, Jack Goldsmith -- who was up to his neck in the torture dealings, but who also made a principled stand against the policies -- launched the first effort to shoot down not just any prosecutions and indictments, even any "truth commission" at all.

So Democrats and Republicans will beat their teeth over it for a few weeks, agree to set up a toothless "truth commission," and let these war criminals walk slowly away.

It's going to be up to the public -- the ordinary citizens who want the black stain of torture removed the national fabric -- to remind their spineless representatives that torture is torture, war crimes are war crimes, and the rule of law requires those who flouted it to face the consequences -- go-along-get-along politics be damned.

Open Thread below....

I know that we're supposed to be healing and reaching across the aisle and being all post-partisan with our upcoming Obama presidency, but I, like Rachel Maddow, need to be seriously talked down with the news that President-Elect Obama has counseled Harry Reid and the Democratic Party to not kick turncoat Joe Lieberman out of the caucus in the next congress.

Steve Clemons from The Washington Note tries to explain how there are ways to at least send a message to Holy Joe by removing his chairmanships to critical committees.

UPDATE: Think Progress has a new report out today showing how Holy Joe, who once proclaimed that he was "a Democrat with a 35-year record of fighting for progressive causes" has lost his way. And BraveNewFilms has a new site and video called "Joe Lieberman Must GO"

Download | Play    Download | Play

Our friend Rachel Maddow stops by the set of The Colbert Report to chat with Stephen about her new show on MSNBC.

Although this segment of The Rachel Maddow Show aired before the election, it does bring up an important point about one aspect of the McCain campaign tactics we haven't discussed yet: as polls showed McCain dropping further and further out of contention, McCain--effectively, the head of the Republican Party--did nothing to help down ticket races, some of which were very, very tight (at the time of writing the Coleman/Franken race in Minnesota was heading to a recount).

Did McCain's refusal to campaign in any of these locations help or hurt the Republican brand? Tim Pawlenty tries to deflect the question by saying that Obama didn't come to Minnesota to stump for Franken, but I don't know that the comparison is apt. While Obama never did any appearances with Franken, the Obama campaign's ground forces did do an amazing job of canvassing and registering more Democratic voters, which would only help Franken.

Download | Play    Download | Play (h/t Heather)

Rachel Maddow goes through some of the dirty tricks we've already seen happening in various locations across the country and empowers us all to not let anyone steal your vote.

After eight years of perhaps the most incompetent government in American history, we‘ve got one way to fix it now, one way to exchange a president who is more despised by his own people than any other president in the time that polls existed. Choose who you will, but do not give up the power to choose by letting anyone or anything stop you from voting.

Transcripts below the fold

Continue reading »

Of all the cable news heads out there, this was the interview that I thought would be the most intelligent and informative. I'm so grateful to have Rachel Maddow on the airwaves this election season.

In this first segment, Maddow talks about Obama's avoidance of partisan or ideological attacks (much to our on the left's consternation) as well as shoring up our infrastructure.

MADDOW: And so, you have the opportunity to say John McCain, George Bush, you're wrong. You also have the opportunity to say, conservatism has been bad for America. But, you haven't gone there either.

OBAMA: I tell you what though, Rachel. You notice, I think we're winning right now so... (LAUGHTER) Maybe I'm doing something right. I know you've been cruising for a bruising for a while here, looking for a fight out there. But, I just think people are tired of that kind of back and forth, tit for tat, ideological approach to the problems.

Now, there is no doubt that there is a set of premises in the reigning Republican ideology that I just think are wrong. This whole notion, and then it's been captured by this back and forth about whether I'm a redistributor, I think is a great example. The notion that the progressive income tax, which was instituted by Teddy Roosevelt, supposedly John McCain's hero, is somehow un-American, I think is an example of how people have gone way off track.

Part two and transcripts below the fold:

Continue reading »

Here at C&L, we try to run funny videos for the open thread and news videos throughout the day, but dang, sometimes they overlap. h/t Heather for the video and the terrific blog Yikes! for reminding me. Open Thread below....

October 21, 2008 Rachel Maddow Show

Holy FSM, I love Rachel Maddow. And not in a little way; I mean pick-her-up-and-carry-her-on-my-shoulders kind of love. And I love her even more for the gracious way that she deals with neo-con former Bush speechwriter David Frum.

Frum, who unbelievably has the nerve to sit in judgment of anyone when his carefully crafted propaganda led us into an unnecessary war, employs the Republican tried and true method of creating false equivalencies to defend the indefensible tactics of the McCain campaign. And his target isn't the expected Barack Obama or even Bill Clinton, but Rachel Maddow herself.

That's right. Frum -- who by the way, has only a glancing relationship with facts -- has the bad manners in addition to flawed thought processes to tell Maddow that using snark and humor in her news show brings down the national dialogue just as much as McCain and Palin's race baiting and fear mongering.

Continue reading »

  Download | play   Download | play   (h/t Heather)

Based on her performance with Katie Couric, it's no surprise that the McCain campaign has kept Sarah Palin off MSNBC news shows where she wouldn't get the Hannity kid glove treatment. But the campaign has also quite studiously ensured that no spokesperson at all appear on shows like Countdown and The Rachel Maddow Show.  Until Friday, that is, when Sr. Policy Adviser Nancy Pfotenhauer agreed to talk up John McCain with Rachel Maddow.  Given Maddow's command of facts, I think it's safe to say this won't be repeated between now and Election Day.  

Watch when Pfotenhauer launches into her typical talking points (which, for the McCain campaign, means repeating the same debunked memes against Obama) and Rachel responds, knowing the actual timeline of the bill McCain takes credit for co-sponsoring and pointing out that the tired Franklin Raines smear has been denied by all parties involved.  Ooops!  None of the other news shows actually do homework and question anything she's said before.  What's a surrogate to do?  Filibuster the rest of the segment by spurting out a lot of words without a lot of substance behind them.

Transcripts below the fold:

Continue reading »

Download | play    Download | play   (h/t Heather)

MSNBC goes to the strange bedfellows tag team of Rachel Maddow and Pat Buchanan to give the post-mortem on the performance of the Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin.  I'm reminded of my reaction to the first presidential debate.  I had been disappointed in Obama's performance, noting far too many opportunities to score points not taken by Obama.  John Amato reminded me that it's not the decideds like me for whom Obama performed; it was the undecideds.  Similarly, Maddow's and Buchanan's perceptions mirror exactly how the Palin's performance will strike the decideds on both sides of the fence:  Maddow found her scripted, lacking in genuine emotion and light on substance.  Buchanan responded to her viscerally, caring neither for her flubs nor her lack of details, but just finding her stimulating through her attractiveness.

But will it sway the undecideds?  According to the CNN poll, it looks like substance won over folksiness: 

Fifty-one percent of those polled thought Biden did the best job in Thursday night's debate, while 36 percent thought Palin did the best job.

But respondents said the folksy Palin was more likable, scoring 54 percent to Biden's 36 percent.

Both candidates exceeded expectations - 84 percent of the people polled said Palin did a better job than they expected, while 64 percent said Biden also exceeded expectations.

But on the question of the candidates' qualifications to assume the presidency, 87 percent of the people polled said Biden is qualified while only 42 percent said Palin is qualified.

So perhaps Rachel wrapped it up correctly:  "Boring, But Right" versus "Exciting, But Wrong."   That’s America’s choice.

Transcripts below the fold

Continue reading »

Download | play    Download | play   (h/t Heather)

You know, it would really be much easier to not go all Godwin on the Republicans if they wouldn't just open themselves up for such blatant charges of being Nazis.  The thing that never ceases to astonish me is how little they attempt to hide it.  ABC News: 

That heartbreaking scenario (of people displaced after natural disasters like Hurricane Gustav) inspired Louisiana Republican State Rep. John LaBruzzo to start thinking about ways to stem generational welfare, in which many welfare recipients have children who also end up dependent on government assistance, according to the representative.

His idea -- giving $1,000 to poor women to undergo reproductive sterilization by Fallopian tube ligation -- is stirring up controversy among some medical professionals, who say that the proposal is offensive and smacks of long-discredited eugenics programs.

LaBruzzo has also suggested other controversial ideas: paying poor men to get vasectomies and giving tax incentives for college-educated wealthy couples to have more children.

LaBruzzo doesn't know why it would be considered eugenics if it's voluntary or racist if most welfare recipients are white.  I don't know why this guy has a job representing the people of Louisiana.

Download | play   Download | play   (h/t Heather)

Ah...we knew him before he became a Villager.  Our buddy and former C&L contributor Steve Benen handicaps how the candidates and their respective economic messages are playing with the American people.  Needless to say, Benen rightly points out that McCain's flailing has hurt him in the presidential race. 

I heard George Will, who is not exactly a reflexive liberal, talk yesterday how this is something of a presidential test. And there's one candidate who's come across as steady, unflappable, calm, the kind of person you would want in a crisis and it's not John McCain, it's Barack Obama. I thnk to a certain extent we saw that with John McCain's constant changing of messages. It didn't necessarily convey a sense of confidence, or for that matter, a sense of competence.

Beyond being happy to see one of my colleagues on television, I think that Steve makes a point -- though I do wish he wasn't quite so charitable towards McCain -- with which I hope we can see the Obama campaign expound upon and moreover, really hammer home in the upcoming debates: this past week and McCain's response to the economic crisis has shown him to not only have a plan to lead the country out of its economic woes...it shows he doesn't even understand them in the first place.  That's not "ready from Day 1", that's not ready at all.

And that's a meme that will resonate with voters.

Transcripts below the fold

Continue reading »