![]() ![]() |
![]() |
| |
|
White House Held Torture Tape DiscussionsPosted on Dec 18, 2007A new report by The New York Times suggests that the White House was a lot closer to those secret CIA torture tapes than has been previously suggested. “At least four top White House lawyers took part in discussions ... between 2003 and 2005 about whether to destroy videotapes,” according to the Gray Lady.
Previous item: Fed Steps Into Mortgage Mess Elsewhere: . CommentsAre you a Truthdig member yet? Login now, or register with Truthdig.
By lawlessone, December 19, 2007 at 11:31 am # Why don’t we round up the entire Administration, thank them for their use of torture interrogations which no doubt saved us from the evil Muslim horde, give them a Medal of Freedom for their heroic work and then lock them in jail for the rest of their lives since they have proven themselves to be sociopaths too dangerous to leave loose in society?
By Travis Northington, December 19, 2007 at 9:39 am # With offices burning at or near the white house while destruction of tortue videos make headlines I can only surmise that Mr. Cheney is as proficient with matches as he is with a gun.
By Ryan W., December 19, 2007 at 8:57 am # I think it’s curious that all of a sudden there is a fire in the VP’s building after this story was covered. I wonder what it ‘inadvertently’ destroyed there!? More evidence of criminal behavior by the administration? This is a new low for an administration that I didn’t believe could go any lower!
By Mark, December 19, 2007 at 8:11 am # Re.: Fire in Old Executive Office Bldg.: Look for Links to Corruption Let’s see: - Fire adjacent to one of Cheney’s offices Huuuuum: - Evidence related to the above “destroyed in blaze”???? This event—esp. its location and timing—smells like Watergate squared (rather than like an ordinary fire)!
By Pacrat, December 19, 2007 at 8:03 am # Wouldn’t you be shocked if the White House weren’t directly involved in the destruction of the CIA tapes? At this point, can the WH ever regain any credibility in this administration? Another day, another scandal uncovered!
By Mr JJ, December 19, 2007 at 6:19 am # AG Mukasey has a conflict of interest problem already, and should recuse himself and appoint a Special Prosecutor. Jose Padilla"s lawyers argued before the Florida Federal Court that Abu Zubaydah was tortured into saying Padilla was an al Qaeda associate. The DOJ dismissed Padilla"s allegations as “meritless,” asserting Padilla"s legal team could not prove that Abu Zubaydah had been tortured. Well, it"s clear now that they certainly COULD have, if the tapes of the interrogations of Abu Zubaydah had been made available! Now here is where Mukasey"s role comes into question. U.S. District Judge Mukasey, now attorney general, was the one who signed the warrant used by the FBI to arrest Padilla in May 2002. Court records show the warrant relied in part on information obtained from Abu Zubaydah"s interrogation. So we have a problem Houston. The Attorney General can only issue a warrant based upon legally obtained evidence, and confessions under torture are certainly not “legally obtained”. So either Mukasey was misrepresented the evidence, and would be liable to be potentially a party in those who were presented with “perjured evidence”; or he knew that torture was used in obtaining the confession and ignored it. In either case he is unsuitable to run an investigation, as it will, inevitably, involved himself. Thus a Special Prosecutor is necessary… Odds that this will happen? Zero percent. Add Your Comment |
COMMENT TOOLS:
Hide comments
Show comments
Comment on this article