Whine and cheesy: Alberto Gonzales ‘angry’ his reputation is tarnished

By GottaLaff

Here's an idea, Gonzo: Take some responsibility for the well-deserved torrent of ridicule and insults you receive on a regular basis:

The New York Times Magazine has a new interview with former Bush attorney general Alberto Gonzales [...] Gonzales said that he has been upset at the way his legacy has been ruined:

Would you agree that your reputation was damaged by your service as attorney general?

It has had an effect, a negative effect, no question about it, and at times it makes me angry because it is undeserved. But I don’t want to sound like I am whining. At the end of the day, I’ve been the attorney general of the United States. It’s a remarkable privilege, and I stand behind my service.

[...] “What is it that I did that is so fundamentally wrong, that deserves this kind of response to my service?” he asked last year. (Here’s a reminder.) Gonzales still has not received any offers for jobs from any law firms since leaving the White House.

Truth commission to proceed despite Obama’s wishes

By GottaLaff

It's starting to take on a life of its own:

Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-VT) plans to proceed with a special commission to investigate alleged Bush administration abuses of power, despite lacking President Barack Obama’s support, according to a report Tuesday. [...]

But Leahy plans to proceed despite lacking the approval of party leaders, sources familiar with the proposal told Politico’s John Bresnahan Tuesday.

“Leahy plans to move ahead with his proposal anyway,” Bresnahan writes. “While he has not found a GOP co-sponsor for legislation creating a truth commission, Leahy is expected to begin circulating a draft soon.”

In a statement, Leahy said his commission will ultimately jibe with the President’s wishes.

“When I first proposed establishing a nonpartisan commission of inquiry in February, I thought then, as I do now, that it was the best approach to conducting a thorough review of national security policies on detention, interrogation and rendition since Sept. 11,” Leahy said in a statement to Bresnahan. “Whether such a comprehensive review happens immediately or in the weeks and months ahead, the evidence that our country committed torture demands a review of the process by which these flawed policies were developed and implemented. President Obama was correct when he said that any review should be done outside of politics. A nonpartisan commission will accomplish just that.” [...]

Some liberals have critiqued the proposal, asserting that Bush officials shouldn’t be granted immunity from prosecution even if they’re forthcoming in a congressional investigation. Conservatives have attacked the proposed commission as a political witchhunt.

I can't fathom giving any of those thugs immunity. Isn't the whole point of finding out the truth dealing with the truth?

Immunity should not be an option for the likes of Rove, Rumsfeld, Cheney, Addington, or any of the other despicable BushCo war criminals. If I could scream that line, I would, but this isn't that kind of blog, and putting that in all caps would be annoyingly out of character. So, use your imaginations if you are so inclined.

But expect me to ask for a talking down if immunity becomes a reality.

FYI, earlier I posted about John Conyers and Jerry Nadler asking Holder for a special counsel.

Bush memos: Children were tortured with insects

By GottaLaff

They tortured little kids:

Bush Administration memos released by the White House on Thursday provide new insight into claims that American agents used insects to torture the young children of alleged 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. [...]

The memo was dated Aug. 1, 2002. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed’s children were captured and held in Pakistan the following month, according to a report by Human Rights Watch.

Thom Hartmann just read aloud the following on his radio show:

At a military tribunal in 2007, the father of a Guantanamo detainee alleged that Pakistani guards had confessed that American interrogators used ants to coerce the children of alleged 9/11 mastermind Khalid Shaikh Mohammed into revealing their father’s whereabouts.

The statement was made by Ali Khan, the father of detainee Majid Khan, who gave a detailed account of his son’s interrogation at the hands of American guards in Pakistan. In his statement, Khan asserted that one of his sons was held at the same place as the young children of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the alleged mastermind of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks.

“The Pakistani guards told my son that the boys were kept in a separate area upstairs and were denied food and water by other guards,” the statement read. “They were also mentally tortured by having ants or other creatures put on their legs to scare them and get them to say where their father was hiding.” (A pdf transcript is available here)

Hartmann went on to say that the kids were about 7 and 9 or 10 years old. The claims were repeated by Ron Suskind in his book The One Percent Doctrine, he said. Here's an interview in which Suskind confirms Hartmann's assertions:

Suskind: With extraordinary minutes passing he earned a sort of grudging respect from interrogators. The thing they did with Mohammed is that we had captured his children, a boy and a girl, age 7 and 9. And at the darkest moment we threatened grievous injury to his children if he did not cooperate. His response was quite clear: "That's fine. You can do what you want to my children, and they will find a better place with Allah."

Unfortunately, the implementers of torture are legally off the hook. All we can do now is hope that those who gave the orders will be prosecuted, and call for that to happen... loudly and clearly.

Glimmer of hope? Spanish judge wants to keep Gitmo case alive

By GottaLaff

I'm getting whiplash. I'm not too optimistic, but this is still good to hear:

MADRID, Spain (CNN) – A Spanish judge moved Friday to keep alive an investigation into six former Bush administration officials for alleged torture of prisoners at the U.S. detention camp for terrorism suspects at Guantanamo Bay. Cuba.

He acted just hours after prosecutors urged the case to be dropped, according to a court document.

The more attention paid to BushCo's war crimes, the better, so I consider this good news, no matter how it plays out.

Secret Interrogation Memos to be Released

By GottaLaff

File under Doing the Right Thing:

"After a tense internal debate, the Obama administration this afternoon will make public a number of detailed memos describing the harsh interrogation techniques used by the Central Intelligence Agency against al Qaeda suspects in secret overseas prisons," the New York Times reports.

"The interrogation methods were among the Bush administration's most closely guarded secrets, and today's release will be the most comprehensive public accounting to date of the interrogation program that some senior Obama administration officials have said used illegal torture."

The Wall Street Journal says that while "some operational details" of the interrogation program will be revealed, the administration will "keep secret the names of detainees and the way techniques were applied to particular prisoners."

Richard Armitage On Torture: I Should Have Resigned From Bush Administration

By GottaLaff

Too little, too late, too easy to say now:

ARMITAGE: We'd lost the discussion about the terminology and the Geneva protections. Did not know, to the best of my knowledge anyone in the Department, that torture was going on.

LEWIS: But you suspected it. You must've.

ARMITAGE: We did know that we lost the terminology question in Geneva. We did know of course because the [International Committee of the Red Cross] would come to see me and Secretary Powell. We certainly knew that they had suspicions.

LEWIS: So when you knew that the administration of which you were a part was departing from the Geneva Conventions and sidelining them, why didn't you quit?

ARMITAGE: In hindsight maybe I should've. But in those positions you see how many more battles you have. You maybe fool yourself. You say how much worse would x, y, or z be if I weren't here trying to do it? So torture is a matter of principle as far as I'm concerned. I hope, had I known about it at the time I was serving, I would've had the courage to resign.

Today's lesson, as taught by Professor Armitage: How to mangle the theory of relativity.

VIDEO-- Feith Responds: ‘I Never Advocated’ For Torture, I Was Just ‘Giving Advice’

By GottaLaff


Here is my earlier post about Spain's taking steps to investigate BushCo 's illegal torture practices. Now Doug Feith is saying he merely gave advice about, you know, committing war crimes:

Yesterday, former Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Doug Feith, one of the officials implicated in the complaint, went on Fox News to defend himself in front of torture advocate Bill O’Reilly.

Feith argued that the charges that he helped approve torture are completely bogus. “I’m being criticized for a position that I never advocated. And so the facts are just wrong,” he said. Feith said he was simply giving “advice” to President Bush and had no role in “directing” torture policy. [...]

But last year, Feith himself bragged in an interview with British law professor Phillippe Sands that he played a pivotal role in ensuring that Geneva protections against “outrages upon personal dignity” did not apply to detainees:

I asked Feith, just to be clear: Didn’t the administration’s approach mean that Geneva’s constraints on interrogation couldn’t be invoked by anyone at Guantánamo? “Oh yes, sure,” he shot back. Was that the intended result?, I asked. “Absolutely,” he replied. I asked again: Under the Geneva Conventions, no one at Guantánamo was entitled to any protection? “That’s the point,” Feith reiterated. … “This year I was really a player,” Feith said, thinking back on 2002 and relishing the memory.

Indeed, Feith’s arguments became official U.S. policy with the signing of a presidential memorandum on February 7, 2002.

Isn't he just precious? How could we ever have thought the worst?

Waterboarding didn't reveal plots, useful info given prior to torture

By GottaLaff

This is not news, this is confirmation:

When CIA officials subjected their first high-value captive, Abu Zubaida, to waterboarding and other harsh interrogation methods, they were convinced that they had in their custody an al-Qaeda leader who knew details of operations yet to be unleashed, and they were facing increasing pressure from the White House to get those secrets out of him.

The methods succeeded in breaking him, and the stories he told of al-Qaeda terrorism plots sent CIA officers around the globe chasing leads.

In the end, though, not a single significant plot was foiled as a result of Abu Zubaida's tortured confessions, according to former senior government officials who closely followed the interrogations. Nearly all of the leads attained through the harsh measures quickly evaporated, while most of the useful information from Abu Zubaida -- chiefly names of al-Qaeda members and associates -- was obtained before waterboarding was introduced, they said.

Here's something I didn't know:

Moreover, within weeks of his capture, U.S. officials had gained evidence that made clear they had misjudged Abu Zubaida. President George W. Bush had publicly described him as "al-Qaeda's chief of operations," and other top officials called him a "trusted associate" of al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden and a major figure in the planning of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. None of that was accurate, the new evidence showed.

New, but not surprising. Shocking, but not surprising. Infuriating, but not surprising. Oh, and guess which group Bush inspired Abu Zubaida to hook up with:

Abu Zubaida was not even an official member of al-Qaeda, according to a portrait of the man that emerges from court documents and interviews with current and former intelligence, law enforcement and military sources. Rather, he was a "fixer" for radical Muslim ideologues, and he ended up working directly with al-Qaeda only after Sept. 11 -- and that was because the United States stood ready to invade Afghanistan.

But all of this doesn't matter one iota to BushCo. Par for the course:

"We spent millions of dollars chasing false alarms," one former intelligence official said.

Despite the poor results, Bush White House officials and CIA leaders continued to insist that the harsh measures applied against Abu Zubaida and others produced useful intelligence that disrupted terrorist plots and saved American lives.

Fraud means never having to say you're sorry.

Dick Cheney Undermined Obama After Election

By GottaLaff

The Nation of Dick undermined President Obama. Why, who would ever suspect the Big Dick would do anything like that?

According to the New Yorker, former Vice President Cheney late last year portrayed then President-elect Obama to Israel's leaders as a "pro-Palestinian," who would not support Israeli efforts in Gaza.

In private comments, Cheney also referred to Obama as someone who would "never make it in the major leagues."

There now. That just proves how much the DickHead cares about America.

The Woman Who Could Nail Bush

By GottaLaff

Fasten your seat belts. It's gonna be a bumpy ride:

Until recently, the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, often considered the “brains” of the department, has been known mostly to legal experts. But for the past eight years it was the epicenter of allegations of political manipulation—and worse—the source of infamous memoranda on torture. In tapping Eric Holder as attorney general, President Obama has promised to restore standards of professionalism to the department. For Republicans this is tantamount to a declaration of partisan war. [...]

Republican leaders, it appears, are playing with the notion of making [Dawn] Johnsen the target of their first filibuster. [...]

The highly credentialed Johnsen is an improbable target, and OLC was long viewed as an obscure post. But Johnsen served as a lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union and the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League. [...]

Johnsen is labeled a “radical, pro-abortion activist,” although her views on the abortion issue line up very closely with the mainstream. While the noise surrounding the Johnsen nomination appears on the surface to be about the abortion issue—over which her position at OLC would have very little influence—discussions with Republican stalwarts reveal that their main concerns lie elsewhere.

I'll say. Ready for revelations about the obvious?

The real reason for their vehement opposition is that Johnsen is committed to overturning the Bush administration’s policies on torture and warrantless surveillance that would clip the wings of the imperial presidency. Even more menacingly from their perspective, she is committed to disclosing some of the darkest skeletons of the Bush years. Already, publication of OLC memoranda authorizing torture, approving warrantless surveillance, and pronouncing the First and Fourth Amendments a dead letter in connection with domestic military operations has rocked the public. More memos, potentially even more disturbing, I have learned, are about to be made public soon. Yet these are difficult issues on which to attack Johnsen, other than through vague suggestions that she is “weak on national security.” Hence the steady stream of accusations linked to her largely irrelevant views about abortion rights. [...]

The Obama nominees, presenting the sharpest possible contrast, have drawn sputtering fire from Republicans in Congress and have come under broad attack from religious right leaders who previously had strong influence in Justice Department picks. Dawn Johnsen is an interesting test case. If the Republicans opt for filibuster or move to line up a unanimous G.O.P. vote in opposition, it will be a shot across the bow of the Obama Justice Department.

I want her in so badly I can taste it. As usual, it's uncanny how completely out of touch the Rushpublics are with the rest of America.

Go here for more. It's a good piece.

More torture memos coming

By GottaLaff

We don't have enough oil. We don't have enough water. But we have more than enough torture memos:

Over objections from the U.S. intelligence community, the White House is moving to declassify—and publicly release—three internal memos that will lay out, for the first time, details of the "enhanced" interrogation techniques approved by the Bush administration for use against "high value" Qaeda detainees. The memos, written by Justice Department lawyers in May 2005, provide the legal rationale for waterboarding, head slapping and other rough tactics used by the CIA. One senior Obama official, who like others interviewed for this story requested anonymity because of the issue's sensitivity, said the memos were "ugly" and could embarrass the CIA. Other officials predicted they would fuel demands for a "truth commission" on torture.

Because of an executive order signed by President Obama on Jan. 22 banning such aggressive tactics, deputies to Attorney General Eric Holder Jr. concluded there was no longer any reason to keep the interrogation memos classified. But current and former intel officials pushed back, arguing that any public release might still compromise "sources and methods." According to the administration official, ex-CIA director Michael Hayden was "furious" about the prospect of disclosure and tried to intervene directly with Obama officials. But the White House has sided with Holder.

So much information has been coming out, and we all know there is so much more to come. The question is, what will be done about it?

H/t

He's Back...The Return of Elliot Spitzer

By GottaLaff

BuzzFlash Tweeted this link, and what a link it was! Seems Elliot Spitzer is becoming relevant again:

Elliot Spitzer is back and hes talking. The thought of this, no doubt, brings a small shiver to the boardrooms of some of the perps walking around trying to figure out how to hide the money this week. [...]

Plainly stated, Spitzer brings the AIG Ponzi Scheme one step closer to the revered establishment when he explains how the bailout money was funneled straight into the top players, with Goldman Sachs being the name that comes up again and again. [...]

Indeed, Goldman and AIG almost merged a few years ago, but Spitzer notes that the unknown black hole of AIG's business practices were probably what prevented it. Still, that didn't stop the incestuous dealings; it almost makes one think that this whole thing was a setup.

This is country that Spitzer is familiar with; he has been a terrible liability to entities that, under the Bush administration, were allowed to literally gut the country and its citizens. All of this seems to have been part of the Bush Administration's own Ponzi Scheme, which figured that the illusion of an ownership society, terrified of the "terraism" and steeped in the me, me, me, culture would look the other way while they finished clearing out the vault.

Spitzer has been fighting these guys and asking questions all along. Coincidentally, right after the WSJ editorial appeared on Valentine's Day 2008, Spitzer was caught up in what was an extremely unusual sting. So unusual is an investigation like this that it seems almost like it was a set-up; and considering where it all came from and how it all came down, it might well have been.

It seems that Spitzer's bank was investigating expenses under the auspices of the newer Homeland Security laws of the Bush administration. Greg Palast wrote about this compellingly, and in light of how the whole thing is shaking out now, and what Spitzer said back then about this financial mess and what he tried to DO about it, Palast had a pretty good early grasp on what had gone down. [...] We might all find ourselves wanting to thank the egotistical crime fighter who cant keep it in his pants.

I am no apologist for breaking the law, and usually its the highest and mightiest that fall the hardest. But when the mainstream is showing us the shiny object, we must resist the temptation to succumb to our base natures and try to see the bigger picture. There was never a real case against Elliot Spitzer, and no charges were filed. The release of embarrassing personal information was at the discretion of the Bush Administration's Justice Department.

Why was this information released? [...]

Palast:

Not all crimes lead to federal bust or even public exposure. It’s up to something called “prosecutorial discretion.”

Funny thing, this ‘discretion.’ For example, Senator David Vitter, Republican of Louisiana, paid Washington DC prostitutes to put him in diapers (ewww!), yet the Senator was not exposed by the US prosecutors busting the pimp-ring that pampered him.

Naming and shaming and ruining Spitzer – rarely done in these cases - was made at the ‘discretion’ of Bush’s Justice Department.

Or maybe we should say, 'indiscretion.'

Bush's Justice Department. [...]

Welcome back Elliot Spitzer. I hope we hear more from you very soon...your voice is needed in this matter.

Rove/Miers deal: The sequel

By GottaLaff

I'm digging up more details. These are from Newsweek's Michael Isikoff, and I'm not happy with some of them:

Craig at times took a hard line in trying to get both sides to make concessions, the sources said. At one point this week, he even told House Democratic lawyers he would authorize Obama's Justice Department to oppose them in court if they didn't back down from some of their demands to complete access to the material.

But in the end, it would appear, it was Bush's lawyers, represented mainly by former associate White House counsel Emmett Flood and his former boss, Fred Fielding, who made the most concessions. Under the agreement, lawyers for Rep. John Conyers's House Judiciary Committee will get immediate access to most of the White House documents in Craig's office. But four documents that cover direct discussions with President Bush about the U.S. attorney firings will still be withheld. The contents of these documents will be described by the former president's lawyers to the House.

Then, after the documents are reviewed, Rove and Miers will be questioned in private by lawyers for the Judiciary Committee, with a transcript of the interviews made. But their testimony will not be given under oath and it will not be in public—at least not initially. The judiciary panel will have the right to call the witnesses again later to testify in public if they wish, though this seems unlikely in the case of Miers; her former position as White House counsel will allow her to invoke some attorney-client privileges. House lawyers say the fact that the witnesses will not be testifying under oath is not particularly significant because they can still be criminally charged with making false statements to a congressional committee if it can be proved that they lied. [...]

Wednesday's agreement allowed all sides to claim victory. In a statement, Conyers called the deal "a vindication of the search for truth" about the U.S. attorney purge. Craig said in a statement that the agreement was the product of a "tremendous amount of hard work, patience, and flexibility on both sides," and that Obama was "pleased" that the parties were able to resolve their dispute. Bush's lawyers could not be reached, but even Rove's lawyer called the deal "good news" and said his client "looks forward to addressing the committee's concerns."

Rove's lawyer, Robert Luskin, did acknowledge that even he has not been given access to the documents in question, which are believed to include internal emails about the U.S. attorney firings that either mentioning Rove or were sent to him. Whether Rove will still be looking forward to testifying after those emails are turned over to congressional investigators is, at the moment, the biggest question mark hanging over the case.

Of course, this is a step in the right direction, but... well, that there are "buts".

Quote-O'-The-Day: Jonathan Turley edition

By GottaLaff

Are you listening, President Obama, Congress, and anyone else who might be inclined to look the other way?

"We need a special prosecutor, not another commission."

--Jonathan Turley just now on Countdown with Keith Olbermann, re: those pesky BushCo Office of Legal Counsel memos

VIDEO-- Countdown: The Unitary Executive

By GottaLaff

In case you missed this story, just watch:

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Lawyers told President Bush that he could detain anyone in the country without a warrant or order a military raid on them if they were terrorists.

I'd like to amend that MSNBC blurb. It should read "suspected terrorists" or "deemed as" terrorists. Or, "anyone Bush wanted to haul in against their will without regard to the U.S. Constitution." Prosecutions are in order. Yes, I realize that is stating the obvious.

Every day more evidence is revealed, and every day it becomes more and more obvious (like it wasn't already?) that these thugs are the ones who belong in prison.

The ugly Bush stain: Nursing Home Watchdogs Muted

By GottaLaff

Per Keith Olbermann just now on Countdown:

Another little surprise from BushCo that nobody discovered until yesterday. It involves nursing home state inspectors and Medicare and Medicaid contractors . Guess what they can't do any more? They can't give evidence in federal lawsuits. They can't testify. Bush just took a 144 billion industry and immunized it from civil suits.

And nobody knew about it.

The Bush administration shut off a source of information last fall about abuse and neglect in long- term care facilities that people suing nursing homes consider crucial to their cases.

The change that affects the $144 billion nursing-home industry occurred with no public notice or attention, perhaps because of the array of last-minute rules that President George W. Bush’s appointees rushed out before leaving Washington last month.

“This is pretty stunning,” said Mark Kosieradzki, a plaintiff attorney in Plymouth, Minnesota. “Nobody was told. It was just done.”

The rule designates state inspectors and Medicare and Medicaid contractors as federal employees, a group usually shielded from providing evidence for either side in private litigation.

The restrictions affect about 16,000 nursing facilities in the U.S. and 3 million residents. The practical effect is to force litigants to go to greater lengths, including seeking court orders, to get inspection reports or depositions for cases they are pursuing or defending.

“This change hurts nursing-home residents and their families by allowing bad practices to be kept in secret by nursing homes and inspectors,” said Eric M. Carlson, an attorney with the National Senior Citizens Law Center in Los Angeles. “Government inspectors have the right to go into nursing homes and investigate, and they learn things that residents and families otherwise could never find out.”

More here.

Bush is still damaging this nation, says Keith. What an understatement.

Senate will advance torture commission; "This is going to be big."

By GottaLaff

Someone Tweeted this to me, and I went right over, and voila! News:

The Senate Judiciary Committee plans to move forward with a commission to investigate torture during the Bush administration. Committee Chairman Pat Leahy, D-Vt., told Salon Tuesday that his panel would soon announce a hearing to study various commission plans. His staff said the announcement could come as early as Wednesday.

While Michigan Democrat Rep. John Conyers and North Carolina Republican Rep. Walter Jones drafted a bill to create a commission to review abuse of war powers during the Bush administration, Leahy's Senate commission would represent the first concrete steps forward toward a broad review of U.S. torture since 9/11.

Spearheading Senate efforts to establish a torture commission is Rhode Island Democrat Sheldon Whitehouse. As a member of both the Judiciary Committee and the Intelligence Committee, Whitehouse is privy to information about interrogations he can't yet share. Still, regarding a potential torture commission, he told Salon, "I am convinced it is going to happen." In fact, his fervor on the issue was palpable. When asked if there is a lot the public still does not know about these issues during the Bush administration, his eyes grew large and he nodded slowly. "Stay on this," he said. "This is going to be big."

Let's hope this leads to more than just a lot of talk.

From the Dep't. of What Did You Expect? Rove ignores House Judiciary Committee subpoena.

By GottaLaff

Via Think Progress:

Pursuant to a subpoena issued earlier this month, Karl Rove was due to appear for a hearing before the House Judiciary Committee today. But as CongressMatters reports, despite being “expected” to appear this time, Rove was a no show. Contacted by ThinkProgress, the House Judiciary Committee confirmed the report of Rove’s absence.

It's long past time for Conyers and company to get tough. According to whomever it was I heard this morning, the issue of privilege will most likely find its way to the Supreme Court. Anyone know if that's accurate?

Ret. Army Maj. Gen. Taguba backs commission to investigate BushCo abuses

By GottaLaff

Everyone who wants BushCo investigated say "aye". "AYE!!"

Yesterday, 18 human rights organizations, former State Department officials, and former law enforcement and military leaders — including [ret. Army Maj. Gen. Antonio] Taguba — signed onto a letter asking the President to create a non-partisan commission to investigate the Bush administration’s torture policies. In a new interview with Salon, he explains why:

I feel we have to come to terms with policies that have gained such notoriety and have been debated about whether they were in the best interest of our national security, and whether those who created these policies were pressured by their senior leadership. […]

[I support] a structured commission with some form of authority with clear objectives and a follow-on action plan. I’m not looking for anything that is prosecutorial in nature, unless a suspected violation of relevant laws occurred, which should be referred to the Dept of Justice.

I suspect there will be many a suspected violation of relevant laws.

Obama DOJ Delays Responding to Request for Key OLC Memos Re Torture and Interrogation Policies

By GottaLaff

Minor progress:

The Obama administration, under pressure to turn over key memos written by the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, has asked the federal judge in New York for another 90 days to consider its position on a Freedom of Information Act case brought by a coalition of civil liberties advocates. But the judge may not be inclined to grant the request.

[T]hree memos at issue were written by then-OLC director Steven Bradbury and reportedly authorized abusive interrogations of suspected terrorists and decided that such extreme tactics would not violate the law. The Bush administration repeatedly refused to turn them over, but given President Obama’s promises to open government and increase disclosure under FOIA, the Justice Department now is under considerable pressure to change its position and release the documents, which could be critical to any future investigations or prosecutions of Bush officials.

[T]he memos provided “explicit authorization to barrage terror suspects with a combination of painful physical and psychological tactics, including head-slapping, simulated drowning and frigid temperatures.” These did not, the memos concluded, amount to “cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment” — which would have been banned by international law, as well as a bill Congress was then considering.

The American Civil Liberties Union, which sued for the memos along with several other organizations, argues the memos don’t fall under an exception to FOIA because they constitute adopted policy, not confidential legal advice. [...T]he ACLU agreed to give the Justice Department some additional time to respond to the request, it argued in court this week that 90 days is too long. The case has already been going on for more than five years.

“The Obama administration deserves credit for its disavowal of torture and for the commitment it has made to transparency, but the public has waited long enough for the disclosure of these memos,” said Jameel Jaffer, Director of the ACLU’s National Security Project, in a statement released today. [...]

On Friday, Judge Hellerstein ordered both sides to appear in his court next Wednesday to discuss how long a delay is warranted. “I take that as a good sign,” Jaffer told me Friday.

I put so much faith in the Obama administration to be the anti-Bushies on torture and transparency. I hope we're not in store for a huge disappointment.