Lieberman-Graham Amendment Removed From Supplemental

Jane Hamsher of Firedoglake.com is reporting that the Lieberman-Graham amendment to suppress detainee photos "is out of the conference report of the supplemental."

The Huffington Post confirmed that the provision has indeed been removed from the bill. The war supplemental had been weighted down both by it and a $108 billion line of credit for the IMF. With Republicans threatening to oppose the war money because of the IMF funding, Democratic leadership couldn't afford to lose left-wing Democrats who were opposed to the FOIA provision.

The left-right alliance was making it hard for leadership to get the necessary votes.

A Democratic aide said that leadership was whipping furiously all day Monday to try to line up support for the bill. Shaving the FOIA provision will get them closer to the votes needed, but might not get them over the top.

The IMF provision is still in the bill and is a top Obama priority. It came under fierce attack from House Republicans who wanted a "clean" war supplemental and many Democrats had no love the the extension of the credit line. Democrats on the left have long opposed the IMF for forcing developing nations to cut social spending in exchange for IMF loans.

Democrats in the center were having a hard time explaining to constituents at home why now was the time to extend the credit to the IMF, especially as Republicans -- aided by the conservative blog RedState -- ripped it as a US taxpayer-funded bailout for foreign countries.

Comments

[lthuedk 1]

As the Great One said: "We (they) must own their mistakes."

It now looks like Obama really meant: They must own their mistakes, meaning the people who voted for him. We have or at least start to look at that possibility. That's why we should consider tooling up for impeachment if game play at our expense remains the bottom line.

We the People should set a deadline for complete elucidation of Bush-Cheney crimes, and stick to it. I suggest two years into his term, after which, We the People can determine whether Obama stays or goes. It's time the People set their schedule and their agenda, including impeachment determination based on defiance of the People's will and their Constitution through deceptive tactics including risky judiciary allocation.

That would be a crap shoot. When it comes to the Constitution, I'd prefer a trial court over political cajoling any day.

I'm all ears if Obama wants to straight talk before the People. So far, he has shown a robust propensity for lying in our faces. Those pictures of torture, if they aren't part of active case discovery, should be handed over to the People without further B.S. Until that is specified and verified, the likelihood of impeachment will grow stronger by the minute, as the image of criminal protectionism materializes.

[lthuedk 1]

That's...W­e have to start looking at that possibility.

[AirForce Vet]

There’re people in this world with good intentions and there’re those with intentions. The release of these pictures and the ramifications is quite questionable. Regardless of their release or not, doesn’t negate the fact that we have to rid ourselves of this morbid mentality, that as long as heinous acts are hidden or the truth of the acts is suppressed, the crime didn’t occur. The notion that individuals in this nation continue to subscribe to the ideology of the lie and deny mentality is beyond comprehension. We as a nation will not fulfill our potential greatness until we face the true facts concerning of our weakness. Many people in this nation wouldn’t know the truth if it hit them squarely in the butt. Why wouldn’t they know it, because they have subscribed to the lies and denials over time and it has become a means of expediency? It has been mentioned that the release of these photos would endanger the security of this nation and place the troops in harms way, then I say, don’t release them, but I’m a firm believer that prosecutions should be brought forth. Since we talk about the security of this nation and placing our troops in harms way, have we ever considered what harm was done to those individuals in these photos. Not releasing these photos is one thing, but corrective actions and prosecution of those who devised and facilitated these acts should never be lost in the debate of this matter.

[kgb999]

Shouldn't we be allowed to slap a bunch of restrictions on the IMF's behavior before we give 'em a loan? It seems only fair.

[Yermammy]

Wah? A "conservative" wanting restrictions? Well I'll be...

[StevenevetS]

That sure didn't last long!

[roquelaure]

YYYYYYYYYY­YYYYYAAAAA­AAAAAAAAAA­YYYYYYYYYY­YY! Wow. I can't believe we won that one. It seemed like just the sort of evil that would make it out of the Senate.

Look, I have no problem with them opposing the release of the photos if they think they're that bad. Reasonable people can disagree on the wisdom of it. However, you can't just pass a new law every time you want to break an old one. That's soooooo wrong.

Score one for the good guys!

[HyperInfluential]

See guys, it's like I told ya! This IS our country and we CAN have WHATEVER WE DANG WANT, including a war crimes tribunal to restore our honor.

Of course they're going to try to sneak this amendment into every upcoming bill so we have to keep protesting over and over. That's the hard part about running the country ourselves, it's a lot of effort. That's why we supposedly have representatives to do it for us, but since they all seem mostly out to lunch, mentally speaking, we just have to step up and assert our sovereignty.

[Yermammy]

FOIA is often explained as a means for citizens to "know what the government is up to."  This phrase should not be dismissed as a convenient formalism.­  It defines a structural necessity in a real democracy.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/02-954.ZO.html
Supreme Court ruling 2004

The Supreme Court pointed out in 1978 that Congress enacted FO­IA because it recognized that an informed citizenry is "needed to check against corruption and to hold the governors accountable to the governed."   Seeing the evidence of exactly what the Government did, who did it and what was done about it -- and not allowing the Government to keep its actions secret except in the narrowest of circumstances -- is critically important in its own right.  That is the foundation of open government.

http://supreme.justia.com/us/437/214/case.html

"If you can maintain secrecy- the war is half won"-- Khmer Rouge.

Sorry, but it's NEVER acceptable to hide the truth just because it might "embarrass" the Government. NEVER.
They know this will lose at the Supreme Court and that's why they're desperate to pass it and they WILL try to until it DOES. FIGHT THIS! Call your Rep's and get a promise. Mark my words, if you don't, this will be just like FISA (and we know how painful THAT can be :)

[Yermammy]

"Whether there is value in disclosing these specific torture photographs is a secondary issue here, at most [though in light of the ongoing debate in this country over torture and accountability, as well as the irreplaceable value of photographic evidence in documenting government abuses (see Abu Ghraib), the value of these sorts of photographs seems self-evident]. A much more critical issue here is whether the President should have the power to conceal evidence about the Government's actions on the ground that what the Government did was so bad, so wrong, so inflammatory, so lawless, that to allow disclosure and transparency would reflect poorly on our country, thereby increase anti-American sentiment, and thus jeopardize The Troops. Once you accept that rationale -- the more extreme the Government's abuses are, the more compelling is the need for suppression -- then open government, one of the central planks of the Obama campaign and the linchpin of a healthy democracy, becomes an illusion."­-- Glenn Greenwald.

[Yermammy]

"Yet the Graham-Lieberman amendment -- which Obama supports -- is nothing but a pure manifestation of the Bush mentality, as its core premise is that we can't remain Safe unless we abandon our decades-old legal framework governing transparency. The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) is more than 40 years old. It vests the Government with extremely broad secrecy powers, especially in the national security realm. Still, two federal courts -- one district court and a unanimous 3-judge Court of Appeals panel -- have ruled that FOIA compels disclosure of these photographs because none of the FOIA exceptions apply. Most critically -- as the courts noted -- the fact that information will reflect poorly on the Government is not a legitimate ground for suppressing it. That is the crux of FOIA, and it is that critical principle which Graham-Lieberman is designed to gut."-- Glenn Greenwald.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/06/09/transparency/index.html

To those of you that called your Rep's and killed this amendment- thank you.

[urnumbersix]

What in the World has happened to Joe Lieberman?

Just think, he could have been Vice-President, under Gore - or God forbid anything happened to Gore, President!

I sure hope his constituents have had enough of this Bum. Go Home Joe. No books, or talk shows. Just Go Home, sit down, and shaddup!

[lthuedk 1]

Is Joe the mole the admin was talking about? He does have Likud and possibly Mossad ties. I can understand why he'd resist vigorously the release of any evidence that would compel legal action against Neo Cons.

Perhaps, there will be a resignation at some point, as Lie(ber)man becomes fully exposed.

http://www.light-to-dark.com/dick_tater_with_joe_mole_and_tony_tool.html

[wonketteRAWKS]

All future war spending should be mandated to be on a lone bill all by itself!

The Pres and congress should not be tacking on supplementals!

[Yermammy]

Hey! What gives? How are they supposed to get all kinds of secret goodies if they have to reveal them?

[HyperInfluential]

We should make a Constitutional Amendment making it clear that they can't make sneaky bills. Each bill should be for one thing only! I can imagine the horror this idea would bring in the wizened halls of the Capitol as the people who "know how things work" scoff at this idea, but the way things work now is really crappy. I say throw all the bums out, and make it so they can't trickily sneak things past each other anymore. It's not fair, it's not smart, it's not a good way to run a government.

[CaptainVideo]

If the bill passes without Republican support, I hope the Democrats have the sense to attack the Republicans for not supporting our troops.

[dphilip]

Why do conservatives love America more than liberals?

[Yermammy]

As much more pertinent question would be why do minimized and desperate "conservatives" come to Liberal blogs and ask inflammatory questions? The thrill? Boredom? Pathetic loneliness?

[HyperInfluential]

Conservatives don't even KNOW America. They have no idea who she is or what she cares about or stands for. They've seen her picture in a magazine and have a crush on her image, but they have never taken the time to think about what she really wants or needs.

[lthuedk 1]

Because they never question authority.

[entrenchedhoosier]

I dunno?

Why were national republicant candidates out voted, voted out and otherwise banished to the wilderness on 11/4/08?

[berryessence]

if you want to see photos of detainees treatment

GOOGLE "detainees photos"

There's over 30 pages of different news media with "horrific" pictures

[kgb999]

And your point?

Try this game: other than Abu Ghraib, name the "half-dozen" facilities in which photo-documented abuses occurred, and the outcome of the "trial" for the troops who committed them. How many do YOU know about?

Oh yeah, that's right .... nothing new could be learned by those photos.

[realpolitic]

Good! The photos should be exposed. The legislature should not act to hinder democracy. The photos should be exposed and we should be very angry. Hopefully, this anger may lead to a prosecution of the Bush war criminals.

[HyperInfluential]

The photos are already out on the internet, or ones just as bad. There's 2,000 photos, and only 40-something in the ACLU lawsuit, not to mention the unofficial photos that people just took for reasons we don't want to speculate on, so there's plenty to get angry about already.

Someone needs to YouTubify it or something, make one thing that can be shared that shows the worst of it, how Bushco sought out these memos, and how the memos were interpreted, and what happened to the children most of all. Young people who know that stuff, make this thing and make it go viral and put in something that directs people how to act to make their voices heard to get justice for what they just saw!

[kgb999]

The point isn't to "show the worst of it"; the point is to get an honest catalog of what actually happened, where it occurred, what troops (including CIA/JSOC) were involved, and what the chain of command was. The only thing that will do it is to release the photos.

BTW you make a pretty big assumption that the "worst" abuse is in "unofficial" photos. We know JOSC (TF6-26/Se­al-6/etc.) was kidnapping and abusing wives/children.

[kevenseven]

Democracy is coming, the the USA!

Perhaps!

[sviolette]

This from another article just released on Huff-Post:

CIA Director Leon Panetta told a federal judge Monday that releasing documents about the agency's terror interrogations would gravely damage national security.

[Yermammy]

Leon is scared to death of his employees.

[ErnestineBass]

Wouldn't you be? heh

[LemonMeringue]

One of the more ludicrous things I've heard Liz and others say is that the terrorists are now "training to our techniques­." So apparently they are practicing being waterboarded.

Do they think we are all stupid? (I think we all know the answer.)

[realpolitic]

I am so tired of Liz Cheney. She is sort of a domestic terrorist herself the way she lies and has such cynicism toward democratic principles.

[Rog49Thomas]

Sadly, with respect to the average American, they are spot on.

[kevenseven]

Releasing documents willy nilly is certainly a mistake.

Now, let me go read the article.

[kgb999]

Oooohhhh! Scary, scary!

[rpswartz]

Why are we giving the IMF $108 Billion?

[Yermammy]

Why have we spent $1,000,000­,000,000.0­0 on the illegal wars?

[kevenseven]

We aren't.

[ErnestineBass]

We aren't?

[3rdCitizen]

So does this mean that they're eventually going to release more photos showing acts that conservatives tell us are no big deal, are essential to keeping us safe & that never happened?

[kevenseven]

One would hope.

[HyperInfluential]

Depends if the SCOTUS rules on it before the Congress can make a law circumventing their ruling. Some kind of Federal game of chicken. This is what we've been reduced to, thanks to Bush. God, remember when our worst problem was the president's marital infidelity? Everybody had money then too, we used to travel to Europe, oh it was lovely. You kids don't know.