iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Andy Worthington

GET UPDATES FROM Andy Worthington

Will Eric Holder Be the Anti-Torture Hero?

Posted: 07/12/09 02:35 PM ET

In an important article for Newsweek, "Independent's Day," Daniel Klaidman manages not only to present a convincingly intimate and sympathetic first-hand portrait of Eric Holder, the first African-American Attorney General in U.S. history, demonstrating how "[h]is first instinct is to shy away from confrontation, to search for common ground," and how he remains haunted by his role in the pardon of Marc Rich at the end of the Clinton administration, but also to explain how "[f]our knowledgeable sources" told him that Holder is "leaning toward appointing a prosecutor to investigate the Bush administration's brutal interrogation practices, something the president has been reluctant to do."

As Klaidman notes, "Such a decision would roil the country, would likely plunge Washington into a new round of partisan warfare, and could even imperil Obama's domestic priorities, including health care and energy reform. Holder knows all this, and he has been wrestling with the question for months. 'I hope that whatever decision I make would not have a negative impact on the president's agenda,' he says. 'But that can't be a part of my decision.'"

Although the independence of the Attorney General is supposed to be a given -- which made the abominable betrayal of that independence by Alberto Gonzales so wounding -- in reality, even the most principled Attorney General faces an unenviable task. "Alone among cabinet officers," they are, as Klaidman describes it, "partisan appointees expected to rise above partisanship."

Even so, there is an openness about the discussions of whether Eric Holder will indeed demonstrate his independence by appointing a prosecutor to investigate the Bush administration's interrogation policies, which suggests that it may indeed happen. Certainly, after the publication of this article -- which, I can only presume, had Holder's tacit authorization, as a way of testing responses -- it will be difficult for him to back-track without provoking an unprecedented storm of disapproval from the many critics of the Bush administration's descent into lawless brutality.

I urge you to read the whole article, but the key passages dealing with Holder's considerations of "whether to launch a probe into the Bush administration's interrogation policies" are as follows:

Holder began to review those policies in April. As he pored over reports and listened to briefings, he became increasingly troubled. There were startling indications that some interrogators had gone far beyond what had been authorized in the legal opinions issued by the Justice Department [the Office of Legal Counsel's "torture memos," issued in August 2002 and in May 2005], which were themselves controversial. He told one intimate that what he saw "turned my stomach."
It was soon clear to Holder that he might have to launch an investigation to determine whether crimes were committed under the Bush administration and prosecutions warranted. The obstacles were obvious. For a new administration to reach back and investigate its predecessor is rare, if not unprecedented. After having been deeply involved in the decision to authorize Ken Starr to investigate Bill Clinton's affair with Monica Lewinsky, Holder well knew how politicized things could get. He worried about the impact on the CIA, whose operatives would be at the center of any probe. And he could clearly read the signals coming out of the White House. President Obama had already deflected the left wing of his party and human-rights organizations by saying, "We should be looking forward and not backwards" when it came to Bush-era abuses.
Still, Holder couldn't shake what he had learned in reports about the treatment of prisoners at the CIA's "black sites." If the public knew the details, he and his aides figured, there would be a groundswell of support for an independent probe. He raised with his staff the possibility of appointing a prosecutor. According to three sources familiar with the process, they discussed several potential choices and the criteria for such a sensitive investigation. Holder was looking for someone with "gravitas and grit," according to one of these sources, all of whom declined to be named. At one point, an aide joked that Holder might need to clone Patrick Fitzgerald, the hard-charging, independent-minded U.S. attorney who had prosecuted Scooter Libby in the Plamegate affair. In the end, Holder asked for a list of 10 candidates, five from within the Justice Department and five from outside.

Klaidman described the negotiations over the April release of the torture memos as follows:

For weeks Holder had participated in a contentious internal debate over whether the Obama administration should release the Bush-era legal opinions that had authorized waterboarding and other harsh interrogation methods. He had argued to administration officials that "if you don't release the memos, you'll own the policy." CIA Director Leon Panetta, a shrewd political operator, countered that full disclosure would damage the government's ability to recruit spies and harm national security; he pushed to release only heavily redacted versions.

When President Obama decided to release the memos, "Holder and his team celebrated quietly," according to Klaidman. What surprised them was that there was no "national outrage." Klaidman suggested that the memos "had already received such public notoriety that the new details in them did not shock many people," although it may be that, unfortunately, evidence of torture that was authorized at the highest levels of the U.S. government is simply not a significant enough matter to a large number of Americans who seem to have forgotten that Richard Nixon was disgraced for what, essentially, was a less significant crime.

Nevertheless, both the President and his ferocious Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel, moved swiftly to head off dissent, with Emanuel appearing on This Week With George Stephanopoulos to declare that "there would be no prosecutions of CIA operatives who had acted in good faith with the guidance they were given," and Obama noting, in a statement on the release of the memos, "This is a time for reflection, not retribution."

Klaidman stresses that, throughout discussions of possible prosecutions regarding the torture memos, Obama "has been careful to say that the final decision is the attorney general's to make," which is as it should be, but it certainly made Holder's independent decision-making harder when the White House was obviously anxious not to provide Republican enemies with an opportunity to attack. As Klaidman also notes, in the first few months after the inauguration, the relationship between the Justice Department and the White House was "marred by surprising tension and acrimony. A certain amount of friction is inherent in the relationship, even healthy. But in the Obama administration the bad blood between the camps has at times been striking."

One particular source of tension was the Justice Department's apparently unilateral decision, in February, to contest a lawsuit brought by the ACLU against Jeppesen Dataplan, Inc., a Boeing subsidiary known in human rights circles as the CIA's "travel agent for torture," because of its role in the Bush administration's program of "extraordinary rendition" and torture. As Klaidman describes it, by "invoking the 'state secrets' privilege, the [DoJ] lawyer was reaffirming a position staked out by the Bush administration." It was not only liberals and human rights groups who were appalled, as Klaidman explains:

It also infuriated Obama, who learned about it from the front page of the New York Times. "This is not the way I like to make decisions," he icily told aides, according to two administration officials, who declined to be identified discussing the president's private reactions. White House officials were livid and accused the Justice Department of sandbagging the president. Justice officials countered that they'd notified the White House counsel's office about the position they had planned to take.

From my point of view -- and from the point of view of many others who have campaigned for the comprehensive repudiation of all the Bush administration's "War on Terror" policies -- the ongoing Jeppesen debacle is not the only occasion when the Justice Department has shown itself unwilling or unable to effectively turn its back on the policies of its predecessors. The DoJ's involvement in reviving the Military Commissions at Guantánamo (the "terror trials" introduced by former Vice President Dick Cheney in November 2001) is bitterly disappointing, as is its role in advocating a policy of "preventive detention" for some of those still held at Guantánamo, and its ongoing attempts to prevent foreign prisoners "rendered" to the U.S. prison at Bagram airbase in Afghanistan -- and held for up to seven years -- from having the same rights as those held at Guantánamo.

Moreover, on a day-to-day basis, Holder's integrity has repeatedly been called into question by his apparent refusal to look beyond the decisions about the prisoners that are being made by the administration's inter-departmental Guantánamo Task Force, and to prevent DoJ lawyers from pursuing worthless habeas corpus cases in the District Courts. In recent months, these have brought nothing but shame and humiliation on the Department -- as highlighted in the case of Alla Ali Bin Ali Ahmed, a Yemeni prisoner, and, in particular, Abdul Rahim al-Ginco, a Syrian whose case was pursued even though he had been tortured by al-Qaeda as a spy.

Sadly, the Attorney General has done nothing to assuage fears that, when it comes to the courts, he is in charge of a policy that, in effect, defends the most egregious errors made by the Bush administration while doing nothing to encourage the long-overdue release of prisoners who should never have been held in the first place, but on torture, at least, if Daniel Klaidman is to be believed, he may finally be on the verge of doing the right thing. As he explains:

After the prospect of torture investigations seemed to lose momentum in April, the attorney general and his aides turned to other pressing issues. They were preoccupied with Gitmo, developing a hugely complex new set of detention and prosecution policies, and putting out the daily fires that go along with running a 110,000-person department. The regular meetings Holder's team had been having on the torture question died down. Some aides began to wonder whether the idea of appointing a prosecutor was off the table.
But in late June Holder asked an aide for a copy of the CIA inspector general's thick classified report on interrogation abuses [the "Holy Grail" of torture reports, whose public release is being delayed by the CIA and the Defense Department]. He cleared his schedule and, over two days, holed up alone in his Justice Department office, immersed himself in what Dick Cheney once referred to as "the dark side." He read the report twice, the first time as a lawyer, looking for evidence and instances of transgressions that might call for prosecution. The second time, he started to absorb what he was reading at a more emotional level. He was "shocked and saddened," he told a friend, by what government servants were alleged to have done in America's name. When he was done he stood at his window for a long time, staring at Constitution Avenue.
Andy Worthington is the author of The Guantánamo Files: The Stories of the 774 Detainees in America's Illegal Prison (published by Pluto Press), and maintains a blog here.
 

Follow Andy Worthington on Twitter: www.twitter.com//GuantanamoAndy

 
 
  • Comments
  • 124
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4  Next ›  Last »  (4 total)
05:03 PM on 07/14/2009
Don't know if it will help, but I went to the DOJ contact Web site (http://www.usdoj.gov/contact-us.html) and sent an email ("When will the department begin investigations of torture, other war crimes, and perjury (i.e., not adhering to their oaths "to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States") committed during the Bush administration?). Maybe if they're inundated it will give them a hint?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
JohnHKennedy
02:39 PM on 07/14/2009
Given his history, Reagan appointee Holder probably will not
but If WE push him hard enough, "maybe"

For our country. for the Rule of Law

SIGN THE PETITION
Demanding both a
Commission of Inquiry
and a Special Prosecutor.

http://ANGRYVOTERS.ORG
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BocaMom
04:59 PM on 07/14/2009
Only when Nancy Pelosi resigns. Fair is fair. We need to get all the bad people out of Washington.
Republicans and Democrats!
12:35 PM on 07/14/2009
Holder is doing what he has always done -- help U.S. enemies and harm the U.S.

Holder was largely responsible for the return of Elian Gonzalez to Castro’s Cuba, after Elian Gonzalez’s mother drowned trying to free his son from Castro. Holder also circumvented presidential pardon protocol and pardoned the infamous Marc Rich, indicted for evading more than $48 million in taxes, and charged with 51 counts of tax fraud. Holder also supported the pardon of 16 members of the FALN terrorist group.

Holder deserves to live in Cuba, with his friend Fidel Castro. He does not deserve to live in the U.S.
12:06 PM on 07/14/2009
no, he wont be the hero. it will devolve into a mess, as the powerful people behind the scenes (who managed to have me arrested, held with no legitimate charges, subject to soft torture, and then deported...) cover up everything.

http://www.josieg6.wordpress.com

even though I am sure they will try to Susan McDougal me, I wont shut up. Iwatched them nearly kill the elderly in jail....I bear witness.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
rich misty
Greed is not Patriotism
11:15 AM on 07/14/2009
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#31898065 - Cheney _ordered_ intelligence information withheld from

Congress. Maddow has the best coverage to date from last night.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/12/us/politics/12intel.html - There is the NY Times article.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Act_of_1947

The National Security Act was passed in 1947 to prevent secret programs from operating without Congressional oversight. This law is essential to preserving Democracy in America.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode50/usc_sec_50_00000403----001-.html

TITLE 50 - CHAPTER 15 - SUBCHAPTER I - 403-1. Responsibilities and authorities of the Director of National Intelligence

(a) Provision of intelligence
(1) The Director of National Intelligence shall be responsible for ensuring that national intelligence
is provided:
(A) to the President;
(B) to the heads of departments and agencies of the executive branch;
(C) to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and senior military commanders;
(D) to the Senate and House of Representatives and the committees thereof; and
(E) to such other persons as the Director of National Intelligence determines to be appropriate.

SEC. 501. [50 U.S.C. 413] (a)(1) The President shall ensure that the congressional intelligence committees are kept fully and currently informed of the intelligence activities of the United States,
including any significant anticipated intelligence activity as required by this title.

http://feinstein.senate.gov/crs-intel.htm
11:10 AM on 07/14/2009
Watch. Obama won't let him do it. It's not going to happen.
photo
BumpyKnight
Born OK the first time
10:27 AM on 07/14/2009
To the numerous hypotheses regarding "why Sara quit", let's add this:
Sara Palin fully expects to be appointed to a high level Obama administration position. She knows that she alone can deliver the tortured language needed in any official demand that American POWs be treated humanely. Can you imagine the wording?
This sad state of affairs remains as long as the perpetrators remain at large.
Bumpy
11:11 AM on 07/14/2009
Does Sarah Palin torture language or does her speech just amount to enhanced interrogation techniques to those who have to listen to her?
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
rich misty
Greed is not Patriotism
08:06 AM on 07/14/2009
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#31898105 - Maddow on torture charges

Please contact Attorney General Holder and ask him to assign a prosecutor. I emailed the general contact address, then printed the email and mailed it first class to the address provided on the contact link: Attn: Atty General Holder - Then copied the email to the White House

http://www.usdoj.gov/contact-us.html

http://www.whitehouse.gov/CONTACT/

http://www.bushcommission.org/

Brig. Gen. Janis Karpinski, former commander of Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq testifies on how the abuse of prisoners in U.S. custody originated at the highest levels (audio) (text).
12:09 PM on 07/14/2009
yep true
http://www.immigrationdetaineestories.wordpress.com
millions spent on pointless misery for hopeful immigrants, or 30 year taxpayers with no crime.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
rich misty
Greed is not Patriotism
07:42 AM on 07/14/2009
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#31898105

Rachel Maddow has a very, very detailed report on this topic. She interviews Michael Isikoff who has been talking to people at the USDoJ. I won't give the spoiler. The link is most definately worth seeing if you want to know what is going down.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Isikoff - Bio on Isikoff

Please contact Attorney General Holder and ask him to assign a prosecutor. I emailed the general contact address, then printed the email and mailed it first class to the address provided on the contact link: Attn: Atty General Holder

Then copied the email to the White House

http://www.usdoj.gov/contact-us.html

http://www.whitehouse.gov/CONTACT/

http://www.bushcommission.org/

Brig. Gen. Janis Karpinski, former commander of Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq testifies on how the abuse of prisoners in U.S. custody originated at the highest levels (audio) (text).
12:31 AM on 07/14/2009
PS:
Eric Holder is toast.
11:19 PM on 07/13/2009
Holder won't do crap -- he is a judicial light weight

the Obama administration cooked a deal with the Bush/Cheney administration and none of those crooks will face the threat of prosecution

Obama talks a good game about respecting The Constitution but when push comes to shove he acts just like a continuiation of the Bush/Cheney administration
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
balthus
09:25 AM on 07/14/2009
Obama is simply cognizant of the fact that if he goes after the abuses of the Bush administration he will lose what little Republican and moderate support he has for his domestic agenda. To you, the Constitutional issues at stake with torture are more important than having affordable health insurance for all Americans or climate change legislation, but just because he believes the reverse is true doesn't mean Obama doesn't respect the Constitution. More likely he wishes both prosecutions and meaningful domestic legislation could proceed, but knows the reality is otherwise.
10:34 PM on 07/13/2009
The Obama administration is not going to do anything on this matter. Cheney will continue his delusional self-aggrandizing rhetoric while hiding behind the skirts of the Cheney women -- every time the s&(t hits the fan and Cheney gets outed on his misdeeds either his wife, his daughter or some other republican woman runs around defending Cheney.

Cheney is always near and dear to the most shady crooks and sleazy corporations:
Nixon -- Cheney, Ollie North - Cheney, Gordon Liddy - Cheney, Shrub Bush - Cheney, PappaDoc Bush - Cheney, Cheney -- Scooter Libby, Cheney - Haliburton/KBR. ...
10:14 PM on 07/13/2009
If they are going to prosecute anyone, it has to be Bush-Cheney. Otherwise what's the point ?
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
rich misty
Greed is not Patriotism
01:37 AM on 07/14/2009
The same rule applies to prosecuting as applies to politics. You start at the bottom, and you work your way up.
12:44 PM on 07/14/2009
If they are going to prosecute anyone, we must start with Obama and Holder, who are working for U.S. enemies to destroy the U.S.
09:48 PM on 07/13/2009
If Mr. Holder does not do his job, and Obama tries to get in the way of a proper investigation, they will both go down in history as failures on more than one level.

There is absolute proof positive of criminal activity. Only the ill informed would dispute this as fact. Only those complicit would try to justify these acts.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
rich misty
Greed is not Patriotism
10:17 PM on 07/13/2009
Fanned and faved
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
rich misty
Greed is not Patriotism
09:04 PM on 07/13/2009
On December 1, 2005, Yoo appeared in a debate in Chicago with University of Notre Dame professor Doug Cassel. During the debate Cassel asked Yoo, "If the president deems that he's got to torture somebody, including by crushing the testicles of the person's child, there is no law that can stop him?", to which Yoo replied "No treaty." Cassel followed up with "Also no law by Congress -- that is what you wrote in the August 2002 memo...", to which Yoo replied "I think it depends on why the President thinks he needs to do that." - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Yoo

http://washingtonindependent.com/15946/mccain-camp-buses-in-4000-kids-for-ohio-rally

http://www.armchairsubversive.org/

Republicans created their own law which made child rape and sexual mutilation perfectly legal. They also say they can take your children out of school anytime they need them.

http://www.usdoj.gov/contact-us.html

http://www.whitehouse.gov/CONTACT/

I sent an email to the general contact addy on the USDoJ contact page. Then I printed it, and mailed it first class to the mailing address provided there, attn: Attorney General Holder. Then I copied the contents to the White House contact form.