dick cheney, torture, iraq, and valerie plame

EW is on fire -- again! -- here is the definitive meta-narrative, eight years in the unmasking -- it ties dick cheney directly as the hand behind the plame outing, and now, the torture tragedies. . . do go read it all. . . but quoting joe wilson now:

. . .The disinformation campaign to manipulate public opinion in favor of the invasion, the torture program, and the illegal exposure of a clandestine CIA agent—my wife, Valerie Plame Wilson -- were linked events. In their desperate effort to gather material to whip up public support, Cheney and others resorted to torture, well known in the intelligence craft to elicit inherently unreliable information. Cheney & Co. then pressured the CIA to put its stamp of approval on a series of falsehoods -- 26 of which were inserted into Secretary of State Colin Powell’s speech before the United Nations Security Council. At the same time, Cheney was furiously attempting to suppress the true information that Saddam Hussein was not seeking yellowcake uranium in Niger. After I published the facts in an article in The New York Times in July 2003, Cheney tried to punish me and discredit the truth by directing the outing of a CIA operative who happened to be my wife. . . .

indeed.






read more | digg story

dick cheney to be deposed -- and then on trial -- beginning september 11 2009

[do note the irony of that date.]

steven howards won an important set
of victories, in court, today. the dickster
(cheney) will likely be feelin' a pinch, tonight.

earlier, the court had granted howards
the right to take former vice-president
cheney's deposition -- today's order allows
howards' lawyers ample time to get that scheduled
and completed, well before a now-extended (to a
final september 11, 2009 conference) and a
september 9, 2009 trial date.

today's orders also prevented the dismissal
of several of the officer-defendants (on the grounds
of imunity). that is a very strong hint that this
one is going to turn on the particular facts dick
cheney either admits to, or has cross-examined out
of him -- at the coming civil deposition. were i
a betting man, and i am, i'd bet real money that
dick cheney will be counseled to settle -- before
the new trial date comes. i bet he'll sit for his depo,
but i think he'll get sufficiently "tangled up" there,
that he'll have few real option beyond agreeing to
pay mr. howards -- or end up being humiliated in a
very public five-day trial in the federal courthouse
in denver, colorado. and that is the way it should
probably go, afterall. take a look:

HEARING: Motions
9:00 a.m. Court in session.

Argument.

10:25 a.m. Court in recess.

10:37 a.m. Court in session.

Oral findings of facts, conclusions of law made of record.

ORDER: Defendants Reichle and Doyle’s Motion for Summary Judgment on the Basis of Qualified Immunity (155) is denied.

ORDER: Motion of Defendants Daniels and McLaughlin for Summary Judgment (156) is denied.

ORDER: Plaintiff Motion for Continuance of Trial (185) is granted. . . .

DEADLINES/HEARINGS:

Final Trial Preparation Conference reset to September 11, 2009 at 9:00 a.m.

Five-day jury trial reset to September 28, 2009, at 9:00 a.m.

10:56 a.m. Court in recess/hearing concluded.

Total in-court time: 1:44

dick cheney may be served -- for a deposition -- in howard's 2006 colorado first amendment case

in a 16-page order, entered today (PDF),
federal district court judge christine m.
arguello has ruled that dick cheney must
allow the plaintiff's lawyers to serve him
with a subpoena -- and eventually sit for a
sworn deposition -- about the events in beaver
creek, colorado, on the afternoon of june 16, 2006.

this is all about whether we, ordinary citizens of
these united states, do still possess the fundamental
right to dissent from our government's policies,
and petition it -- for the "redress of [our] grievances. . ."

. . .The cases do not involve, as the present case does, situations where the high-ranking official to be deposed was an eyewitness or physical participant in an event which precipitated the lawsuit.

Furthermore, and perhaps more obviously, Mr. Cheney is no longer a high-ranking government official, so the Court questions whether these cases are still applicable. In any event, the Court believes that Mr. Cheney should be deposed because he has relevant testimony that is unavailable from any other source in this case. . .

no doubt, cheney's lawyers will appeal
this order allowing the service, and
therefore, the sworn deposition of the dick.

so -- it will be a while, but he will
eventually have to answer -- under oath -- why
he ordered his guards to arrest steven howard
for simply expressing his first amendment pro-
tected views about the administration's policies
in iraq. one small one for the good guys.

is this "old man potter"? who is this guy?

this, i suppose, is fitting:

in many ways, dick cheney crippled
our once proud nation's commitment
to individual liberty and privacy -- so,
it seems ironic that he would hurt his
back (moving a "man-sized" safe, all by
his lonesome -- in secret -- perhaps?) -- and
leave office in a wheelchair, looking suspiciously
like the second runner-up in the "old man potter"
look-alike-contest (reference capra's "it's a wonderful life"):

it's about TIME(!). . . five nisour square, baghdad blackwater mercs indicted. . .

. . .'twas a long-time comin' but the winds seem,
finally, to be shifting -- unfurling a flag
that offers some semblance of the return to
the rule of law, and egalitarian justice.

the new york times is reporting that five
of the blackwater mercs involved in the
killing of 17 iraqis -- some unarmed, and
several clearly ordinary civilians -- in
baghdad's nisour square -- some parts
of which were caught on tape, apparently,
have now been indicted. damn. that's. right.

a sixth is reportedly plea-bargaining. that's decidedly
bad news for the other five, as his proffered testimony will
likely implicate the others -- and thus, a very-solid
federal criminal case -- with the real potential for multi-
decade (30 year) prison sentences -- is built.

the case will rely on a law that focuses felony penalties
on the gangland-style use of machine guns in committing
any other crime -- in this case, the unlawful killing of
at least 17 unarmed iraqi civilians. rather ironic, that, no?

background, here. more to come, finally.

archive video here:

even if cheney is not deposed (pre-trial), he may yet be called, at trial -- as a witness. . .

as mr. howard's appeal from the denial
of his request to depose the vice president
(about the circumstances of their conversation,
in the moments before he was arrested) wends its
way through the courts, the parties continue to
prepare for trial on the merits. to that end, page
12 of a proposed agreed final pre-trial order is
rather illuminating -- as it makes plain that mr.
howard's lawyers intend to call mr. cheney, as
a witness, at trial. by then, he will be a private
citizen -- and no longer able to assert that he
is too busy with "affairs of state" -- to appear.

in fact, he'll likely be just up the road (north
a few hundred miles, on i-25), in wyoming --
jackson hole, or casper, actually. cool.

in retirement -- but still in league with evil.

do take a look -- 2009 could provide this goofy gift:



namaste.

a new federal judge assigned to the colorado cheney case. . .

judge wiley b. daniel has been
taken off this colorado civil case,
a case in which it is alleged that
the vice president had steven howard
arrested, and held for 24 hours -- for
the "crime" of expressing his disagree-
ment with dick's iraq war policies, face-
to face, in non-profane terms, at a
publicity-stop by cheney in beaver
creek, back in late summer of 2005.

now -- it could be a simple as this new
judge needs to fill-up her calendar -- she
is a new appointee -- but i'll look into
it, shortly. . .

This action is reassigned to Judge Christine M. Arguello, upon her appointment.

All future pleadings should reference Judge Arguello at the end of the civil action number (such as 06-cv-1964-CMA). Unless otherwise ordered, the dates and times for all previously scheduled matters will be maintained and will now be handled by Judge Arguello. . .

i'll report what i find out,
right here. . .

colin powell denounces xenophobia -- endorses obama -- says republicans have "lost their way". . .

this is a towering figure -- making a clean
break from the politics of division and hate:

the more cynical side of me wonders
whether former general powell will now
throw his hat in the ring for secretary
of state, or defense, in the emerging
obama cabinet for 2009. . .

i do not want to detract from his courage
in making this break, though -- he has done
so on first principles -- saying the republicans
have shifted too far right, and toward division,
rather than inclusion, in beating the drum
on the (clearly dead) ayers story -- as just
one small example.

good bye, and good riddance, messrs. cheney,
bush -- and your sidekick (not maverick) mccain.

btw -- was sarah palin's appearance in the
rap scene on s.n.l., last night the closest thing
you've ever seen to an admission that she'd
rather be on "the real world", garner her
15 minutes -- than to actually be no. 2 in line
to run the country -- or, even be no. 1, in
alaska? i think it was her concession "speech".

she's knows she's burnt toast -- and now she's
angling for a fox-news style analyst gig, post
nov. 2008 -- i suspect even alaska will no longer
want her as the helicopter hunting, high-powered,
scoped rifle barbie, after troopgate is fully
understood. the "first dude" ought to prepare
to live in knoxville, or new jersey. or wear an
orange jumpsuit -- for his lies in signed, sworn
statements to the alaska bi-partisan commission.

19 days until our regime changes -- up 14 points, nationwide.

it would appear that. . .

"yes, we can. . ."

we can change the politics of
deceit, and fear, and secrecy. . .

to the politics of common decency,
shared ground, open discussion, and
respect for our differences -- while
still moving inexorably forward. onward.

upward.

yes, we can:

Tom Davis (R) Supports Demand for Cheney’s FBI Interview materials...

EW quite cogently notes:

". . .Retiring GOP Congressman Tom Davis must have accepted that we'll soon have a Democrat in the White House. He has joined Henry Waxman in declaring Bush's (Mukasey's, really) invocation of executive privilege with regards to the Cheney interview notes in the CIA Leak Case to be improper. . ."

read more | digg story

palin implodes -- troopergate and election day (by EW)

strictly speaking, the below is slightly
tangential to the main topic of this blog -- but
it foretells the end of cheney/bush "opacity/
secrecy in governance" initiatives. so, the
wheel finally begins to turn -- first gonzales, now this. . .

we, the people, have both a right -- and
a responsibility -- to demand complete candor
from our would-be elected officials -- especially
where the allegations involve using one's high elected
executive branch office for a singularly inappropriate
cum-personal vendetta -- to drum-out a very
competent state trooper because he divorced the sister
of one caribou barbie (or if you prefer -- a pin-up
dominatrix -- designed especially for people at least
who profess that it is sinful to masturbate). . . .

per the ever-on-point EW, here's where it
is all very-likely headed, come nov. 4, 2008:

. . .In other words, Palin's still on the ticket, for the moment. They're probably stuck with her. After all, there are few people who would want to take over for her. I think KayBee Hutchison might help McCain--but why would you do it if you were her? Becoming McCain's running mate is no longer a desirable career move. And if he replaced Palin with Lieberman, it would devastate Republican turnout in November. So, for now, at least, Palin remains on the ticket.

Which leads me to my third point. McCain's whole campaign since he picked Palin was about "mavericks" who take on the old way of doing things. Was. That's not going to work anymore. So now he's got an unqualified but charismatic fundie fire breather, but a really tainted claim to maverickyness (though I think McCain will claim that his refusal to push the lynch mobs is more maverickyness).

In other words, since his poll numbers are already in the 42% range, McCain's bid to be President just got even more tougher, because his brand is for shit.

So point four. At some point, the Republicans are going to decide that McCain's going to lose, and they need to save as many of the congressional seats as they can. . . .

read more | digg story

CREW wins a preliminary injunction against cheney's tossing official records. . .

in a special saturday order, d.c. federal
district court judge colleen kollar-kotellly
has issued a preliminary injuction in CREW
v. Cheney, et al. -- running in favor
of CREW, to prevent the vice president's
offices from dumping any [more] records that
dick cheney unilaterally decides need not be pre-
served under his highly dubious narrowed-inter-
pretation of the presidential records act.

cheney had argued that he need only preserve
records he deemed central to duties directly
assigned him by the president in an official
capacity, or generated in an official capacity
in his (largely ceremonial) legislative role -- in
other words, almost no records, at all. . .

the able judge believes there is substantial
doubt about whether cheney's view is correct -- given
that the PRA was specifiaclly amended to deal
expressly with shenanigans attempted by dick
cheney's old boss at a former white house -- one
richard m. nixon -- (when dick was a welp), and to
definatively put an end to attempts made, on
nixon's behalf, to shield many of the records
of that ignoble presidency, from public view.

quoth judge kollar-kotellly:

. . .the Court is guided by the Supreme Court’s discussion of the purposes underlying the PRA’s enactment in Nixon v. Administrator of General Services, as explained above. The PRA serves to “preserve [Presidential and Vice-Presidential] materials for legitimate historical and governmental purposes” and to ensure that future members of the executive branch can access historical records as necessary in carrying out their duties. 433 U.S. at 452-53. The PRA also serves the public interest by ensuring the “preservation of an accurate and complete historical record” by “trusted and disinterested professionals,” and thus enhances “the public confidence in our political processes.” Id. at 452-53 and n.14 (quoting Nixon v. Administrator of General Servs., 408 F. Supp. 321, 338-39 (D.D.C. 1976)).

These public interests are of the utmost significance and, as discussed above, are not and will not be fully protected if Defendants’ narrowed interpretation of the PRA’s statutory language is incorrect as a matter of law. Defendants admit that they have only preserved under the PRA those records that they have unilaterally determined to be encompassed in the phrase “documentary material . . . created or received by the [Vice] President . . . in the course of conducting activities which relate to or have an effect upon the carrying out of [his] constitutional, statutory, or other official or ceremonial duties . . . .” 44 U.S.C. § 2201(2). The American public, however, has a right to the preservation of all records encompassed by the PRA’s statutory language. As such, until the Court is able to determine whether Defendants’ narrowed interpretation is legally supported, the public interest favors the issuance of a preliminary injunction. . .

For the foregoing reasons, the Court shall GRANT Plaintiffs’ [3] Motion for Preliminary Injunction. As set forth in the Order accompanying this Memorandum Opinion, the Court shall order all Defendants to preserve throughout the pendency of this litigation all documentary material, or any reasonably segregable portion thereof created or received by the Vice President, his staff, or a unit or individual of the Office of the Vice President whose function is to advise and assist the Vice President, in the course of conducting activities which relate to or have an effect upon the carrying out of the constitutional, statutory, or other official or ceremonial duties of the Vice President, without regard to any limiting definitions that Defendants may believe are appropriate. . .

any violation of this order is punishable
by immediate contempt -- including the power
to promptly jail the offender, to deter additional
violations of these preservation orders. cool.