Palace Revolt

Newsweek ^ | Feb. 6, 2006 issue | Daniel Klaidman, Stuart Taylor Jr. and Evan Thomas

[Anthem]

They were loyal conservatives, and Bush appointees. They fought a quiet battle to rein in the president's power in the war on terror. And they paid a price for it. A NEWSWEEK investigation.

Feb. 6, 2006 issue - James Comey, a lanky, 6-foot-8 former prosecutor who looks a little like Jimmy Stewart, resigned as deputy attorney general in the summer of 2005. The press and public hardly noticed. Comey's farewell speech, delivered in the Great Hall of the Justice Department, contained all the predictable, if heartfelt, appreciations. But mixed in among the platitudes was an unusual passage. Comey thanked "people who came to my office, or my home, or called my cell phone late at night, to quietly tell me when I was about to make a mistake; they were the people committed to getting it right—and to doing the right thing—whatever the price. These people," said Comey, "know who they are. Some of them did pay a price for their commitment to right, but they wouldn't have it any other way."

One of those people—a former assistant attorney general named Jack Goldsmith—was absent from the festivities and did not, for many months, hear Comey's grateful praise. In the summer of 2004, Goldsmith, 43, had left his post in George W. Bush's Washington to become a professor at Harvard Law School.

...Goldsmith was actually the opposite of what his detractors imagined. For nine months, from October 2003 to June 2004, he had been the central figure in a secret but intense rebellion of a small coterie of Bush administration lawyers. Their insurrection, described to NEWSWEEK by current and former administration officials who did not wish to be identified discussing confidential deliberations, is one of the most significant and intriguing untold stories of the war on terror.

[jjm2111]

I don't trust Newsweek and my instinct is to trust the President. It's easy to officially not torture prisoners when you are meeting armies in the field and defeating them through superiour force of arms and when nations make war on you in the open.

Our enemies are hidden and we must adapt.

[okie01]

So, you have chosen to trust Newsweek's reporting? Given their track record, that's an odd choice.

[Anthem]

You know... It may be as much that I hope it's true. I'd like to think that there are still men of conscience in government. And no, I don't put the Bush gang in that category.

Let me ask you a tough question, old friend. Do you beleive the "pancake" collapse story about the WTC towers? (Or, have you done any research on the subject)?

[Anthem]

believe (sheesh)

[Dolphy]

To those with whom I argued, back in '01, that the US had no history of torturing POW's and that there were not going to be abuses at Gitmo, I apologize for my foolish ignorance.

I hope you have more going for your change of heart than this article because it is at best, weak. Personally I'm happy that they are playing smash-mouth behind the scenes and pushing the envelope as far as they can, we are facing an uncivilized enemy.

[dljordan]

"I am a political bigot. I hate pols who agglomerate power in ever greater amounts. Especially when it's based on "terrorist attacks" or "acts of war" that don't stand up to reasoned analysis."

Make that two of us.

[CFC__VRWC]

Let me ask you a tough question, old friend. Do you beleive the "pancake" collapse story about the WTC towers? (Or, have you done any research on the subject)?

So as far you're concerned, Bush was responsible for carrying out the 9/11 attacks, and he framed al Qaeda and bin Laden? And this was done to provide the pretext for invading Iraq and avenging Saddam's attempt to assassinate Poppy, I presume?

[okie01]

I'd like to think that there are still men of conscience in government.

As do I.

Let me ask you a tough question, old friend. Do you beleive the "pancake" collapse story about the WTC towers? (Or, have you done any research on the subject)?

What's tough about it? I saw what happened and, though I'm not an engineer, I understand the engineering.

If you'll believe Newsweek, or buy into the WTC conspiracy theory, you're disappointing me.

[BamaDi]

I just retired after 36 years with the Federal government -the last 15 with the DOJ....And believe me, Comey was no republican prize!

[xcamel]

'zactly. thank you.

[Anthem]

--I hope you have more going for your change of heart than this article because it is at best, weak.

Regarding what? Resistance inside the administration to the torture policy? This article doesn't look weak to me, the resignations speak with some clarity, and the policy itself is insanely stupid.

--Personally I'm happy that they are playing smash-mouth behind the scenes and pushing the envelope as far as they can, we are facing an uncivilized enemy.

As perfect an example of cognitive dissonance as I've ever seen. Who are the uncivilized?!

[Dan(9698)]

Let me ask you a tough question, old friend. Do you believe the "pancake" collapse story about the WTC towers?

I watched on television as they came down after being hit by airplanes.

I don't think it is too much to presume they wouldn't have collapsed if they hadn't been hit.

What is tough about your question, and my answer?

[Anthem]

--So as far you're concerned, Bush was responsible for carrying out the 9/11 attacks, and he framed al Qaeda and bin Laden?

I don't speculate on motivation or 'who done it', as I have seen no clear evidence. My question was limited to the only solid evidence I've seen, at that is Physicist Steven Jones' analysis of the collapse.

[Anthem]

I had my watchman on at my desk that morning too. See post 33.

[Anthem]

BTW, I've worked with engineers for years. I understand moments of enertia and torque. Believe me, I was a loud skeptic of conspiracy theories myself, as most of what I saw was tissue paper. Other than the too convenient attack (as in qui bono, three other things have aroused my suspicions: My own knowledge of construction and demolition (I actually witnessed the Husky stadium collapse at the U o Washington years ago); Jones' work; and the really lousy job the 911 Commission did explaining it. The latter looks more like a coverup.

[Torie]

You seem to be making the assumption that all of these powers are not needed to wage an effective war against terror, or if they are, just say no, because we just become more like our enemy. The first point is an assertion, the second might be characterized as an over indulgence in aesthetics that might risk life and limb. The bill of rights, and all the rest, is not a suicide pact, at least that is the way I would parse it each and every time that I was asked. One can't be dead by virtue of a Utopian reach of individual rights at the expense of communal defense, while enjoying such rights, at the same time, at least not while on this mortal coil.

[ChildOfThe60s]

This war must be fought in back alleys, knives in the ribs of terrorists. Our operatives in those back alleys, many times, have to be judge and executioner.

As far as war prisoners are concerned, GITMO is kiddy college. Study history. Study our opponents.

Uncivilized? Sometimes, perhaps often. But the aggressor makes the rules of warfare, and we are not the aggressor. If we respond with anything less than 100% resolve, using all the force at our disposal, we will have no civilized society to discuss.

This is not a civilized war (in as much as any war is "civilized"). If your reasoning is founded upon a belief that there is anything civilized about war or that we are somehow obliged by morality to treat terrorists as anything other than the barbarians that they are, your conclusions are guaranteed to be erroneous.

[Dan(9698)]

White House stop using what they saw as farfetched rationales for riding rough-shod over the law and the Constitution, Goldsmith and the others fought to bring government spying and interrogation methods within the law...

Have you done any study of the Second Section of the Constitution, and the Laws of War that were passed by Congress in the 1700s?

Just because a Lawyer isn't familiar with the Laws of War does not mean they don't apply.

The laws of war apply to what is happening now. There still are Attornys and Politicians who want to approach this as a law enforcement exercise, and not as a hostile military operation.

Look up what the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals said about Padilla when they last ruled on him.

[Dan(9698)]

My question was limited to the only solid evidence I've seen, at that is Physicist Steven Jones' analysis of the collapse.

Are you saying that the airplane that we watched on TV when it flew into the second tower was faked?

I am sure that Karl Rove didn't have control over what was shown on TV that day, or do you really have a tinfoil hat?

[okie01]

You realize that, for every Steven Jones, there are twenty other reputable physicists and engineers who conclude otherwise.

There are people who argue that the Rosenbergs were innocent. They have plausible sounding arguments. But, then, there is the jury's verdict...and the historians...who disagree.

The point being: there is "beyond a doubt" and there is "beyond a reasonable doubt".

The 9/11 committee made a hash of many things. But we don't have to rely on their judgment to make our own.