Has anyone considered the parallel between the current political situation and the doctrine of papal infallibility? The organization that promulgated this doctrine has survived for quite some time; is this an attempt to redesign our government to copy the power and longevity of the Catholic Church?

And to think I once believed that Obama would promise real change from the Bushies

Obama did promise such change. He just didn't deliver.

Wieners just wouldn't taste the same.

Absolutely. They'd taste much more like losers.

So Eric Holder is "leaning towards" investigating the Bush torture program. So in other words he's thinking about doing the fucking job he was appointed to do. He isn't quite there yet, but he may or may not get there eventually. Isn't that nice? I'm with Glenn, I'll believe it when it happens. I've had it up to here with fucking pussy footing around Obama administration. They are nothing but a bunch of spineless wimps. Obama is proof positive that children, especially boys, need a male figure in their lives. Maybe if his dad had been around when he grew up, he'd actually now how to be a man. Instead of constantly seeking validation from others as Obama does. He'd be able to make a decision, without worrying what his critics might say about it. As much as I disliked Bush, he never had a problem making a decision and sticking to it. Too bad Obama isn't a little more like Bush in that regard.

Mr. Greenwald,

I won't hold my breath for any meaningful investigations to ensue. Despite promises, unfortunately our president is preserving the "privilege" of power for its own sake.

Each elected or appointed government official swears an oath "to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution." I do appreciate the needs of secrecy when the nation's security is at stake, but when "national security" is the reason for justifying blatantly illegal acts (having nothing to do with the nation's security or defense) is appalling by any measure.

Illegal surveillance (much more widespread than previously known), torture, indefinite detention, denial of Habeas Corpus, and now revealations Cheney was running secret spy programs of the CIA, and as yet undiscovered abuses of power have defied our democratic principles, freedoms, legal, civil and human rights, reek of impropriety, corruption, and unethical behavior at all levels. I can't find fault with those low-level field agents, following orders of superiors, as much as I do those who fabricated the reasons, justified and set the policies.

and I blame it ALL on polls - Last time I blamed it all on Hollywood - but I guess in a case where the Attorney General is waiting for a 'public reaction' to appoint a Special Prosecutor

you just have to produce the right polls and you should not ask Americans these idiotic questions if it is okay to torture terrorists!

You have to ask them if it is okay to torture their grandma and THEN you get a 90 percent majority for prosecution - But as I complained before this seems to be some kind of weird

'democracy in progress' - Jackson (not Michael) - never would have stood for that!!

[With apologies to Robert Johnson]

It is not often that a single individual stands at a crossroads with the ability to make a decision that will affect the history of their country in a way Eric Holder now does. As has been pointed out by many, including the President, the decision on whether and whom to prosecute lies with Holder (at least until he appoints a special prosecutor). As several of the stories on the trial balloon have pointed out, Holder appears to be haunted by the specter of his bad decision on the Marc Rich pardon. It is not difficult to imagine that he realizes his torture prosecution decision will be a much more visible and permanent emblem of his character for the rest of his life.

Note that Holder did not flinch from calling waterboarding torture in his confirmation hearing:

Early on he was asked whether waterboarding, a technique that makes a prisoner believe he is in danger of drowning, constitutes torture and is illegal.

“If you look at the history of the use of that technique, ” Holder replied, “we prosecuted our own soldiers for using it in Vietnam. … Waterboarding is torture.”

Link: http://archives.chicagotribune.com/2009/jan/16/nation/chi-holder_16jan16

Also note the impact that the CIA IG report appears to have had on him.

It has been nearly 36 years since Nixon fired Archibald Cox, but only after his AG and DAG resigned rather than fire Cox. So, the dilemma confronting Holder is whether he wants to go down in history as someone with the ethics of Elliot Richardson, who resigned rather than fire Cox, or the amoral Robert Bork, who gladly stepped in to do Nixon's dirty work once two people ahead of him resigned.

[For a refresher, see : http://tinyurl.com/7qpbt]

Holder is at the crossroads. Will the devil keep his soul or will Holder get it back?

Alger Hiss, F. Lee Bailey, Spiro Agnew, G. Gordon Liddy -- what do all these high-profile lawyers have in common?

They were all disbarred for MUCH LESS than what Yoo has done.

It's just crazy to think that the OLC lawyers who wrote those memos and the advisors (Addington, Fredo, Ashcroft) don't deserve at least disbarrment.

...it could be an effort to shut down the embarrassing Spanish investigation, which may actually gets press coverage in Europe.

As I understand it, Garzon wraps if the US officially proceeds with an investigation(s), even if it turns out to be a contrived dog-and-pony show.

that adnoto is not a pessimist.

Welcome brother!

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2007/08/15/apa_torture/

"Aug. 15, 2007 | WASHINGTON -- The American Psychological Association, the world's largest professional organization of psychologists, is poised to issue a formal condemnation of a raft of notorious interrogation tactics employed by U.S. authorities against detainees during the so-called war on terror, from simulated drowning to sensory deprivation. The move is expected during the APA's annual convention in San Francisco this weekend."

...

"In fact, given what promises to be the continuing involvement of psychologists in coercive interrogation, there is intense infighting within the organization about whether simply condemning abusive tactics is enough. Some of the APA's 148,000 members think the anti-torture resolution put forward by APA leadership is too weak, and they are putting intense pressure on the organization's leadership to go a step further and ban psychologists from participating in detainee interrogations altogether. They have introduced their own resolution proposing a moratorium. "I and others think that a moratorium is essential to try to tell the government that psychologists are not going to participate in the interrogation of enemy combatants," said Bernice Lott, a member of the Council of Representatives, the APA's policy-making body. Others oppose the moratorium because they think psychologists must be involved in the interrogations to prevent abuse -- and because the government may just choose to use non-APA members for its interrogations, as has already happened."

-------------

Frankly, I don't dare look to see if they followed through. I don't want to spoil the morning. But presumably the American Bar Association can follow suit, and call Yoo not-a-lawyer.