In his April 26 column, David Broder descends to a new low in his disgustingly evil campaign to prevent accountability for torture as a United States government policy. Sadly, he recognizes the key reason for investigations leading to prosecutions:
Their argument is that without identifying and punishing the perpetrators, there can be no accountability — and therefore no deterrent lesson for future administrations.
However, Broder just can’t live with the thought that his pals in the government might have to face up to the crimes they have committed. His very next sentence negates the one clear thought he had:
It is a plausible-sounding rationale, but it cloaks an unworthy desire for vengeance.
No. Just no. Broder just can’t accept the fact that he stumbled upon. Prosecutions are simply the only way administrations will learn that they cannot break the law with impunity. What do we have when the government is free to break the law without consequence? Dictionary.com provides a definition: "arbitrary or unrestrained exercise of power". The word defined here is "tyranny". Broder is so afraid of the appearance of "vengence" that he chooses to embrace tyranny.
But the evil in his column continues:
But having vowed to end the practices, Obama should use all the influence of his office to stop the retroactive search for scapegoats.
This is not another Sept. 11 situation, when nearly 3,000 Americans were killed. We had to investigate the flawed performances and gaps in the system and make the necessary repairs to reduce the chances of a deadly repetition.
We have known for four years that over 100 detainees have died in US hands. To Broder, dead Americans require full investigation to prevent a "deadly repitition". Dead brown people who were tortured to death? Not so much.
Finally, Broder contorts himself yet again to join with those who try to paint prosecutions as a desire to "criminalize policy differences":
The memos on torture represented a deliberate, and internally well-debated, policy decision, made in the proper places — the White House, the intelligence agencies and the Justice Department — by the proper officials.
Substantial evidence is emerging that the process for developing torture authorization was warped and relied on selective use of advice received. Further, the required legal briefing for Congressional oversight also appears to have been gamed. A stroll through the past week at Emptywheel will provide much evidence on these fronts. This is evidence of criminal intent on the part of those who crafted the torture policy, yet Broder would have us shut down the investigation now and sing Kumbayah with those paved the way to negating the image of the United States as the leading defender of human rights.
Finally, Broder simply doesn’t trust the system of justice we have set up in our country. The laws and procedures surrounding them are set up to prevent arbitrary prosecutions. Rules of evidence and the requirement of proof "beyond a reasonable doubt" by a jury protect against prosecutions that would be mere political vendettas. Genuine lawbreaking that can be proven should be prosecuted, or we return to the opening theme above of tyranny when the government can break laws without consequence.
Here is Broder describing just how little trust he has in our system of justice:
That way, inevitably, lies endless political warfare. It would set the precedent for turning all future policy disagreements into political or criminal vendettas. That way lies untold bitterness — and injustice.
Try again, Mr. Broder. The only injustice I see here is your drive to sweep obvious crimes under the rug. If there are no prosecutions for these crimes, then it is only a matter of time until a future administration decides to take up these disgusting practices again.
[While making final edits on this post, I noticed that Scarecrow beat me to responding to Broder's column. I'll still pile on since the column is so disgusting...]



26 Comments




Glad you hit this too, Jim. Broder earned this.
Thanks, Jim. Recommended.
hmmmm…WAPO, let’s see: Novak leaked Plame; Woodward, formerly reporter of integrity – now Bushie mouthpiece; that horrible Fred Hiatt; and Krautheimer…
adds up to propaganda mill for Power. Dan Froomkin’s is the only column worth reading.
I didn’t read all of the comments to his column (there are PAGES) but they are overwhelmingly against him. In three pages of comments, I only saw ONE (and it was contained in someone’s response — annoyingly the comments are “newest first”).
Enter, like clockwork, the politics of FEAR.
The message being hammered home, as always: be very afraid. Don’t question political authority- especially if involves the president. We must recognize that men like Broder are consummate artists in using fear to sustain their authority. Broder’s comments required some particularly twisted logic. Broder, like Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld and their ilk, have repeatedly used a successful reliance on fear tactics to make possible a pervasive and diffuse sense of powerlessness whereby a diminished sense of agency leads people into passivity so that complaining, not action, is all that occurs. Broder and his ilk have never hesitated to play on fear for political gain. In the past, it has proven to be a very effective ploy, working to cow politicians of all parties into silence and submission.
The truth is that FEAR is the only shard remaining to try and protect the Bush Administration’s justifications for manipulating and breaking the law.
Promulgation of the fear that has gripped the American psyche since September 11, 2001 must no longer be given sanction.
Half a century of research has shown that fear is one of the most politically powerful emotions that can be tapped. The evolutionary primacy of the brain’s fear circuitry makes it more powerful than the brain’s reasoning faculties. That makes fear far, far more powerful than reason. Exploitation of fear and anxieties grabs attention in a way that other appeals do not. “In politics, the emotions that really sway voters are hate, hope and fear or anxiety,” says political psychologist Drew Westen of Emory University, author of the recent book “The Political Brain: The Role of Emotion in Deciding the Fate of the Nation.”
That must not happen this time. By now, Congress (and surely anyone else with even a minimum of intelligence) and the DOJ / Holder can see through such fear-mongering. Political / legal action must be taken publicly to insure and prove that no one is above the law. Our elected / appointed officials must act in accordance with their oaths of office and admit that the rule of law is not discretionary. They must prove that they are not only willing but capable of exerting their power to investigate, indict, and prosecute.
I too thought his column was particularly disgusting. I also wrote a blog piece yesterday about his column.
Hey Jim, The Post wrote a story today about their new post/ABC poll where they tried to once again paint this issue as a partisan issue. But if you look at the raw numbers you can find another story in this poll.
Check it out.
Broder consciously conveys the myth of how Washington works – “well-debated, policy decisions, made in the proper places…by the proper officials.”
That line gives Cheney (and Bush) a get out of jail card for his corruption of the Washington bureaucracy’s formal and informal policy-making networks, and for his orchestrated shutting down of informed, professional dissent in order secretly to formulate and implement an illegal, immoral, and self-destructive policy of torture – developed before there was anyone yet to torture.
Mr. Broder’s – and the Washington Post’s – continuing support for that policy makes him and them complicit with its wrongs.
So very true, tx49holdem. Did you see the video clip of Rachel Maddow’s interview with Col. Lawrence Wilkinson here on Oxdown? He outright states that Cheney is a fear-filled man and all that he does is fear-motivated. That clip is Leen’s diary, ‘Veep In Trouble’.
We all harbor fear to some degree, it is how we govern it that makes the difference. We govern it or it governs us. I don’t choose to be a slave to fear, myself. (as you know, hee,hee)
Yes, I did see the clip. It will take a lot more brave people to step out and do the same thing Wilkerson so masterfully accomplished. If all of us continue to place pressure on the government and media then more people that lived and worked within the confines of the Bush administration can speak up about their own experiences and justice will have to be served on those who have acted with such hubris in ignoring the law.
What the hell is up with David Broder and anyone else that is standing in the way of accountability on torture.
Christ All Mighty does he not realize that the American people were subjected to two years of our Reps being focused on the investigation and impeachment of a President who had lied under oath about some blow jobs. What the Hell
We want to witness our Reps and our justice system hold the people who built the legal framework for torture to take place. Were not just talking about waterboarding we are talking about innocent people who died , disappeared, were tortured etc etc.
We have yet to witness anyone held accountable for the false pre war intelligence (Feith, Miller, Ledeen, etc etc)
Lies about blow job’s = impeachment
Intelligence snow job = 0…no accountability (tens of thousands dead, injured, displaced
torture =
We all know about diversion being a tactic to draw attention away from what is really going on; well, I can’t shake the thought that Limbaugh, reporters like Broder, Bill Kristol, the beaters of the fear-drums, panic over some new pandemic, etc., is to draw our attention away from something going on right under our noses. But what is it?
Is it quiet, further erosion of our laws by ignoring the law? Not repealing the Patriot Act? Construction of more prisons in foreign lands…and indeed in our own country (management and security leased to private contractors). I just can’t get a grip on what it is ‘they’ are distracting our attention from.
Thanks for all the great comments, folks. I posted and then got caught up in things at home and then a Gator baseball game. I’ll try to catch up, but it may be a few more hours until I can respond more appropriately.
For anyone who hasn’t happened by there yet, I strongly recommend pmorlan’s blog mentioned above.
Thanks for taking the time to write about someone and something that is just flat out painful to examine and to even be aware of. Broder is awful almost beyond words.
Excellent post, Jim. I, for one, cannot–not any longer, and for a good long time before that–stomach comments like this: “That way, inevitably, lies endless political warfare. It would set the precedent for turning all future policy disagreements into political or criminal vendettas. That way lies untold bitterness — and injustice.”
Injustice. Like this man knows about that, in his secure and comfy perch at WaPo.
In answer to your question- my vote what is really going on = the cybersecurity bill introduced on 4/1/09. “The Cybersecurity Act of 2009 introduced in the Senate would allow the president to shut down private Internet networks. The legislation also calls for the government to have the authority to demand security data from private networks without regard to any provision of law, regulation, rule or policy restricting such access.” See the link below. It involves jello Jay and others of his kind….
http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Secur…..rs-504520/
And msmolly, I hope you registered a comment @ Broder’s page. I’m urging everyone to do so, before the Post cuts off all comment.
There really needs to be an avalanche of outrage over Broder’s latest, and the comment section seems the only place to register it.
The names of the sponsors of that bill, Jay Rockefeller and Olympia Snowe, tell me enough to warn me. Oh yeah, give up more freedom for national security, and all under the powers of the
Emperorpresident.I guess this is the change we can believe in.
There are a few questions that you can always ask yourself to place where Broder is coming from.
Do you think he would have written this column this way if the last 8 years had been a Democratic Administration?
Would he make the same arguments to defend the human rights records of countries like China and Zimbabwe?
How can you take anything seriously that was written by a man who still hasn’t noticed that Bush was the worst President in our history?
Broder is a shill and a fool. He defends what is most corrupt and criminal about Washington. If he had just retired early in the Bush years, he probably would be rightly forgotten by now, but at least for those addicted to reading footnotes he might have kept at least the aura of a reputation. He is a classic case of not knowing when to STFU. His reputation is gone. All he has left are his absurd rants.
Maybe Broder and the Post would like to offer an apologia for the Craigslist killer next.
If Cheney was tried he would proudly declair that he kept the US safe from terror attack for seven years and more than one of the juriors who got their news from watching the TV drama “24″ where each week the hero saves the country by tortureing the bad guys, might believe Cheney is a hero.
Don’t count on the jury system to restore US’s moral values.
See,
http://oxdown.firedoglake.com/diary/4983
RichardKanePA
Great piece, Jim, and I second your endorsement of pmorlan’s piece. The watchdogs of the press strike again.
Atrios -
I posted this on Scarecrow’s thread as well -
Harpers 07
our Broderella wrote this during Iran Contra:
dead cat bounces for Repub pres.’s, scapegoating, it’s all in the Harpers piece
Broder on a previous Presidential scandal….
“Spare us these juveniles who won’t learn or can’t understand that the presidency is too damn important for their mock-war games….Let the children go out to play ‘sticks-and-stones’.”Nope, that wasn’t about Clinton, about which Broder insisted that Clinton must be impeached or, preferably resign. It was about that President who traded missiles to Iranian militants for cash…who then hid it to finance his secret war on the Sandinistas (against the Congressional mandate to not do so).
Broder was sick of “waiting around to see another President get his lumps …I don’t know what a long orgy of Reagan-bashing would bring in its wake. But I do know what came after the effort at president-breaking in Nixon’s time. It drove him into the secret police operations which in turn led to Watergate.”
So Broder clearly argues that any UnConstitutional act by a Republican should never be prosectued or investigated. Watergate, okay. Selling missiles to the Ayatollah, swell. Torture…not a crime, really.
But a blow-job! By a DEMOCRAT! How dare he “trash-up, my home!”
Sex bad, torture good!
The Patriot Act expires in December. There may have been some provisions made permanent. But rather than fighting to repeal the Act and squanderin energies for other things, I think it should be allowed to just fade into oblivion…and rescind the other provisions at that time.
http://bkmiller428.blogspot.co…..xpire.html
Oh…and notice the not so subtle statement that Nixon wasn’t responsible for the Watergate “secret police operations” because Nixon-bashing drove him to it! Hmmm! This was a President who got such heavy criticism that he crushed his Democratic opponent in the greatest electoral college rout to that time? Nixon committed these crimes “because” he was…scared of losing? Angry at the “scumbag” protesters? Afraid of losing the election?
It wasn’t Nixon’s fault he tried to establish a fascist regime, a one party state in which the Republicans could spy at will on the Democrats?
Broder seems to have shared Nixon’s paranoia.