Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman
Well there lies the problem, the opinion was a result of what was called proffesional misconduct but it was decided the proffesional misconduct was not deliberate.
If the opinions had a decent legal basis they wouldn't be able to describe them as a result of misconduct.
|
Well I would take the OPR's report with a grain of salt, it is an internal report from the DOJ, after the democrats took over, saying the Bush administration lawyers committed "professional misconduct". To me, it smacks of political payback. The final DOJ recommendation in 2010 took the position that there was no misconduct.
If you look at the memos, it is pretty obvious that the Bush WH asked the question of how far they could push EITs without being in clear violation of the "Torture" statutes. That is the type of opinion lawyers get asked for all the time, it is not misconduct by any stretch.
"Torture" is defined as infliction of "severe physical pain or suffering". Does "Waterboarding" meet that definition? Is it "severe" enough? you got me, it could be argued both ways.
You have to admit there is a certain liberal bias in the news media. The Bush administration was pilloried for taking the position that EITs were not "Torture". It was seen as an unconstitutional expansion of executive power. Yet now you have a President who has decided that he can unilaterally order the assassination of U.S. citizens if he deems them to be a threat to national security and you hear scarcely a peep.
