Home › Blogs › Jon's blog ›

Baffled by Dem Response to CIA program

Submitted by Jon on Tue, 07/14/2009 - 21:14
in

I do not understand the politics of the latest CIA inspired hatefest on Capital Hill.  Certaintly it looks like the Ds are seeking to get payback for the Pelosi fiasco early this year.  But if I was a Republican on the side of this issue, I would do some polling to verify what seems intuitive -- namely that if there is one thing that the American people want the CIA to do it is to seek out and kill Al Qaida leaders around the world. I suspect that this issue will gain little traction in places outside of the beltway where process stories have a hard time gaining traction.  However, from a political perspective, I would think R's would want  to take advantage of this issue  by highligting it outside the beltway and presenting a picture of what they would like the CIA to do -- again identifying, capturing and/or killing AQ leadership around the world.  At the very least make the Ds go onto the defense on this issue. Over at Volokh conspiracy, Kenneth Anderson has this to say about the whole matter.  

0
Your rating: None

Comments

You don't have a link to Ken Aderson

Submitted by cr on Wed, 07/15/2009 - 07:43.

This has been getting press in the non-MSM liberal media. I think because at this point there are no real facts. I believe there is definitely a some power struggle going on and so far its being waged by press release and rumor.

My thoughs, just to spur discussion:

1. It's all Bush's (Cheney's) fault. I say that not in the usual sense. Rendition and torture have been used selectively befor those two. It was the not-so-secret secret that we were sending certain people to egypt to be 'held'. However, post 9-11 that administration took a no-holds barred, shake the tree approach to interrogation. That approach put a selective, controlled tool and shoved it on a collision course with the public. No country should ever have an Abu Grahib or Guantimo in the news. Torture by it's very nature is ugly and devisive.

Those issues excited the liberal parts of the country which demanding from a liberal president that he 'do something' about it. No president want to get into this sort of thing. It's not what gets you elected, it's not what makes you famous. However, he does have a constiuency. So he's sort of tried to give a little but not a lot.

Republicans then responded by accousing Pelosi of hyprocracy or 'knowing' about it. She then has a constituency and must defend hereself. She does so by saying the CIA 'mislead' her. Fact is, the CIA does mislead congress. How much? Who knows, but I image that it is complicit misleading. The CIA prefers its activities to remain as secret as possible and politicians prefer to have plausable deniability. However, when the implicit understanding becomes an exlicit stink, everyone starts covering their ass. The best way to do that is point out the stink on someone else's ass. However, you have to go about that indirectly or else its 'politics'. Hence press releases.

2. Now we have a game of chicken. How much to people pursue what they don't want to pursue. Sides are laying down cards. I thought it had ended with Pelosi because there was a lull in accusations, then someone leaks the Cheney thing.

3. I don't think Obama will ever go after Bush, but Cheney may be fair game. If they do, then they'd better go hard. I don't see him being a halfway kind of guy. Dems will get him for breaking the law and Reps will say Dems are beating up the CIA.

4. Cheney probably did break the law, but some laws are better broken than others. I would say its better that that remain so. For example, it is against the law for anyone in the US to assasinate someone. However, that is one the primary capabilities (and uses) of our drones.

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

This could get ugly because there aren't coordinated teams, but lots of independant affiliated players. Both leadersship of each party would be better off to shut their mouths and let this slide out of the public. The longer this goes on, the harder it is to pull away from putting somethng that should remain secret into the full view of the public. Holder will at some point be forced to investigate.