BUMPED: Has Lindsey Graham Become “All Powerful”?

Share

The Pink Flamingo has been working on this post for several days.

The Pink Flamingo figures most of us have been wondering why Attorney General Eric Holder has been acting the way he has about terror trials, etc.  At least 9 (count ’em) N-I-N-E DOJ lawyers have represented terrorists!

And now we are learning that Lindsey may be calling some of the shots when it comes to detentions and trying to find a way to try the terrorists in a military setting.

Well – how about this little ditty:

“...Attorney General Eric Holder says nine Obama appointees in the Justice Department have represented or advocated for terrorist detainees before joining the Justice Department. But he does not reveal any names beyond the two officials whose work has already been publicly reported. And all the lawyers, according to Holder, are eligible to work on general detainee matters, even if there are specific parts of some cases they cannot be involved in….Finally, it is possible that there are more than nine political appointees who worked for detainees. Holder tells Grassley that he did not survey the Justice Department as a whole but instead canvassed several large offices within the organization….”

I guess we now know why Lindsey seems to be terrorizing the DOJ and the Obama Administration.  There ‘s a store we’re not hearing via the conservative blogsphere because Ron Paul Bots hate Lindsey and Ron Paul Bots now appear to control the world via their tea party twits.

Here’s the story:

“…Two recent articles examining the legal policy of the Obama White House have concluded that one man wields unprecedented power and influence: Lindsey Graham, a Republican senator from South Carolina who first gained national attention as one of the managers of the impeachment effort against President Bill Clinton. He went on to win a Senate seat and aligned himself tightly with Senator John McCain. An Air Force reserve JAG, Graham was a champion for lawyers inside the Defense Department as they battled Bush Administration efforts to introduce torture. But he was simultaneously a champion of other aspects of Bush-era war-on-terror policy, including the notion of military commissions to try prisoners held at Guantánamo. Both the New York Times and the New Yorker found that presidential chief of staff Rahm Emanuel relied heavily on Graham and his views, seeing in them a possible bridge to a bipartisan consensus on thorny legal policy issues. As Glenn Greenwald puts it, Lindsey Graham has become “all powerful.”…”

Greenwald doesn’t appear to like Lindsey:

“…Today, Lindsey Graham announced that the White House was now once again considering supporting an indefinite detention law as a means of securing his approval on terrorism policy.  It’s unclear whether this is true, but given the vital position Graham has been given by the Obama White House — Supreme Chairman of Terrorism Policy — it would be unwise to dismiss his decree….”

Lindsey is also speaking out about what it going on with with terror interrogations and NATO.  This is from CNN. You rarely see Lindsey on FOX anymore.  Glenn Beck doesn’t like him.  FOX has become all tea-party all the time, and not much of anything else.  This is from Anderson Cooper:

“…COOPER: A former U.S. Army captain in Afghanistan has just lost two soldiers in an IED attack. Dozens more were seriously injured on other missions. The enemies seemed to anticipate where Captain Roger Hill and his soldiers were headed. As it turned out, 12 Afghans working on his military base were suspected spies, including his own interpreter.

Captain Hill now faced an impossible choice: violate orders and give the Afghan government classified evidence against the 12 suspected spies, or let the men go free. Under NATO rules, he had just 96 hours after the men were detained to figure it out. At the 80th hour, he came up with a plan.

CNN’s Abbie Boudreau picks up the story.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BOUDREAU (voice-over): As the clock ticked towards the 96-hour NATO deadline, the 12 suspected spies were held in this small building on base.

HILL: I decided that I needed to break protocol and interrogate them myself. I took three gentlemen outside, sat them down, walked away, fired my weapon in the ground three times, hoping that the men on the inside, left to their own imagination, would think that they really needed to talk.

BOUDREAU: Meaning that maybe you killed these men?

HILL: Or hurt them. I really did not consider what they would think. I just knew that it would gain a reaction.

BOUDREAU: You thought it would scare them?

HILL: Yes. And that’s all I was concerned about, because I needed that intelligence.

BOUDREAU: So what happened?

HILL: Fired three rounds into the ground, walked back inside, and sure enough, some of the detainees started to talk.

BOUDREAU (voice-over): What the detainees told him inside this building was ultimately enough to convince the Afghans to take all 12 suspects into custody, including Hill’s interpreter, Nuri (ph). Hill felt he’d done the right thing, that he’d protected his soldiers.

HILL: I broke protocol and more or less took matters into my own hands out of necessity, out of self-defense.

BOUDREAU (on camera): But the Army saw it differently. Hill was charged with detainee abuse. He accepted a plea deal and received a general discharge last year. His military career was over.

(voice-over) NATO spokesman James Apatherei (ph) announced the 96-hour detention rule in 2005 after talks with both U.S. and Afghan military commanders. He told CNN, quote, “We have to balance the requirement for protecting our soldiers with the reality that Afghanistan is a sovereign country, that there must be limits on the time we can detain Afghans before handing them over to Afghan authorities.”

U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham says cases like Roger Hill’s are the reason NATO needs to change the rule. SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R), SOUTH CAROLINA: The one story I hear told over and over and over again, “Senator Graham, this policy makes no sense. It is putting our folks at risk for no higher purpose. Quite frankly, here’s what’s going to start happening. We’re going to take less prisoners. They’re going to start shooting these folks.”

BOUDREAU: Graham has seen the problem first hand. He’s the only U.S. senator who serves in the Air Force Reserves. He’s a colonel and was in Afghanistan just last year.

GRAHAM: Who the hell made this rule up? Why did you pick 96 hours versus 80 hours or 100 hours? I can’t get anyone to tell me how this thing was formed, whose idea it was, and how it became policy. …”

And the latest:

“…So the price of closing Guantanamo is to create a “new national security court” from out of nowhere, according to the senior senator from South Carolina. The U.S. tried that once before when it created the military commissions. The courts have consistently found the commissions to be procedurally problematic, and even when the Obama administration embraced the commissions, senior officials testified that in essence they were going to make them more like civilian trials in order to withstand future scrutiny from the bench. Besides, the administration has declined to embrace the creation of new national security courts, even though some senior officials, like deputy solicitor general Neal Katyal, have long championed them. What’s to stop the courts from challenging another newly-created structure?…”

Share