ABC News reported on the role of psychologists Bruce Jessen and Jim Mitchell in developing the CIA enhanced interrogation program. The always interesting Michael Goldfarb and the invaluable Gateway Pundit describe this as ABC having "outed" these two [And I knew I had seen that elsewhere - Matt Drudge is headlining this as "ABCNEWS outs 'torture' psychologists" and includes a supplemental link to an ABC story denouncing the Plame leak].
Well, the names have been out there for a while - Katherine Eban reported on this in Vanity Fair on July 17, 2007 and their names have been in many news accounts recently (see News Google). The recently declassified Senate Armed Services Committee report on torture also names them repeatedly (sorry for the no-link but the Senate report is about a 15 meg .pdf which is crashing my PC.)
That said, showing their faces is not helpful. Oh, well - maybe these guys can be enrolled in the AIG bonus recipient protection program. At least until Obama needs to demonize someone new - the Chrysler creditor hold-outs come to mind.
RELATED: All Ahmadinejad is doing is trying to develop a nuke so he can destroy Israel. Maybe if he opened a hedge fund Obama would get tough on him.
Panetta pees his pants.
Posted by: lurking | April 30, 2009 at 11:14 PM
I know we can count on David Corn to scream how shocking this is and how it puts the lives of our secret agents at risk.Mo?
Is Jason Leopold working on this, too? Emptywheel? All the rest of the Plame as victim gang?
Posted by: clarice | April 30, 2009 at 11:17 PM
OT: But before I leave the WSJ has some optimistic news:
Cramdown Slamdown
Three cheers for obstructionism.Article
more in Opinion »Email Printer
Friendly Share: Yahoo Buzz ↓ More
facebook
MySpace
LinkedIn
Digg
del.icio.us
NewsVine
StumbleUpon
Mixx
Save This ↓ More
Text
The power of a united minority was on beneficial display yesterday, as Senate Republicans defeated the budget bankruptcy "cramdown" bill. Credit goes to Arizona's Jon Kyl and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, who kept their party together to beat destructive legislation that had easily passed the House and was one of President Obama's housing priorities.
The cramdown would have allowed bankruptcy judges to rewrite contracts to reduce the amount that people owe on their mortgages. But a bipartisan majority understood that relief for today's troubled borrowers would be paid with higher rates on the next generation of homeowners, as lenders priced the added risk into mortgage contracts.
A dozen Democrats joined Republicans in the 51-45 vote, and even Pennsylvania turncoat Arlen Specter gave his former GOP comrades an assist. Speaking for millions of renters and nondelinquent borrowers, Mr. McConnell said that the vote "ensures that homeowners who pay their bills and follow the rules won't see an interest-rate hike at the whim of a bankruptcy judge."
Prior to the vote, the Associated Press described the looming defeat as "the first major legislative setback for the popular president." Illinois Senator Dick Durbin and New York's Chuck Schumer also did their worst to pass the bill, including some arm-twisting of politically vulnerable bankers. Their defeat is a victory for healthy credit markets and, let us hope, a sign that Americans do not want to throw out all the rules of our market economy.
The victory is also an example of Republicans helping the economy and thus saving Democrats from their own worst instincts. Liberals were so intent on helping troubled homeowners that they were willing to punish the profits of the very banks they say they want to lend more to new mortgage borrowers. May we have more such virtuous "obstructionism."
************
Not everyone in the Senate is crazy!! WOW
Posted by: clarice | April 30, 2009 at 11:32 PM
Oh, but clarice, bankers own Congress, donchaknow?
Posted by: lurking | April 30, 2009 at 11:35 PM
Off topic...but...
Ooops, what sort of tax cut is really just playing with the withholding tables and might need to be paid back? An Obama tax cut.
And if you don't pay your taxes, you just might suffer the indignity of being appointed to a senior position in his Administration.
Posted by: RichatUF | May 01, 2009 at 12:28 AM
Biden's laser sharp political acumen at work again as Specter may leave a turd in the dem punch bowl...
Couldn't happen to nicer people.
LUN
Posted by: Stephanie | May 01, 2009 at 12:30 AM
The cramdown news from above is great news indeed. Can you imagine the lines forming at the bankruptcy courts in order to take advantage of this? Plus, investors should be able to excercise their "contractual" rights to arrive at a remedy that minimizes their loss. It is the trampling of contracts that is important here, and this government seems so comfortable to kick them aside as if they have no meaning, and this concept will have enduring consequences.
Posted by: Mickey | May 01, 2009 at 12:51 AM
I noticed something interesting -- this is under the caption:
No stop and ponder (like Cheney did) why did not the CIA have super important, national command authority Joe Wilson sign their STANDARD OPERATING and REQUIRED confidentiality agreement?
Posted by: Topsecretk9 | May 01, 2009 at 01:19 AM
Again:
Non-disclosure. You would think there would be ONE reporter out there who might have wondered why the CIA failure breakdown of protocol on confidentiality with super, scary important Wilson happened and who paid for it?
/sarc off on there being a "reporter" and someone getting in trouble for not following the non-disclosure rules.
Posted by: Topsecretk9 | May 01, 2009 at 01:35 AM
what sort of tax cut is really just playing with the withholding
If one has to pay it back, is it still a tax cut? Only in Obamaland could one find people that believe this.
Posted by: pagar | May 01, 2009 at 08:15 AM
Journalists need to focus on the magician's other hand:
For all of the administration's anguish that terrorist interrogation techniques ignored the rule of law, Obama's administration shows precious little respect for the rule of law when it subverts Bank of America stockholders by misrepresenting Merrill Lynch, strong arms employees who signed retention contracts with investment firms, and cheats those whose precious savings were invested in Chrysler bonds.
Posted by: sbw | May 01, 2009 at 08:54 AM
Obama is declaring a decrease in interest rates as a tax cut.
So I'm not the least bit surprised.
Posted by: Jane | May 01, 2009 at 08:56 AM
OFF TOPIC ALERT
See LUN for an article on the AIPAC matter (which, if the article is correct, is no longer a matter).
Posted by: Thomas Collins | May 01, 2009 at 09:44 AM
I assume there will be some Michelle-following stock-watchers here who are eager to buy into the high-end ($540!) Lanvin sneaker industry.
>
Posted by: Extraneus | May 01, 2009 at 10:00 AM
Ooops, forgot to close a tag.
Posted by: Extraneus | May 01, 2009 at 10:03 AM
Hey girls, the photo of Michelle Obama in her gardening clothes that we snarked about...Michelle was wearing designer sneakers. Cost? $540.
http://www.nydailynews.com/lifestyle/fashion/2009/05/01/2009-05-01_first_lady_michelle_obama_kicks_in_own_foot_feat_for_fashionistas_lanvin.html>Source
Posted by: Sue | May 01, 2009 at 10:04 AM
Ex,
::grin:: I'm trying to decide if the author of the article I linked above is serious when she says this...
...if so, we really are doomed.
Posted by: Sue | May 01, 2009 at 10:06 AM
Jane,
Did Buck Zero-Progressive Hero explain how artificially lowering rates for a moment constituted a tax cut? It appears to me that there have been fewer than a million refis at lower rates. Credit issuers have lopped over $1T in available credit out of the market and per the BEA personal interest received (line 13) fell by 33.6 billion while personal interest paid (line 29) fell by 10.7 billion in Q1.
It takes a lying, cheating, thieving (D)irty socialist to call a net loss of $23 billion in personal income a "tax cut".
Posted by: Rick Ballard | May 01, 2009 at 10:06 AM
Sue and Extraneous, may I go on record as pointing out that regardless of how much those shoes cost, they are butt ugly.
I have gardening shoes in the garage with more style.
Posted by: bad | May 01, 2009 at 10:12 AM
Barack is the family's primary dog walker.
Posted by: sbw | May 01, 2009 at 10:13 AM
Agreed, bad. But do your socks and laces match as well?
Posted by: Extraneus | May 01, 2009 at 10:15 AM
Jane,
You must read http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/30/AR2009043003108.html?nav=rss_opinion/columns>Krauthammer. He picked up your theme in the debate the other night.
Posted by: Sue | May 01, 2009 at 10:16 AM
Hey girls, the photo of Michelle Obama in her gardening clothes that we snarked about...Michelle was wearing designer sneakers. Cost? $540.
They look like Chucks. On second thought, they are not as cute as Chucks.
She could have saved herself $500 bucks and gone to TJ Maxx
Posted by: verner | May 01, 2009 at 10:17 AM
Those shoes are not walking shoes. If you need comfortable shoes to walk the dog in, by Dr. Scholls. Or splurge on a pair of New Balance.
Posted by: Sue | May 01, 2009 at 10:19 AM
Well, TC, maybe off topic, but earthshaking.
Posted by: lurking | May 01, 2009 at 10:21 AM
"I have gardening shoes in the garage with more style."
Sure, but can you rent them out as landing craft? I find the delicate simplicity of the First Lady's Brobdingnagian boats to be consonant with her entire approach to couture. It's not her fault that no one ever explained the difference between cheap and chic to her.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | May 01, 2009 at 10:24 AM
Rick, you make an excellent point. My size sevens fall short in that regard.
Posted by: bad | May 01, 2009 at 10:35 AM
The ankles are the real problem.
Posted by: laura | May 01, 2009 at 10:39 AM
Sue,
I insist on royalties!
Posted by: Jane | May 01, 2009 at 10:40 AM
Extraneous, after a day in the yard, the laces and socks are definitely the same color.
Posted by: bad | May 01, 2009 at 10:41 AM
Did Buck Zero-Progressive Hero explain how artificially lowering rates for a moment constituted a tax cut?
Gee Rick, don't you know anything? The President doesn't have to explain, he just has to pronounce.
I think I will start accumulating these little episodes and announce them every week on the radio.
One a week should be fine. I'll call it the ____________________ segment. (Any ideas)
Posted by: Jane | May 01, 2009 at 10:43 AM
The "Obama's full of sh8t" segment....
Posted by: bad | May 01, 2009 at 10:48 AM
Gee, and Democrats wondered why the CIA shredded those interrogation tapes. Answer: Even if classified, locked into a Top Secret safe, and sealed in lead, it would be about a month before some Democrat would leak carefully edited copies to ABC/CBS/YouTube, along with the interrogators home addresses and work schedules.
Posted by: Georg Felis | May 01, 2009 at 11:01 AM
"Your Lying Eyes"
Posted by: DebinNC | May 01, 2009 at 11:02 AM
Don't forget Hit's "Lie to You"?
Posted by: Sue | May 01, 2009 at 11:03 AM
Jane,
I'll be more than happy to help with an "Obama is FOS" segment. I'm sure that others will feel the same. It would be helpful in developing a rebuttal if you copied Barry Dunham's exact words in your comment.
I don't read Mediacrat propaganda much anymore and I dislike giving any media site other than the Rome-Sentinel even .0001 cent of click income.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | May 01, 2009 at 11:11 AM
Shame if the journos' pix and addresses got accidentally mixed up and labeled "CIA covert paramilitary operatives" on Youtube and went viral.
I can hardly stand to think of what might happen.
Posted by: Richard Aubrey | May 01, 2009 at 11:12 AM
Rick,
I'll have to try and find it. I heard it from someone on Fox most likely. So it may take a while. I've actually heard it more than once.
Posted by: Jane | May 01, 2009 at 11:31 AM
Jane,
I have no doubt re the existence of this instance of Buffoon Babble. It fits perfectly within the context of the (D)irty socialist Deadbeat Reparations Program. Credit issuers have seen the writing on the wall and are restricting new issuance to debt serfs at an accelerating pace. That hasn't staunched the bleeding yet but it will.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | May 01, 2009 at 12:01 PM
Have y'all seen the Palin video linked at Hot Air? If not, especially Reagan fans, go watch it.
http://www.conservatives4palin.com/2009/05/theres-bear-in-woods.html>Bear in the Woods
Posted by: Sue | May 01, 2009 at 12:11 PM
RUSH is talking about the $540 sneakers and Red State has the worst picture of Michelle:
Michelle Antoinette
I hope that was a photoshopped picture.
Posted by: Ann | May 01, 2009 at 12:19 PM
It might have been at the "town hall" meeting when Obama preached to his flock during his 100th Day Jubilee. I thought I saw something flagged up at Sweetness and Light or Gateway Pundit.
Posted by: RichatUF | May 01, 2009 at 12:19 PM
Here's the Bear Ad, for those so inclined:
Posted by: narciso | May 01, 2009 at 12:24 PM
Ann, I was hoping you would come across that lovely photo of our First Lady and put it in comments.
Isn't she lovely?
Posted by: centralcal | May 01, 2009 at 12:24 PM
c-cal,
Nope, she's one of Barack's Beauties.
Posted by: Sue | May 01, 2009 at 12:42 PM
Unbelievable, cc! The shoes,too. :P
Posted by: Ann | May 01, 2009 at 12:44 PM
Ann, thanks for the link to the picture and the article. I learned that the shoes are french and know I understand why Michelle bought them.
They make her look just like Carla Bruni.
I get it!! I really do!!
Posted by: bad | May 01, 2009 at 12:49 PM
The shoes are totally hideous and anyone who pays $5.40 let alone $540 for them is a fool.
No comment on Michelle; the photo speaks for itself. :)
Posted by: Porchlight | May 01, 2009 at 12:50 PM
having seen my share of odd women's shoes, chacon a sont gout, as the French say. I'm much more interested in Tony Bennet's opinion of Obama, which he bestowed upon us today....the male version of "he's so dreamy".
Tony, stick to your day job.....
Posted by: matt | May 01, 2009 at 01:03 PM
Ouch!
"As the family's primary dog walker, Michelle clearly requires comfortable footwear.
"I got up at 5:15 in the morning to walk my puppy," she joked Thursday. "That's how my day starts. Even though the kids are supposed to do a lot of the work, I'm still up at 5:15 a.m. taking my dog out.""
When Momma's not happy, nobody's happy!
Posted by: Mustang0302 | May 01, 2009 at 01:05 PM
BARRY, WALK THE DOG NOW!!!
Posted by: Ann | May 01, 2009 at 01:07 PM
I am soooooooo headed for a reeducation center.
It was nice knowing you guys. :)
Posted by: Ann | May 01, 2009 at 01:11 PM
Get a leash!
Posted by: Mustang0302 | May 01, 2009 at 01:14 PM
Those sneakers at a food bank? Hey, let 'em eat huraches.
Posted by: lurking | May 01, 2009 at 01:18 PM
FLOTUS is wearing French sneakers? Which first lady was it who caught hell in the press for not patronizing American designers? Probably Nancy Reagan.
Glad to hear Rush has it. It would be a crime not to use that $540 next time the Prez touts a $400 "rebate." I can hear it now: Some tax break, eh -- wouldn't even buy his wife a pair of sneakers! That's definitely one for you too, Jane.
Pearlized toes? My how things have changed. We used to head outside to rub dirt on our sneakers and then run them through the washing machine so they wouldn't look new when we wore them for the first time.
That dog-walking-I-too-know-sorrow is typical, but I have to say, she sure does a whole lot more to connect with "ordinary folks" than her husband does. They eat every detail of this stuff up. if you don't have your Lanvin's already, you'll have to wait till the knock-offs hit the shelves.
Posted by: JM Hanes | May 01, 2009 at 01:34 PM
I see you were there before me, bad. That' typical too.
Posted by: JM Hanes | May 01, 2009 at 01:36 PM
lurking:
FLOTUS goes to the kind of food bank where the clients all have cell phones to take pix with.
Ouch, Ann! Probably one of the out takes from the People Magazine shoot. The b/w photo they chose was bizarre. It's not just that Michelle looked like a Gladys Knight backup singer wannabe, it's that you know she had to have approved it.
Posted by: JM Hanes | May 01, 2009 at 01:44 PM
Ann, looks like the salt vampire from Star Trek. (Posting from a hospital waiting rm. where there's an old lady coughing and she speaks only Spanish.)
Posted by: Dave | May 01, 2009 at 01:44 PM
Heh, JMH, I "defended" Michelle's pricey sneaks over on Tapper's POTUS SCOTUS thread as a mistake often made by the newly rich.
I blamed it all on FLOTUS advisors who were not good at their job.
Posted by: bad | May 01, 2009 at 01:47 PM
Dave, I hope everything is okay and you are just visiting someone.
Posted by: bad | May 01, 2009 at 01:56 PM
♥ bad ♥
Posted by: JM Hanes | May 01, 2009 at 01:56 PM
Hope you are okay, Dave.
Stay away from the coughing Spanish granny. Yikes!
Posted by: Ann | May 01, 2009 at 02:04 PM
It was awful of me, JMH, sounding supportive while actually skewering the first couple.
I do that all the time at Tapper.
Posted by: bad | May 01, 2009 at 02:05 PM
Ann,
I am blowing that picture up to use in my garden. I've had a problem with critters lately. One look at that face and I suspect my critter problem will be over.
Posted by: Sue | May 01, 2009 at 02:05 PM
I wonder what Crazy Joe would advise?
Posted by: Dave | May 01, 2009 at 02:17 PM
I can't even get a link to post and Extraneus can post a picture in JOM comments? I call discrimination! :)
The shoes are hideous and the cost for a pair of tennis shoes is obscene.
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | May 01, 2009 at 04:39 PM
It would be a crime not to use that $540 next time the Prez touts a $400 "rebate."
My rebate, according to the letter I rec'd this past week, is only going to be $250.
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | May 01, 2009 at 04:42 PM
Sara, be sure to read the fine print about who will end up paying taxes on that $250 and save accordingly for tax time next year.
Posted by: bad | May 01, 2009 at 04:53 PM
Did the Obama's ever pay back their college loans? For some reason that question sticks in my head as a result of something Michelle said a long time ago. I would certainly hope that they did. otherwise it might even be viewed as embarassing by the MSM if they're blowing 540 bucks on sneakers with that debt to the nation still outstanding. And if half brother whoever in Kenya only earns 20 dollars a month, that would take him, lets see, 4 and a half years to earn enough to buy this pair of shoes. Wonder if Michelle Obama is still ashamed of her country?
Posted by: daddy | May 01, 2009 at 06:00 PM
Bill Whittle makes the glowing, radioactive rubble bounce in Jon Liebowitz' grid square.
16:46 video; worth every minute.
Liebowitz is a putz. Remember September of your senior year in H.S., running into that guy who graduated last June, yet keeps showing up at the H.S. parties, hitting on sophomores, bragging about all the cool things he's gonna/woulda/coulda/shoulda- do...
Didja hear he hosted the Oscars once?
Loser.
Posted by: Mustang0302 | May 01, 2009 at 07:20 PM
Bill Whittle video link.
Posted by: Mustang0302 | May 01, 2009 at 07:26 PM
I love ya daddy, but you don't have to do math in the cockpit, do you?
Posted by: JM Hanes | May 01, 2009 at 08:45 PM
JMH
You got me there. Ughhh, I feel stupid...but it won't be the first time. Arggggh!
Posted by: daddy | May 02, 2009 at 05:31 AM
Loser.
Liebowitz makes me glad I don't have cable. I realize humor is subjective but I can't see how anybody can find such a rudderless preening jackass enjoyable to watch.
Posted by: Captain Hate | May 02, 2009 at 06:53 AM
Every man woman and child in America should watch Whittle's video. Wow, just Wow.
Posted by: verner | May 02, 2009 at 08:22 AM
And you do it so well.
Posted by: Jane | May 02, 2009 at 08:37 AM
Verner - the post at Ace's calls Whittle's piece "brilliantly delivered . . ."
Absolutely - brilliant indeed.
Posted by: centralcal | May 02, 2009 at 09:56 AM