Another lib cause falls by the wayside. Big on talk, small on substance, and void of action. Hope and change. Does Holder do anything besides protect Black Panthers?

Does Holder do anything besides protect Black Panthers?
#1 | Posted by cookfish

Clearly he protects the previous administration too. What's your point?

"Just maybe poor judgment...."

Well, that's a start. These kids were guilty of poor judgment? Want to affirm that idea with some clear words? And the judgment of Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld---Who ran with their "findings". Any problems there?

This was a conspiracy.

Bush cheney etal worked with yoo and Bybee to prepare a justification for what they knew was illegal.

Bush cheney etal KNEW that they were going to authorize illegal activities. They KNEW that if they had a legal paper they would be protected by the defense of "based on legal advise". They directed yoo and bybee in preparing their blatantly wrong advise. Cheney even admitted to it. "yoo and bybee worked with them to develop their toture policies"

This is circular protection- and a conspiracy.

The fact that none of these asshats is going to be held accountable is a travesty.

The fact that none of these asshats is going to be held accountable is a travesty.
#4 | Posted by truthhurts

Hey, truth, what can you do? Political change is incremental. Or so I'm told.

unfortunately it is incrementally worse, obama will live off this precedent and the next pres will expand further etc.

That's been my fear for a long time.

"Just maybe poor judgment...."

Well, that's a start.

#3 | Posted by Zed at 2010-02-22 08:14 AM | Reply | Flag:

No, Zed, that's an end. Ya' gotta face the fact that much of your shrieking about Bush was a silly waste -- just like I and a host of others tried to help you see. You thought we were all defending Bush; in fact we were looking at it from a point of reality and hoping you could reach taht point also.

I guess you could still hold out hope that the Hague will try Bush and Cheney for war crimes (s~n~i~c~k~e~r) or you could wash your face, put on a clean shirt and face the day.

"Ya got to face the fact that much of your shrieking about Bush was a silly waste..."

VERNON---My consistently held position on human torture has always been the morally and legally correct one-----Your shrieking notwithstanding.

"We were looking at it from the point of view of reality...."

It was always just "reality" as you had a taste for it, VERNON. It is, and was, a nasty and useless place.

As I've remarked oountless times, I'm glad I'm on my side of the fence here. I'll never agree with your position, fearing for my soul. Just as I wouldn't agree with JACKASS' cute ideas about the Jews for just that reason.

#9 | Posted by Zed at 2010-02-22 08:48 AM | Reply | Flag:

Life sucks, then you die

Get over yourself.

And please, get over your smug self-righteousness -- unless you are determined to put your actual life and treasure at risk.

Are you? Of course not. You are comfortable watching such things on the History Channel while you order pizza

The ugly reality is that governments throughout time have done ugly things. Let us consider just a few:

1. The Nazi Holocaust

2. The Japanese Horrors in Korea, China and the Philippines

3. The British firestorms of Dresden and Hamburg; the bombings of Kaiserslautern

What are your indignant views about these events?

You know, it's good to see a rwingnut apologist like Vermin admit that America as torturer fits well on the list of atrocities he posts.

Clearly he protects the previous administration too. What's your point?

You do relaize how stupid you sound, don't you? Holder has tried to prosecute CIA agents, close Gitmo, have KSM tried in NYC, and now this - all failures. Tell me which of these actions did the previous administration approve of? Holder's problem is that he's an ineffective incompetent toady who shouldn't be holding this position, not that he agrees with or protects anything from before.

Yeah! I'm sure glad the Bush DOJ only prosecuted terrorists in military tribunals.... oh, wait.... they tried that twice and still ended up in criminal court like all their hundreds of other terrorist prosecutions.... never mind.

John Ashcroft: Civilian Trials For Terrorists Have 'Use And Utility'

In an acknowledgment that throws a wrench in Republican talking points, former Attorney General John Ashcroft said on Friday that the criminal justice system does, indeed, have a role to play in trying terrorist suspects.

In an interview with the Huffington Post at the Conservative Political Action Conference, the former Bush administration official said that there are "a variety of tools that ought to be available to an administration" in its efforts to curb terrorism and bring terrorists to justice.

Asked specifically about holding civilian trials for terrorists, he said such a venue "has use and utility."

When asked how to distinguish whether to use a military tribunal system or criminal courts for terrorist suspects, Ashcroft said: "It depends on the circumstances."

"Our priority should be a priority of preventing further terrorist attacks and to automatically allocate people from one system to another without understanding what best achieves that priority would in my judgment be less than optimal," he said.

Ashcroft did not specifically address the Obama administration's plans to place 9/11 plotter Khalid Sheikh Mohammed on trial in a New York criminal court. (His handlers whisked him away before he could tackle the topic).

But his admission that the criminal justice system has a useful role to play in trying terrorist suspects puts him squarely at odds with many conservatives. Republican lawmakers have spent the past few months railing at Attorney General Eric Holder for placing KSM through the criminal system. They have repeatedly criticized the Obama administration for doing the same with the Christmas Day airline plotter.

Story continues below
Newly elected Sen. Scott Brown (R-Mass) jabbed the president repeatedly for the move while campaigning for office: "Our tax dollars should go to weapons to defeat [terrorists] not lawyers to defend them," he said repeatedly.

The debate used to be far more nuanced within the GOP. Under the Bush administration there was a clear divide over those who insisted military tribunals were the way to go and those who felt the criminal justice system had and could try terrorists suspects. Indeed, under Ashcroft, the Bush Justice Department actually took pride in the number of terrorism-related convictions it was able to secure in criminal settings.

Strange days when Ashcroft is the voice of reason.

And the judgment of Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld---Who ran with their "findings". Any problems there?

#3 | Posted by Zed at 2010-02-22 08:14 AM

How about the dem lawmakers that were briefed, complicit and wondered if the techniques went far enough?

And please, get over your smug self-righteousness
#10 | Posted by vernon | Flag: Unbelievably Clueless

This shit just keeps writing itself.

-Strange days when Ashcroft is the voice of reason.

And Gates and Petraeus.....

You know, it's good to see a rwingnut apologist like Vermin admit that America as torturer fits well on the list of atrocities he posts.

#11 | Posted by Corky at 2010-02-22 10:27 AM | Reply | Flag:

What the fuck does that even mean?

In English, if you are able

You know, it's good to see a rwingnut apologist like Vermin admit that America as torturer fits well on the list of atrocities he posts.

#11 | Posted by Corky at 2010-02-22 10:27 AM | Reply | Flag:

Oh, wait ......

It's one of those things about screaming and screeching toward sobriety ... or in your case ... reality

shake your head back and forth

Yoo was cleared over the 'torture memos'

You wasted a big piece of your life fussing about nothing

try to find reality

The ugly reality is that governments throughout time have done ugly things. Let us consider just a few:
1. The Nazi Holocaust
2. The Japanese Horrors in Korea, China and the Philippines
3. The British firestorms of Dresden and Hamburg; the bombings of Kaiserslautern
What are your indignant views about these events?

Sure, because attempting to right the wrongs of the previous administration is exactly the same as what happened 60-something years ago.

Do you actually believe the shit you post, Vern?

Yoo was cleared over the 'torture memos'
You wasted a big piece of your life fussing about nothing

Just because he was cleared doesn't mean it was nothing. It just means we can't do shit about it anymore.

Clearly he protects the previous administration too.

#2 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2010-02-22 08:12 AM

It's not criminal to write a bad legal opinion. It's not unethical to write a wrong legal opinion. It's wrong to do a terrible job, a negligent job, etc. That said, I think this was a terrible and negligent job, if not a purposefully wrong opinion. I'm not sure why the DOJ is not going after them for an ethics violation. However, this does NOT mean the individual Bar Associations cannot go after them. The DOJ has nothing to do with their licenses to practice.

You know, it's good to see a rwingnut apologist like Vermin admit that America as torturer fits well on the list of atrocities he posts.

#11 | Posted by Corky at 2010-02-22 10:27 AM | Reply | Flag:

Your beloved dem party was just as complicit as the repubs. They were briefed and just as culpable.

On February 19, Attorney General Eric Holder took part in the time-honored Washington tradition of dumping undesired news on Friday afternoons or evenings. After weeks of leaks, the Justice Department officially exonerated Bush-era lawyers John Yoo and Jay Bybee, the authors of the original legal opinions on the lawfulness of the CIA interrogation program, which are known pejoratively as the "torture memos" to critics.

All wrong All wrong.....

So, exactly when did politically appointed lawyers acquire the power to make those kinds of orders?

This is a sham and everyone knows it! If you implicate them, you implicate dick-shrub. And that ain't gonna happen, much to my chagrin.

LMAO... If I were a Democrat who actually believed Obama I would be really pissed off at this point in his presidency.

Shit I'm starting to wish I had voted for the guy. Nuke plants and guns in national parks are about the only things that have changed.

But remember that speech in Berlin? That was awesome! LOL

Imagine that!!! A bunch of fucking weasels saying 2 other weasels are just a couple of swell guys. Nothing to see here. Move on along.

Vermin Loyalty before Country or party.

The Nation and Harper's document not merely the torture, but the murders of Islamic captives in Guantanamo and elsewhere. The Obama administration's refusal to prosecute the Bush Mafia for Murder One merely proves that our LEGITIMATELY elected president still seeks to woo into his Big Tent bushy and tea-bagging types whose lone objective in politics remains getting Da Niggah out of the White House. herm

All that typing just so Herm could drop an N-bomb... lol how precious

Herm, what if Da Niggah fills in for Nurse Mildred Ratched tonight?

"Life sucks then you die...."

What a little ray of sunshine. You're on my prayer list now, VERNON.

"The ugly reality is that governments throughout time have done ugly things...."

Absolutely. I've studied one of two of them in some detail. My question is: So what? To say there is and has been sewage is not a mandate for I and Thou to behave like crap.

"What are you indignant views about these events (Dresden, etc.)...."

That they should never have happened. Your point?

"What are you indignant views about these events (Dresden, etc.)...."
That they should never have happened. Your point?

#35 | POSTED BY ZED

Never should have happened?

There's a reason they're called the "Greatest Generation," and its because they knew how to win a fucking war. They didn't give a shit about who they were going to offend, or hearts and minds, or separating the citizenry from its leadership. Germany and Japan declared war on the world and so they gave them all they could stomach and then a shit ton more. And surprise, surprise, sur-fucking-surprise... they won, convincingly. And Japan and Germany haven't been a problem since.

I think we need to get that mentality back in this country.

"Never should have happened...."

That's right. Dresden was a city of little or no military significance, declared to be "open". It was destroyed when the Allies knew victory was inevitable and a very short time away

Dresden was also priceless in terms of architecture. One of the most beauthiful cities in the world until it was immolated.

Like I said to VERNON, ROB---Applauding open sewers just encourages people to take craps.

Dresden was a city of little or no military significance

Different mindset back then. It wasn't about someone's opinion of "military significance," it was about fighting a war. Maybe Germany shouldn't have started slaughtering millions of innocents in a bid to take over the world.

Dresden was also priceless in terms of architecture. One of the most beauthiful cities in the world until it was immolated.

In your opinion who is to blame for its destruction, the Allied Forces or Germany?

One more quick question, how many times since WWII has Germany been a problem?

"Different mindset back then...."

No. Dresden had no military significance in 1945. None. If it had, it coud have been bombed years before 1945. Never was.

"It was about fighting a war...."

Which, in order to win, necessarily means you don't sling shit around to no apparent purpose.

"In your opinion, who is to blame for it's destruction....?"

I'm afraid I classify Dresden as a war crime. Had the Germans won, someone would have hung for it. Curtis LeMay KNEW that about his own activities over Japan.

You don't know about Louvain, in Belgium. The year was 1914. Look it up. There are a lot of similarities.

In further news... It was leaked to the Washington Post today that In further closed session questioning Mr. Yoo was asked if the President had the right to light the farts on fire of an entire village...

Senator Goody..... Mr Yoo are you saying that the president has the authority to commit Mass Fart lighting on a villages civilian population.......

Mr. Yoo Ah yes sir... Farts on fire as well...

Mr. Yoo The Pro Torture Lawyer went on to further explain. The President can light farts on fire, make them eat each others buggers, slap the pee pee and pinch the buttock...

Senator Goody Then there's nothing in the constitution on Barring the fart lighting

Mr. Yoo.... No sir... Fart lighting isn't specifically barred nor mentioned... Though in the 1780's we are not aware that the framers of the constitution had that type of advanced technology or the need there of

Senator Goody... I see....

More closed door hearings will be held tomorrow due to the sensitivity of the issues being discussed.

The Man-
Actually, Yoo was asked if it was legal for the President (any US President, ostensibly including Obama and the future President Palin) to massacre an entire village of civilians.

His answer was, "Sure".

This is the person to whom the previous admin. went for legal advice and cover.

And you defend such a right for Obama and all future executives?

"Themaniscoming"-

At what point is the President subject to our own laws?

Blowjobs? Do you draw the line at blowjobs?

Blowjobs? Do you draw the line at blowjobs?

If the president's actions result in the spillage of bodily fluids or excreta (his own or another person's), you only need apply the "color test". It's a little-known part of the 10th amendment.

If the fluids spilled are red, brown, yellow, or clear, whatever the president did is okay.

If the fluids spilled are white and gooey, whatever the president did is an impeachable offense.

In a previous conversation, Yoo was asked if it would be within the legal authority of the President to authorize that the testicles of a child of a detainee be crushed.

His answer was affirmative in this case as well.

At what point does is the President subject to law, or even common decency?

(Just Blowjobs?)

Blowjobs? Do you draw the line at blowjobs?

This just in... A recent gallop poll was taken to survey Americans on the performance of past Presidents compared to the Current President... 99% of the people polled believe that president Bill Clinton Didn't draw any lines when it came to Blowjobs"

83% of the people polled felt that (Apparently)the president has the right to draw lines where ever the hell he wishes...

At what point is the President subject to our own laws?

Blowjobs? Do you draw the line at blowjobs?

You have problem with BJ's...

How about making them eat each others buggers, slapping the pee pee and pinching the buttock...

re: 83% of the people polled felt that (Apparently)the president has the right to draw lines where ever the hell he wishes...

#45 | Posted by themaniscoming at 2010-02-22 11:46 PM | Reply | Flag:

Yeah. That's in the Constitution somewhere, I'm sure: "Herewith, when over 80% of the people according to numbers "Theman..." pulls out of his ass think that the Executive is above the law, then it shall be so, as long as he "keeps us safe".

re: How about making them eat each others buggers, slapping the pee pee and pinching the buttock...

#46 | Posted by themaniscoming at 2010-02-22 11:51 PM | Reply | Flag:

How about torturing them to death?

Is that cool?

It is according to Yoo, but that's soo been done, so I suppose the question is moot.

I suppose the question is moot.

Moot? What's moot... Slapping the pee pee .... The forcing them to eat each others buggers or the pinching the buttocks...

Or... Are way back to Farts On Fire????

The interrogation and detention regime implemented by the U.S. resulted in the deaths of over 100 detainees in U.S. custody -- at least. While some of those deaths were the result of "rogue" interrogators and agents, many were caused by the methods authorized at the highest levels of the Bush White House, including extreme stress positions, hypothermia, sleep deprivation and others. Aside from the fact that they cause immense pain, that's one reason we've always considered those tactics to be "torture" when used by others -- because they inflict serious harm, and can even kill people. Those arguing against investigations and prosecutions -- that we Look to the Future, not the Past -- are thus literally advocating that numerous people get away with murder.

The record could not be clearer regarding the fact that we caused numerous detainee deaths, many of which have gone completely uninvestigated and thus unpunished. Instead, the media and political class have misleadingly caused the debate to consist of the myth that these tactics were limited and confined. As Gen. Barry McCaffrey recently put it:

We should never, as a policy, maltreat people under our control, detainees. We tortured people unmercifully. We probably murdered dozens of them during the course of that, both the armed forces and the C.I.A.

re: Moot? What's moot... Slapping the pee pee .... The forcing them to eat each others buggers or the pinching the buttocks...

I suppose we are back to where we began, with you defending murder and techniques that you would condemn as torture if they were done to our own.

...just another example of a broken judicial system.

"The man"-
(I think this is where you play the moral relativist and abandon all principle by claiming that our enemies are much worse.)

SO the Fart Lighting is out then..... Good... What ever makes you happy......

And where do you stand on the Pee Pee Slapping then?

I'm afraid I classify Dresden as a war crime.

I classify it under, "Don't start a World War and then cry when you get your shit handed to you."

Same with Tokyo, Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Again I have to ask, how many times have Germany and Japan been a problem since we annihilated their cities (whether militarily significant, or just fun to blow up)?

Now would also be a good time to explain how the treatment McCain received at the hands of his captors differs in any legitimate way with what was approved by Rumsfeld/Cheney/Bush.

(I think this is where you play the moral relativist and abandon all principle by claiming that our enemies are much worse.)

...just another example of a broken judicial system.

Well... I don't know about the Judicial system...... Being Broken... I would think that compared to Cigars in the Vagina a little pee pee slapping is no big deal....

The Farts on Fire... Well the Jury is still out on that one.... Gallop polls have suggested that Most Americans would much rather drop them all into a big wood chipper feet first because pee pee slapping has been deemed too harsh.... And besides... It's soooooo 70's

Rob-
re: Again I have to ask, how many times have Germany and Japan been a problem since we annihilated their cities (whether militarily significant, or just fun to blow up)?

#55 | Posted by Rob_The_A_Hole at 2010-02-23 12:14 AM | Reply | Flag:

And the lesson you've learned from this as it applies to the current state?

"The Man"-
re: The Farts on Fire... Well the Jury is still out on that one.... Gallop polls have suggested that Most Americans would much rather drop them all into a big wood chipper feet first because pee pee slapping has been deemed too harsh...

I don't know where you get off on the penis slapping, but there have been at least a hundred documented cases of detainees being killed in our custody.

"The Man"-

re: Gallop polls have suggested that Most Americans would much rather drop them all into a big wood chipper feet first...

I'd like to see the polls cited, and understand what you mean by "them all"...

claiming that our enemies are much worse

No... I think you are mistaken... I don't think the enemy is worse.... I haven't heard of them doing Any Pee Pee slapping or Farts on Fire technique.... Lucky for us.... I think our soldiers are much more comfortable knowing that the Taliban will just cut off their heads if they are captured.... They tend to become completely terrified at the thought of the Pee Pee Slapping...

Theman-
You are really, really good at remaining ignorant; I'll give you that. It's like talking to someone who mumbles to himself without any outside help. An idiot, in other words.

I'd like to see the polls cited, and understand what you mean by "them all"...

Them All? You mean the ones we pee pee slapped and the ones we Farts on Fired too? Yes all of them...

what Margolis actually said(p. 67):
For all of the above reasons, Iam not prepared to conclude that the circumstantial evidence much of which is contradicted by the witness testimony regarding Yoo's efforts establishes by a preponderance of the evidence that Yoo intentionally or recklessly provided misleading advice to his client.It is a close question. I would be remiss in not observing, however, that these memoranda represent an unfortunate chapter in the history of the Office of Legal Counsel.

Just think about that for a minute. Margolis said that whether Yoo "intentionally or recklessly provided misleading advice to his client" when authorizing torture -- about the most serious accusation one can make against a lawyer, as it means he deliberately made false statements about the law -- "is a close question." That's the precise opposite of what Burck and Perino told National Review readers about Margolis' conclusion.

As leading political scientists have long documented, the actual hallmark of under-developed and backward nations is the immunity which political elites enjoy from the rule of law no matter how serious their crimes.

excerpted from Glenn Greenwald

Before I go, and just out of curiousity, "The Man", where did this "pee pee slapping" nonsense you are fixated with come from?
,

You are really, really good at remaining ignorant; I'll give you that. It's like talking to someone who mumbles to himself without any outside help. An idiot, in other words.

This from a guy who cheers at the movie theater when James Bond kills a terrorist by half drowning him in the toilet then shooting him with a pistol...

You can't have it both ways man.... Either we slap the Pee Pee or we Farts on Fire them or we just let them go.. Whats your decision....

I say Farts on Fire!!!

re: This from a guy who cheers at the movie theater when James Bond kills a terrorist by half drowning him in the toilet then shooting him with a pistol...

No, that's a movie fucktard. Do you understand the difference between fiction and reality (unless it comes to "Pee Pee slapping"?????)

good night

And the lesson you've learned from this as it applies to the current state?

#58 | POSTED BY BETELG

When dealing with a population of extremists you can't just attack the militant ones, you have to reach back and punch the entire population in the mouth.

Germany got fucked up from WWI, but the German people apparently had some fight left in them and came back pretty hard almost taking over all of Europe. So we level as many of their buildings as we can see (civilian or military) and all of a sudden they're the most peaceful sons of bitches you can find.

"So we level as many of their buildings as we can see (civilian or military) and all of a sudden they're the most peaceful sons of bitches you can find."

Gee, what great logic. I wonder if you'll feel the same way after China levels as many of our buildings as they can. Will you all of a sudden become the most peaceful son of a bitch you can find?

re: When dealing with a population of extremists you can't just attack the militant ones, you have to reach back and punch the entire population in the mouth.

So, do you mean Islam itself, and every country with a significant Muslim population?

I'll look for your answer tomorrow , Rob.

I wonder if you'll feel the same way after China levels as many of our buildings as they can. Will you all of a sudden become the most peaceful son of a bitch you can find?

#71 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

Why would China attack us? What provocation have we given them. Shit, how would they get all their money back? Think out your hyperbole a little first.

So, do you mean Islam itself, and every country with a significant Muslim population?

#72 | POSTED BY BETELG

I mean Iraq and Afghanistan.

"Why would China attack us?"

The Bush Doctrine.

The Bush Doctrine.

#76 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

Bush is the president of China?

**"That Bush officials have to cling to the harsh condemnations of Margolis as "vindication" reveals just how wretched and lawless their conduct was. Essentially, the current posture of the U.S. to the world is this:

Yes, we implemented a worldwide torture regime that we justified with lawyers' memoranda that were false, wrong, shoddy, lawless, sloppy and extremist, but because those lawyers were such warped radicals, they probably believed what they were saying at the time, so we're going to declare that we had the right to do what we did and are shielded from all consequences, even though we've signed treaties agreeing to prosecute anyone who authorizes torture and demanded that other nations prosecute their own torturers. Besides, we have important things to do and thus want to Look Forward, not Backward.

Doesn't that make you proud?"

**Glenn Greenwald ICH

"Again I have to ask...."

ROB---In your defense of Dresden, you essentially make the argument that----If a dog bites you, set fire to it, it won't bite you again.

Concepts of fundamental morality, you just don't appear to have. You don't care about that, it makes you tired. VERNON doesn't care about that, it makes him pissed.

That makes you both good little Germans from any objective point of view. You wonder how WWII happpened? You shouldn't.

I'd never give either one of you a scintilla of power, and I wouldn't let you supervise kids younger than seventeen.

You fellows prate on and on about what realists you are. That's another thing you guys have in common with the Germans and the Japs during WWII, you see yourselves as realists. There was something wrong with them, and there's something wrong with you.

Senator Goody... Ah... Mr. Yoo..... Would it be fair to say that the President of the United States has the Power in your opinion to Crush the nuts of suspected terrorists?

Mr. Yoo... Ah.... Yes sir.... We looked into that also... And Nut Cracking and crushing is not barred in the Constitution... Sir....

Senator Goody..... I see... Well then perhaps you can explain this report by the CIA Interrogation oversight committee stating that Akmehed ....

Mr. Yoo... Interrupts nervously... I am unaware of that report and can not comment on subject matter I have no previous knowledge of...

Senator Goody... Well then.... Mister Yoo..... Akmehed Zimbooby a prisoner held at Gitmo, Who wrote in his newly released book, States that and I quote... "The guard on my cell block took great pleasure in squeezing my nuts until they popped!"

Mr.Yoo... I have to deny any knowledge of this alleged incident... The fact that mr. Zimbooby is it... Wrote that in his book does not mean that it is accurate... We do not allow Slowly squeezing the Nuts until they pop... That I can assure you... That is Inhumane and would never be sanctioned by any White House Administration.... The President is However authorized to order the Nuts be Smashed... But... I must say the smashing is to be done in one quick motion.... Never in a vise.... And... Certainly never to be done by hand.... We have Machines for that Senator.... And the slow squeezing being claimed by the former prisoner has never been corroborated.

Senator Goody... Okey Mr. Yoo I'll let you explain how you can be certain that this never happened......

Mr. Yoo... Well Senator.... Just because the man said it doesn't necessarily mean it's accurate... I mean.... The guard may have been attempting to Whack the Pee Pee or Light the prisoners Farts on fire, Both sanctioned in the Constitution as actions the President can take on the War On Terror to Keep the People Safe, when the prisoners Nuts became caught between the Guards hand and the Chair.... Perhaps if the prisoner had remained perfectly still while the Pee Pee whacking was being administered his nuts would not have been injured.... Um... Sir...

Senator Goody... I see.... And do you know if to this day..... Under the Obama administration, if this Pee Pee Smacking and Lighting of Prisoners Farts on fire is still taking place Legally.....

Mr. Yoo... May I refer to the report in front of me sir...

Senator Goody.... Yes you may Mr. Yoo...

Mr. Yoo.... Ah..... Ummmm.... Ahh... Yes sir it is.... Right there on page twenty six. Paragraph seventeen..... Smacking the Pee Pee and Farts On Fire Technique... So Um.... Yes sir it is....

Senator Goody.... Thank you Mr. Yoo