Jon Stewart / The Daily Show (unedited interview) takes on Unindicted War Criminal John Yoo

[Land Shark]

The unedited interview, which has much more time and substance than the broadcast, starts here and is broken up into several sections: http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-january-7-2010/daily-show--exclusive---john-yoo-extended-interview-pt--1

My take:

Initially I wondered about legitimating war crimes by having the author of torture memos on the show. But Stewart, as usual, does a good job and implicitly humiliates the corporate media by showing them once again how to do their job and ask hard questions (and still get those kinds of guests on his show).

Selected Highlights

Stewart starts by saying he's "not a constitutional lawyer." While this may appear to undermine his own opinion, on the contrary the firmness with which he opposes torture makes it clear that the wrongfulness of torture is obvious to the layperson. THIS IS CRITICAL BECAUSE a primary way that constitutional rights of detainees are being denied is the claim that a reasonable government worker couldn't know for sure that constitutional rights applied. (I'm not kidding, courts have ruled that)

He introduces Yoo by saying (in his first comment) "you are Infamous."

Effectively points out that "it's a war" (and a perpetual one) on one hand, and then it's not a war for purposes of prisoners of war and the Geneva Conventions creates a "netherworld" of essentially unlimited power. In every case, the justification chosen is the one that increases presidential power.

Tells Yoo his rationales don't make sense. Stewart is bothered at several points, and says so, or physically acts out reflecting his discomfort.

Stewart can't even believe Yoo's position that while we signed a treaty entitled "Convention Against Torture" we never defined what torture WAS. In fact, it's defined in the treaty as shown in the box below, which means that Yoo's position (though he never specifically says so here) is essentially that we don't know what the meaning of the words "ill-treatment" and "severe" are as used in the definition of torture, which is nevertheless the same in US statute as it is in the treaty.

Definition, from Treaty (Article I) and US Statute essentially identical.

"Torture means any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity.

THE ONLY BIG THING TO BE WISHED FOR

Given that Yoo's "issue" was how to "define" torture in what he claims are less severe cases (nobody that's been waterboarded "properly" considers it "un-severe"), he's trying to escape the absolute torture prohibition which, of course, specifically says it admits of "no exceptions whatsoever" under any circumstances, regardless of war or peace or state of emergency.

HOWEVER, "ill-treatment of prisoners or detainees" is a class of crime less severe than torture, but it is still a war crime and, if widespread or systematic, a crime against humanity (whether in time of war or in time of peace).

But, maybe Jon Stewart thought we'd all figure that last part out - that less severe ill-treatment is still a violation -- because the very title of the applicable treaty is:

"CONVENTION AGAINST TORTURE and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment"

It's well recognized that "other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment" is that which is less severe than torture, but still inhumane.

Again, time of war or not is irrelevant: The law admits of no exceptions whatsoever. Despite hundreds of cases applying international law in US courts, the only available tactic to avoid this absolute prohibition is to claim international law no longer applies in US courts. And that's what courts have been asked to hold, and some have.

But international law has been recognized in US Courts at every stage of our history. The Alien Tort State expressly designed for international law claims began in the US in 1789 by act of Congress, and the Constitution also says Congress can "define AND punish" violations of the "Law of Nations." The Constitution provides no authority for EXCUSING violations of the law of nations. Indeed, the Declaration of Independence is in large part an appeal to international law and the community of nations to hear our reasons for separation from Great Britain, and declares the only purpose for which governments are created is to "secure" individual rights, i.e guarantee them.

The Bush administration has turned the American way on its head by approaching the whole issue as whether "Congress intended to GRANT rights to detainees, etc."

Free governments don't GRANT rights, they guarantee them.

Dictators GRANT rights - making the public entirely dependent on the leaders.

Regardless of outcomes in US courts, international law applies in international tribunals, beyond any doubt. In fact, to even ask the question of whether international law applies in international tribunals is absurd, because it is a question that answers itself: Of course international law applies in international tribunals. That's why the US feels it must resist the jurisdiction, as against all Americans, of the International Court of Justice.

Once again, a professional comedian does an enormously better job than MSM "journalists."

Part I starts at this link below. Jon Stewart shows the book, but does not, as he so often says, say "Buy this book." Good for him.

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-january-7-2010/daily-show--exclusive---john-yoo-extended-interview-pt--1

[Solly Mack]

1. K&R

I'm watching now. (I'm in Germany)

[arcadian]

2. Good stuff, thanks for breaking it down.

K&R

[Land Shark]

11. You're most welcome. n/t

[Soylent Brice]

3. can't watch from here but bookmarked for later.

and thank you for the breakdown.

K&R

[Desertrose]

4. You definitely need to watch the entire interview.

The way I see it, this whole book and rewriting what constitutes "torture" is nothing more than an attempt to cover the Bush administration's ass for future indictments re the Geneva Convention.

John's logic was impeccable and that slippery Yoo NEVER gave a direct answer. Good choice Bush administration...this guy is as slimey as they come- plus he believes his own lies.

[rurallib]

5. Yet again, John Stewart shows why he is one of the few good journalists around

[truedelphi]

13. Ironic, ain't it? n/t

[dotymed]

31. IMO

President Obama should be (at least threatened with) impeached if he does not uphold our (and all signatory nations) laws that forbid this type of treatment to "enemy combatants" or any human being. Obviously, we have a single party with "two heads." I worked my ass off to help get him elected,and to see President Obama completely ignore war crimes and to go as far as to perpetuate these crimes, proves that we have a fascist government. Unfortunately,these actions are only one part of the continuing Fascist government that has replaced our original form of government.

[truedelphi]

46. I'd like to see the look on his face if he were

handed a notice of impeachment.

After all, his party leaders keep saying "impeachment is off the table."

[Journeyman]

6. Thanks for the analysis and links to the article. . .

I didn't watch that segment last night -- too many other things going on -- but knew the full interview would be up this morning and preferred to wait.

Again, thanks for the links and breaking this down. I knew Stewart would acquit himself well, and it'll be nice to send the links to friends.

[berni_mccoy]

7. Yoo ADMITS Waterboarding IS Torture. Listen Carefully near 7:40 in the video

Stewart is getting Yoo to nail down what the open question was that Yoo is addressing. Yoo states the question that had never been answered "What Is Torture?". When talking about capturing the #3 AQ leader, Stewart asks, "So the only two choices America had were Miranda Rights or Water boarding?" Yoo answered, "It's what is in between." that they were trying to determine?

Really, because I thought water boarding was found to be in between.

Yoo is admitting that water boarding is torture, even though that was a practice that was authorized.

[rurallib]

8. I have never heard such twisted logic in my life

I thought Stewart was going to reach across the table and smack Yoo in the smirk.

[Land Shark]

9. With an open hand, three times - approved by John Yoo and "it's a time of war" so....

Jon Stewart for President!

[Rozlee]

50. My question is how Jon could breath in the same air Yoo exhales

and not turn into one of the flesh eating living dead.

[Land Shark]

10. Nuremberg quote: on THE DUTY TO DISOBEY DOMESTIC LAWS

“Individuals have international duties which transcend the national obligations of obedience. Therefore (individual citizens) have the duty to violate domestic laws to prevent crimes against peace and humanity from occurring. –Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunal, Following World War II, 1950

[Land Shark]

22. Note the quote. n/t

[truedelphi]

12. Thak you. Last night I was pleased that my sinuses were keeping me up late enough to see this.

MAny here might have been to bed early, especially if kids and/or jobs get them up before 7Am.

Glad more will know abt it because you took the time to put this on DU.

[Land Shark]

14. I know how bad sinuses can be, so I'm glad you watched it. n/t

[KakistocracyHater]

20. if it is nasal swelling I have that at night, I use nasal strips w/Nexcare cloth

tape; sometimes the strip pops up & the cloth tape I found after looking for awhile for something to hold it down. My nasal passages started swelling at night during the mass fires in Calif. in 08, sometimes one is almost completely shut & I suffer terrible panic attacks because it's hard for me to breathe. I tried nasal sprays, allergy pills-neither works as well as the nasal strips. This 19thC air-quality will eventually get the best of me someday.

[truedelphi]

21. I will try that.

I don't often have an attack at night.

When it is hay fever season, I rely on nettle tea. It tastes like horse piss, but if I drink two cups on any given day, I don't have sinus problems for a month. And it costs about 70 cents a dose!

[KakistocracyHater]

26. hope it helps you, that nettle tea sounds awful though

*

[Mithreal]

33. Consider a neti pot too, immense relief, wish I had learned about them sooner

[Mithreal]

32. Neti Pots really help me with my sinus troubles

[thesquanderer]

15. on getting guests...

re: "humiliates the corporate media by showing them once again how to do their job and ask hard questions (and still get those kinds of guests on his show)."

The difference is that they only come on his show when they have a book to sell.

[Land Shark]

16. Jim Kramer did not have a book to sell, and he came on the show.

I know what you're saying about a book to sell. I've seen people turned down because they DIDN't have a book to sell, so it's not necessarily just guest-driven.

[2 Much Tribulation]

17. kick so more people see this unedited version n/t

[midnight]

18. I disagree with John Stewart on this issue of not holding John Yoo, and those

who broke the law accountable....

[2 Much Tribulation]

19. Did he say that? I didn't catch that or get that message. n/t

[omega minimo]

23. Great job Land Shark. Thanks for taking the time to put this together.

:yourock:

[UTUSN]

24. K&R #33 for, what a PIECE OF SHIT is this ASSHOLE YOO (& i saw both parts)!1 n/t

[Jumping John]

25. Stewart shopuld have nailed Yoo that he decided that the practice that he OKed Bush to use was OK to

use against any of our troops.

[defendandprotect]

27. kick

[defendandprotect]

28. Back tomorrow -- only had time to briefly scan -- thank you!!

And thanks to Jon Stewart!!

Stewart makes you feel at least someone is on duty in US --
and helps confirm whose head is screwed on straight and who the criminals are!

[Bette Noir]

29. Stewart's the best, along with Rachel.

[bluestateboomer]

30. The President's Lawyer?

I always thought that the Solicitor General is "the presidents lawyer" and the the attorneys at the Justice department are the country's lawyers. If that is true, then Yoo misspoke about his duty as a lawyer. Am I right?

[JDPriestly]

34. Yoo's apparent ignorance of the history of the American revolution

and the origin or the policy of our government on torture SINCE THE TIME OF GEORGE WASHINGTON and the Revolutionary War is appalling.

The British army, one of the greatest (if not the greatest) regular, organized military forces of the revolutionary period, tortured and abused our captured revolutionaries. The British viewed our rag-tag, sometimes barefoot, hungry, volunteer army as we view the terrorists of our day. After all, our soldiers did not fight according to the rules. To the British they were more like a gang of violent thugs than a real army of a real country. The British did not consider our revolutionary army to be protected by the rules of war commonly accepted at the time. (David Hackett Fischer,Washington's Crossing.)

No question, the ideals of our revolutionaries were more noble, more legitimate than those of the terrorists. Our revolutionaries were defending their homes, their right to self-government and other very personal economic, political, social and property rights, not attacking someone else's country. (Although the British considered the U.S. to be theirs.)

Nevertheless, the British ran their swords through our some of surrendering men, imprisoned others in inhuman conditions, allowed them to starve and, in certain cases, tortured them.

In contrast, George Washington, setting a precedent that, as far as we know, was for the most part unbroken until George W. Bush and John Yoo, showed respect for the prisoners he took. Washington even abstained from torturing the mercenary Hessian prisoners.

Interestingly, Washington's humane policy benefited our country. A good number of the Hessian mercenaries stayed in or returned to America after the Revolution. By treating them with dignity, America won their hearts and minds.

In the same way, we won the hearts and minds of German prisoners of war who were "imprisoned" on American farms during WWII. (I personally met some of these Germans when I lived in Germany and Austria some years ago.)

The Civil War was a far greater threat to our nation than Al Qaeda. So was the War of 1812. We have faced much more dangerous enemies and upheld our respect for human rights.

John Yoo and George W. Bush have brought great dishonor to our country.

Whether or not he faces an international tribunal, Yoo will be judged in the fine print at the bottoms of pages of textbooks on the Constitution -- as a villain in the history of international human rights.

Jon Stewart did a great job. He is brilliant. He certainly outargued John Yoo.



Yoo is correct in that Alexander Hamilton argued in the Federalist Papers and that the Constitution provides that the president is the commander in chief of the military and the militia in times of war. But, in Federalist Paper No. 69, in which Hamilton compares the limited powers of the president to those of a monarch, Hamilton points out that the Constitution limits the president's powers even when acting as commander in chief.

Specifically, it is to Congress that the Constitution assigns the authority to "declare War, grant Letters of marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water." (Article I, Section 8 (11). Yoo claims that members of Congress were advised of the torture. They were advised but also sworn to secrecy about it. What could they do?

I could go on and on about the flaws in Yoo's thinking. We need an international tribunal to review what happened and to clarify the meaning of torture so that in the future a Bush and a Yoo will not torture. There is no evidence that more information is obtained by using torture than could be obtained without it. No evidence whatsoever.

[zeemike]

38. Thanks for pointing out our policy in WW2

We did not torture our prisoners and in fact treated them very well...and it was this treatment that gave us a great deal of intelligence.
The fact was that it was well known among our enemy troops that they would be treated well that cause many of them to want to be captured by the Amdricans...I too knew some of those Germans that liked it so much that they became citizens. And that is how we got Von Brawn and the rocket scientist from Germany.

[JDPriestly]

45. Yes, ordinary Germans and Austrians found refuge

in areas occupied by American soldiers. I was there many years after the war, and people in the small towns and villages in which we lived truly loved Americans based on their experiences in the war. Love your enemies and there is a good chance they will learn to love you.

[zeemike]

49. i encountered one while in the navy in the early 60s

He was a Sargent in the Mariens....He was captured when by the American forces when he was 15 and was so grateful (I guess) he joined the US Marine corp and made a carrier out of it.
Yep love works.

[Land Shark]

40. Yeah, I suspect Yoo is deeply wrong on history, but I haven't read the book so can't detail n/t

[mmonk]

35. The rule of law. It is why impeachment of the Bush administration was imperative.

It is why violators of the law from the Bush administration should be pursued instead of protected from legal remedy by the DOJ like it is currently. We have lived through a great assault on our Constitution and laws. We will still live it for generations to come if we do nothing which looks like our course. We now are ruled. We the people no longer applies even in concept without practicing it. The Republicans have been apt enemies of our Constitution, complete with "Federalist Society" judges sprinkled through our court system. They have literally changed the US into something else. And we as a generation of Democrats have been damned by one of the weakest Democratic Parties in our party's history. The DLC stench is tacit.

[The Wizard]

36. Call in the kidnappers

and let the International Courts do their business. The most immoral pack of scumbags in our history has committed crimes against humanity in our names.
As Shakespeare's Shylock said, "If you wrong us, shall we not revenge?"
The only way to begin our restoration will be war crimes trials for the Bush cartel.
If the Obama Administration continues the cover up, Obama will be a one term president.
Adroit lying does not constitute good law. John Yoo, please step up to the scaffold.

[H2O Man]

37. Recommended.

Thanks for this.

[The_Commonist]

39. I think that people like Yoo...

...and Bush and Cheney for that matter, are able to come up with twisted justifications for torture, because they are themselves twisted and tortured. That man has obviously never gotten laid, at least not properly, and he's a sick and twisted little douche. The fact that we let people like this anywhere near the halls of power says a lot about us as a people. We should be ashamed. Collectively, we are twisted and tortured, and we really need to do something about it...

[Land Shark]

41. That echoes a quote by Albert Camus about the tortured nature of torturers

Though whether it applies to those who order instigate and justify like Yoo is a different issue, but not one completely unamenable to resolution.

[DisgustedInMN]

42. I'm thinking...

... how's about we "waterboard" John Yoo, Darth Cheney, The Smirking Chimp, et al a few hundred times each and the n see what they have to..

... oh yeah..

That includes all of the Dems in the current Administration refusing to do the right thing. ALL of them.

[Land Shark]

44. Lincoln, on seeing slavery defended, felt an "abiding interest" in trying slavery on the defenders

It's a certain kind of application of the Golden Rule - a form of reciprocity.

[crim son]

43. So, it's exactly what we all thought it was. A crime,

Yoo has absolutely no success trying to prove otherwise.

[Buzz Clik]

47. It begins and ends with Yoo. Without him, the illegal activities of the Bush admin don't exist.

Orange jump suit. Frog march. Soon. Please???!!!!

[Catshrink]

48. He claims he never met Bush.

That is just weird.