The Death of Dawn Johnsen's Nomination

[IndianaGreen]

Published on Saturday, April 10, 2010 by Salon.com

The Death of Dawn Johnsen's Nomination

by Glenn Greenwald

After waiting 14 months for a confirmation vote that never came, Dawn Johnsen withdrew (Friday) as President Obama's nominee to head the Office of Legal Counsel. As I documented at length when the nomination was first announced in January, 2009, Johnsen was an absolutely superb pick to head an office that plays as vital a role as any in determining the President's record on civil liberties and adherence to the rule of law. With 59 and then 60 Democratic votes in the Senate all year long (which included the support of GOP Sen. Richard Lugar, though the opposition of Dem. Sen. Ben Nelson and shifting positions from Arlen Specter), it's difficult to understand why the White House -- if it really wanted to -- could not have had Johnsen confirmed (or why she at least wasn't included in the spate of recently announced recess appointments).

I don't know the real story behind what happened here -- I had an email exchange with Johnsen this afternoon but she was only willing to provide me her official, pro forma, wholly uninformative statement -- but here's what I do know: virtually everything that Dawn Johnsen said about executive power, secrecy, the rule of law and accountability for past crimes made her an excellent fit for what Candidate Obama said he would do, but an awful fit for what President Obama has done. To see how true that is, one can see the post I wrote last January detailing and praising her past writings, but all one really has to do is to read the last paragraph of her March, 2008 Slate article -- entitled "Restoring Our Nation's Honor" -- in which she outlines what the next President must do in the wake of Bush lawlessness:

The question how we restore our nation's honor takes on new urgency and promise as we approach the end of this administration. We must resist Bush administration efforts to hide evidence of its wrongdoing through demands for retroactive immunity, assertions of state privilege, and implausible claims that openness will empower terrorists. . . .

Here is a partial answer to my own question of how should we behave, directed especially to the next president and members of his or her administration but also to all of use who will be relieved by the change: We must avoid any temptation simply to move on. We must instead be honest with ourselves and the world as we condemn our nation's past transgressions and reject Bush's corruption of our American ideals. Our constitutional democracy cannot survive with a government shrouded in secrecy, nor can our nation's honor be restored without full disclosure.

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2010/04/10-0

One lesson we have learned for the past 14 months is that candidate Obama is not the same person as President Obama. :-(

[seaglass]

1. He certainly is not and what a damn shame. Thanks for posting this. n/t

[Lord Helmet]

2. "I don't know the real story behind what happened here ..."

Exactly ... nonetheless Greenwald's speculation is red meat here for some.

[IndianaGreen]

3. It is an undisputed fact that Dawn Johnsen was not among Obama's recess appointments

I doubt that was an oversight!

[ShortnFiery]

4. No, Obama is willing to DISCUSS anything with liberals and progressives but when it comes ...

time to act, he comes down decidedly on the side of the New Democratic corporate wing of our party. :thumbsdown:

[seaglass]

8. Right, he doesn't know whether she gave it up or it was suggested

that she give it up.

That isn't even the point of Greenwald's post, your attempt at deflection is a failure.

[slipslidingaway]

5. True knr ...

President Obama disagrees with Candidate Obama ...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=133612&mesg_id=133666

Candidate Obama ...

"And we are tired of watching as year after year, candidates offer up detailed health care plans with great fanfare and promise only to see them crushed under the weight of Washington politics and drug and insurance lobbying once the campaign is over.

That is not who we are, that is not who we have to be, enough is enough, it time for us to change."


Links and video ...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=385&topic_id=420430&mesg_id=420457

This part is from the 4:55 mark so the detailed plan by the candidate that could save up to 300 billion was replaced by a deal with the lobbyist Tauzin for 80 billion. The study referenced in the Obama plan may or may not account for the increased enrollment by the baby boomers, 46 million to 79 million over the next twenty years.

Tauzin got a good deal IMO, Medicare and seniors not so much.


From the Obama/Biden HC plan ----

"...Barack Obama and Joe Biden will repeal the ban on direct negotiation with drug companies and use the resulting savings, which could be as high as $30 billion (per year),33 to further invest in improving health care coverage and quality."


Obama's $80 Billion Deal with Pharma Is a Very Bad Deal for Us
By William Greider

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[slipslidingaway]

7. The Inevitable Sacking Of The Dawn Johnsen Nomination

http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2010/04/09/the-inevitable-sacking-of-the-dawn-johnsen-nomination

"There was never any question but that the nomination of Dawn Johnsen to be head of the Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel would be withdrawn. None. Much to the dismay of progressives everywhere who believe in the principles Professor Johnsen has written and stood for, early on in the Obama Administration it was crystal clear Mr. Obama and his Administration had retreated completely from the what has turned out to be empty rhetoric of his campaign and short term in the Senate...

...It is indeed a serious blow to progressives; but far more than that, it is a serious blow to the country and its desire to bring common sense, morality and the rule of law back to the tattered United States Department of Justice. No division of the DOJ has more symbolized the rot, moral and legal decay brought on by the Bush/Cheney Administration than the OLC where the sick and despicable opinions of John Yoo, Jay Bybee and Steve Bradbury emanated from. This is why Dawn Johnsen was both symbolically and pragmatically so critical and so welcomed. But it was not to be; it was never to be.

But Stein, and the rest of the major media that has had their head in the sand and not been paying attention need to wake up and realize that the failure of the Johnsen nomination is NOT and NEVER WAS about a lack of votes. No, it is completely and unequivocally about the failure of Barack Obama and his Administration to support their own nominee and stand up for the values she proffered which led them to select her in the first place. This is about Obama, not the Senate, not Republicans and not about obstruction. From an earlier post..."