One Track Ailment

Why would Bush want one of the chief lawyers favoring the legality of torture, to be in any post whatsoever. Bradbury is back.

From the NY Times: Justice Nomination Seen as Snub to Democrats

Late last year, Democrats urged the White House to withdraw Mr. Bradbury’s name once and for all and find a new candidate for the post (assistant attorney general for legal counsel) after it was disclosed in news reports in October that he was the author of classified memorandums that gave approval to harsh interrogation techniques, including head slapping, exposure to cold and simulated drowning, even when used in combination.

Mr. Bradbury’s memorandums were described by Democrats as an effort by the Bush administration to circumvent laws prohibiting torture and to undermine a public legal opinion issued by the Justice Department in 2004 that declared torture to be “abhorrent.”

Recall that there was no Senate adjournment during the holidays in order to prevent a Bush recess appointment of Bradbury. Thankfully the Democrats came through because Bush is big on recess appointments.

How do you explain the actions of this President.

From my 12-27-07 post on Bradbury

..Throughout 2006, Bradbury argued forcefully that the Supreme Court's rejection of the administration's military tribunals in terrorism cases was incorrectly decided. He argued that Geneva Conventions language barring "humiliating and degrading treatment" was hopelessly vague, and subject to "uncertain and unpredictable application." He was a leading advocate of the Military Commissions Act of 2006, which revoked habeas corpus for terrorism detainees. He authored an opinion immunizing ex-White House counsel Harriet Miers from testifying in the U.S. attorneys investigation. And, most infamously, he apparently authored secret memoranda reauthorizing torture techniques, including waterboarding. Source