About
Learn More about our progressive online community for the Granite State.

Create an account today (it's free and easy) and get started!
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Search




Advanced Search


The Masthead
Managing Editors
Dean Barker
Laura Clawson
Jennifer Daler

Contributing Writers
elwood
Mike Hoefer
susanthe
William Tucker

ActBlue Hampshire

The Roll, Etc.
Prog Blogs, Orgs & Alumni
Bank Slate
Betsy Devine
birch, finch, beech
Blue News Tribune (MA)
Democracy for NH
Live Free or Die
Mike Caulfield
Miscellany Blue
Granite State Progress
Seacoast for Change
Susan the Bruce
Tomorrow's Progressives

Politicos & Punditry
The Burt Cohen Show
John Gregg
Krauss
Landrigan
Lawson
Pindell
Primary Monitor
Primary Wire
Scala
Schoenberg
Spiliotes
Welch

Campaigns, Et Alia.
Paul Hodes
Carol Shea-Porter
Ann McLane Kuster
Katrina Swett
Jennifer Daler

ActBlue Hampshire
NHDP
DCCC
DSCC
DNC

National
Balloon Juice
billmon
Congress Matters
DailyKos
Digby
Hold Fast
Eschaton
FiveThirtyEight
MyDD
The Next Hurrah
Open Left
Senate Guru
Swing State Project
Talking Points Memo

50 State Blog Network
Alabama
Arizona
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Missouri
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin

Dodd, Padilla, and the Rule of Law

by: Mike Caulfield

Mon May 14, 2007 at 19:47:51 PM EDT


With the Padilla case in the news today, I scanned Google News to see if I could find any recent statements by the candidates on the case. I thought I'd present the statements back to back here, to show how the candidates are going after the administration on how they handled this case, and on how low they have brought this country.

Unfortunately, I didn't find any. Maybe I'm not looking in the right places. Or maybe the candidates don't think this is an issue on the level of health care or global warming.

I'm here to say it is. If your foreign policy doesn't begin with bulldozing Camp X-Ray, don't bother finishing your speech.

So for any campaigns reading this, if you have a press release on

(more)

Mike Caulfield :: Dodd, Padilla, and the Rule of Law
what the Padilla case means to us and I missed it, send it here. It's our policy not to front-page raw press releases, but we'll make an exception.

For the time being, though, I ask all of you to please read what Senator Dodd said in response to a question on international relations this Saturday in Merrimack. I know people might not generally see "Dodd" and "moving speech" as adjacent concepts -- but this set of of the cuff remarks was as potent as any of the speeches I've heard so far this season:

...one of the worst votes cast in my 26 years [in the Senate] was last fall, when the Congress of the United States, including the Senate, including too many Democrats, voted to support the Military Commissions Act, which stripped us of Habeas Corpus, allowed torture to come back in as a means of acquiring information, and walked away from the Geneva Convention.

We need to reform and change the international architecture that was created at the end of WWII. It's got to be changed to conform to the kinds of problems we face in the world today.

But I'm very worried that we're stepping away from all this, almost on a deliberate basis. Anyone that thinks we're going to deal with the problems of international terrorism on our own is deluding themselves. The strength is going to come because we have the relationships around the world that will allow us to deal effectively with these questions.

I come by this by a variety of sources. My father was ...a chief prosecutor under Robert Jackson at Nuremberg. He spent eighteen months in 1945 and 1946 at the Nuremberg trials.

...

He died so young, but I can just hear him over and over again talking about the "Rule of Law".

And what a difference it made. Churchill wanted to summarily execute every defendant at Nuremberg. The Soviets wanted to have show trial for a week and shoot 'em all. And my father and Secretary of War Stimson and the Roosevelt administration argued for a trial. Instead of a team of executioners, assemble a team of lawyers. Let 'em have a lawyer. Let them defend themselves. Let's show that we are different, that we can support the rule of law.

So even these thugs, who were hardly deserving in light of their murderous thirteen year regime, had a chance to present their case.

It was a hallmark of who we were. And from that experience, that whole international architecture came about: NATO, IMF, World Bank, the U.N. System -- it came as a result of the Nuremberg experience.

And we led the way. It was the United States. People were reluctant to do this. We were the ones out there fighting for it, saying, look, this makes sense. An international criminal court. The Kyoto deal. And so forth.

And this crowd comes along, and slowly just rips it apart...

"It was a hallmark of who we were." And hopefully who we can be again.

Send me releases if you've got them. Seriously.

Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
When (4.00 / 1)
we torture, when we spy without warrant, when we detain indefinitely, when we go it alone, bin Laden wins.

Good for Dodd.

I'm starting to like this guy more and more.

birch, finch, beech


I like them all (0.00 / 0)
...in their own way.

All of our Democratic Candidates have their strengths and weaknesses.  Thats why I'm having such a hard time choosing


[ Parent ]
The Military Commissions Act (0.00 / 0)
with its destruction of habeas corpus passed fairly easily last year.

But every Democratic Senate Presidential candidate voted Nay, and every Senate Republican running for President voted Yea.

Sununu actually voted for the Specter Amendment to preserve habeas corpus. But when that amendment failed, He fell back into line and supported the entire bill.


That's true -- but not my point (0.00 / 0)
I don't mean to imply Dodd was different on MCA -- for me that's the intro to the more important part of the speech.

The thing Dodd did effectively for me, in a way I hadn't seen done, was portray the Rule of Law concept as a principle which  made the architecture post WWII possible.

For Dodd, NATO, the IMF, and the UN come out of what we proved at Nuremberg. I don't know how literally he means that. But I haven't heard another candidate articulate the interconnectedness of these things in such a satisfying way. And I certainly haven't heard a candidate talk about this issue with as much passion.

I snipped a middle section out of that (in the elipsis) but maybe I'll post the audio later and that will make it more clear. This is an issue that Dodd is heart and soul connected to. I've clipped out a bit here about the bill he is sponsoring to bring back those things the MCA took away.

But, yeah, my point wasn't really the MCA, that's just how he wandered into the topic.



[ Parent ]
Oh, understood. (0.00 / 0)
I looked it up because I wondered whether any of the candidates had indeed supported it. It got almost 2/3rds approval. I was glad to see none of the Presidential hopeful Dems did. (Joe Lieberman did.)

And it does wipe out habeas corpus. Supposed, only for a narrow class of people. But the whole point of access to a court is: without it, any bogus claim of your crime will do. Bush could cart me away tomorrow, claiming he has evidence I am a foreign terrorist.

Thanks, Senators.


[ Parent ]
in a couple years of sad days in the Senate (0.00 / 0)
I was glad to see him single out MCA as one of the saddest



[ Parent ]

Connect with BH
     
Powered by: SoapBlox