Orin Kerr provides the definitive rebuttal to NRO’s chief birther and, well, McCarthyite hack, Andrew McCarthy:
I find McCarthy’s arguments ridiculous, and I want to explain why.
Consider McCarthy’s basic argument that lawyers who represented detainees “aided the enemy in wartime,” and should normally be guilty of treason. If that’s true, isn’t the federal judiciary, and aren’t the Justices of the Supreme Court, also guilty of treason? In fact, aren’t the judges the kingpins of this treasonous plot to “hurt the war effort”? After all, lawyers only make arguments to judges. It doesn’t actually help detainees to make argument courts reject. It’s up to the judges to rule one way or the other. If the lawyers are aiding the enemy, they’re only minor players: It’s the judges, and especially the Justices, who are the real guilty parties, as they’re the ones that actually help the detainees by ruling in their favor. Does McCarthy think the Justices of the Supreme Court are guilty of aiding the enemy, and that (if we treat them like everybody else) they should be “indicted for coming to the enemy’s aid during wartime”?
Orin goes on to provide a point by point rebuttal, factually disproving McCarthy’s smears/assertions, but Kerr sort of misses the point. McCarthy is a Bush era Republican. He doesn’t care about nuances like fact, precedent, the rule of law, or common decency. These are the folks who proudly stated they make their own reality.
And that is what is going on here- McCarthy, Cheney, Goldfarb, and the rest of the Keep America Safe scumbags have two objectives. Forcing the country to shed her laws and traditions and requiring all of us to live in their totalitarian reality, and providing rhetorical fodder for the Republican party and cover for their past criminality during the Bush era.
That is all McCarthy is concerned with- those things and nothing more. Any one who foolishly tries to engage McCarthy on the rule of law or matters of national security is playing a fool’s game. McCarthy cares about neither of those things.
cleek
exactly right. and frankly, that’s how i feel about the entire wingnutoshpere.
and imagine how much better off the world would be if more people would recognize that far too much of our political discourse is dominated by disingenuous idiots preaching the ludicrous to the credulous…
Bob K
Come on he’s just channeling his inner Sen. Joe McCarthy. Terrorists are the new communists. Watch out pinko liberals – Andy’s got his eye on you. The sooner he ends up like
“Tail Gunner Joe” the better.
Tail Gunner Joe
O.T. – Reading the wiki for Senator Joseph McCarthy came across this. Pity nobody thought of Swift Boating the wanker:
It is well documented that McCarthy lied about his war record. Despite his automatic commission, he claimed to have enlisted as a “buck private.” He flew twelve combat missions as a gunner-observer, earning the nickname of “Tail-Gunner Joe” in the course of one of these missions. He later claimed 32 missions in order to qualify for a Distinguished Flying Cross, which he received in 1952. McCarthy publicized a letter of commendation which he claimed had been signed by his commanding officer and countersigned by Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, then Chief of Naval Operations. However, it was revealed that McCarthy had written this letter himself, in his capacity as intelligence officer. A “war wound” that McCarthy made the subject of varying stories involving airplane crashes or antiaircraft fire was in fact received aboard ship during an initiation ceremony for sailors who cross the equator for the first time.
iLarynx
McCarthy’s “wartime” claim is bullshit too. It is a wholly dishonest statement because the U.S. is NOT in a state of war from a legal, Constitutional perspective. And this has to be taken into consideration because these are legal, Constitutional issues being discussed. The neocons want to wield unchecked power as though we’re in a declared war while shying away from the other issues and restrictions that come up when operating in a state of war, as defined by the Constitution. Even the Bush administration was forced to admit that the U.S. was not in a declared war:
Yes, there is a very clear distinction, and it is that when Congress declares war, the U.S. is in a state of war. If the Congress has not declared war, we are not in a state of war. The Constitution is very specific about this point. While the Commander in Chief may move troops and such, he does not have the power to declare war by fiat. And as the A.G. pointed out, the AUMF is most certainly not a declaration of war.
Using the bogus term of “wartime” is part and parcel a scare tactic of the right-wing nuts attempting to excuse their unconstitutional and unAmerican positions.
namekarB
What is that old saying? Don’t wrestle with a pig. You’ll just get dirty and the pig likes it.
The Grand Panjandrum
OT: The Mountaineers and my Lobos could end up playing for a Sweet 16 spot. Now that is SUHWEET!
The Claw
Right you are.
Kristol will happily lie to everyone forever. He is playing Straussian eleven-dimensional chess to empower and enrich his backers. That is truth enough for him.
Keith G
I am unwilling to go Godwin this early in a thread. So, I just want to say that one day a few months ago I wanted to see who is this Andrew McCarthy. A swing by Google and off to Youtube and there he was. That’s one scary mo fo. A pit bull with a Bavarian accent could not be more disconcerting.
Rights? Due process? Truth? To him, those are all niceties extended to the right folk at the proper time.
russell
My reply to these folks is “Kenneth Claiborne Royall”.
Or, I take the very good suggestion of cleek et al and don’t bother spending the energy to reply at all.
Keith G
@Tail Gunner Joe:
I wonder if that was a penetrating wound.
Gregory
@cleek:
Amended to include my opinion. I agree with cleek’s second point about our discourse being dominated by disingenuous idiots, but I’d settle for the freakin’ media to realize it and quit handing them a megaphone.
patrick II
Even if the defendant is an enemy, he deserves representation. But what I hate is the rhetorical trap of claiming even the “enemy” or “terrorists” deserve representation. A lot of innocent people got swept up and the presumption of guilt asserted by the terms even those who attempt to defend their rights galls me.
Second. John is right at the core. This argument is not about law, it is about power. It is about — fuck you — we can do any fucking thing we want and you may comment on it but you aren’t going to do anything about it. Lawyers like Yoo are merely hired to say anything the powerful want for the purpose of creating a smokescreen of words. To create enough of a sham defense that the conservative royalty my act in the name of their gods — money and power — without interference from the rabble too foolish to understand their own use as pawns.
Miriam
@Keith G: I think that is key – only Real Americans deserve constitutional rights. And that certainly doesn’t include libruls.
burnspbesq
@The Grand Panjandrum:
In the bracket that I filled out yesterday, I have UNM beating WVU. I just can’t imagine Huggy Bear outcoaching anyone down the stretch in a close game.
In fact, I have UNM in the Final Four. Where they will lose to Duke. Badly.
Paul L.
So much for the vaunted progressive desire for Transparency.
MattF
It is notable how closely McCarthy et. al. hew to the classic fascist strategies. Nothing new under the sun, etc. The (relatively) good news is –given that 9/11 was the analog of the Reichtag fire— that we still have something like a democratic form of government. A wonder to behold, but still.
tigrismus
I’m not sure that McCarthy wouldn’t be perfectly willing to call judges traitors, too.
Throwin Stones
@Keith G: Didn’t former Congressman ‘tickles’ Massa just tell Glenn Beck those ceremonies were like Caligula?
Nethead Jay
@tigrismus: Yeah, I wouldn’t put that past him either. It’s becoming increasingly clear that there are simply no depths apologists like him won’t sink to.
El Cid
The real crooks here are the Founding Fathers who weren’t pro-American enough to understand that you don’t need trials and a buncha damn lawyers and dress-wearin’ judge types and 12 moron jury members to decide who’s guilty and who ain’t — these are the sorts of things that good, Patriot American conservatives just know.
And if a precious few “innocent” people happen to get jailed or executed by mistake, well, screw them for being so damn self-centered about it. There are bigger things at stake here.
The Magna Charta wasn’t a suicide pact.
bago
@Paul L.: What the fuck does transparency have to do with regime secrets, torture, and constitutionally mandated legal representation?
Sam Hutcheson
This was my thought too. It’s not like the populist right-wing has shown an aversion to demonizing “activist judges” in recent past.
CalD
__
No but it’s arguably still a worthy exercise because there are still people who do — perhaps even some, I suspect, among self-identified conservatives. The fact that guys like McCarthy will never admit they’re wrong no matter how much you rub their noses in it doesn’t mean there aren’t others who would be inclined to agree with them if their arguments were left unchallenged but might not be completely beyond the reach of reason otherwise.
Tom
Plus, isn’t the whole point of the trial to find out to what degree they are enemies or if they are enemies at all?
Paul in KY
I’d say Sen. McCarthy’s ‘war wound’ was broken ribs from excessive tickling. The Navy, they don’t fuck around…
Svensker
@bago:
It’s the “look, a jackalope” thing. Because Holder refused to immediately tell everyone who asked which attorneys had represented “filth” (as one warmonger I know put it), all other arguments are mooted.
rb
@El Cid:
Precisely. McCarthy and his pals hate us for our freedoms.
Ana Gama
Speaking of birfers, check out the latest from the VA Attorney General. (The same guy who caused the ruckus last week over gay rights at VA universities.)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/15/ken-cuccinelli-virginia-at_n_499311.html
Ash Can
I’m sure that Paul L would also agree that, because the drainage basin of the Danube River extends through nine countries, our local school council elections are going to take place on April 21st and tomorrow’s Cubs spring training game will be broadcast on WGN radio.
kommrade reproductive vigor
Never hurts to push back against those who want to return to Lynch Mob Rule.
John O
@kommrade reproductive vigor:
Yeah, it’s a waste of time on McCarthy, but it’s good that Kerr gets out in the public sphere and bothers.
Count McCarthy (Andy, Joe, what’s the diff?) as one of those NRO turds I’d love to meet, if only to work up a big loogie to drop between our feet right after verifying he was THE Andrew McCarthy.
“You, sir, are a lousy human being,” I fantasize about saying.
And I would, too.
Irony Abounds
What amazes me is that Clinton appointed McCarthy as a US Attorney. Can you imagine a Republican ever, EVER, appointing McCarthy’s Librul evil twin to ANYTHING. Ideology uber alles.
thomas Levenson
The oddest thing to me (and that’s a mild choice of words) is that these scumsuckers, (McCarthy, Cheney pere et fille, Goldfarb et al) are doing their best to make sure that American exceptionalism dies its overdue death. If we torture, arrest, “disappear” and all of the rest whilst providing cover for an oligarchic kleptocracy to make off with the wealth of generations, we may offer certain lessons to the rest of the world…but it won’t be that of the City on a Hill.
I hate these people not just for what they have done, but for what they are doing to the country that my son will inhabit. It will take decades to dig out from the practical consequences of the misrule of the Bush years, if we ever do. Full moral recovery is damn near impossible, I expect.
I understand why Obama and Holder decided not to prosecute the criminal conspiracy that was the last adminstration…but I think it was the wrong choice.
Other than that, it’s a lovely day…
slippy
@iLarynx:
If we weren’t at war, how come all the Republican dittoheads and imbeciles kept screaming in our faces that “WE’RE AT WAR, TRAITORS!!!!”
Either we were, or we weren’t.
To me, having a military force in combat in another nation is WAR.
There should be no silly semantic games allowing a President to cow us into WAR without calling it WAR.
And a declaration of WAR should be automatically tied to a huge increase on taxes on the wealthy. An IMMEDIATE raise to 90%, in order to pay for the WAR that the wealthy want us to all go and fight.
That’s just me.
slippy
@John O: John, I’d aim that spit higher than between his feet.
Right between his fucking stupid eyes would work for me.
joes527
@thomas Levenson:
You don’t understand American Exceptionalism.
Exceptionalism is *why* this is all OK. If other nations try to pull this shit, then they would be wrong.
Exceptionalism == IOKIYAA
Quiddity
Re John’s
Many modern-day Republicans don’t care about anyone outside their circle. Be it foreigners (torture) or citizens (health care).
BC
This is to obfuscate their dirty deeds done in the name of defending the homeland during the Bush administration. It’s part and parcel of Karl Rovian thought – attack, defend, never give in, never admit fault, never apologize. They’ve done it with torture and they’ll do it with every other facet of our legal system. They will smirch every American institution. If they have to destroy the country to avoid that moment of accountability in which they stand exposed to the entire country for their misdeeds, that’s what they’ll do. And I can’t help but think that Obama knows this and this is why they will not prosecute the Bush gang – we would have McCarthy, Theissen, the Cheneys, and the other gang on tv 24/7 attacking the rest of the country on a hyper level. I can’t help thinking we dodged a big schism in this country when SCOTUS decided Bush v Gore – can you imagine how Gore’s presidency would have been had he won in 2000 by a SCOTUS decision?
Batocchio
Don’t forget money. But yes, Kerr’s piece is excellent. (I linked it the other day myself.)