New Haven Independent

Dodd Open To Torture Prosecutions

by Paul Bass | May 4, 2009 7:28 AM | Permalink | Comments (25)

Making parallels to the Nuremberg trials, U.S. Sen. Chris Dodd told a gathering of liberal bloggers in New Haven he’d support bringing charges against any Bush administration officials found responsible for the policy of waterboarding terrorism suspects.

The five-term Connecticut senator made the comments Sunday at The Playwright, his latest New Haven stop in what has become a nonstop Dodd Career Resuscitation Tour in the wake of recent damaging press disclosures.

“Not to prosecute people and pursue them when these acts occurred,” he said following the gathering, “is in a sense to invite them to do it again in a future administration.”

The event was as notable for what Dodd said — the torture remarks; a vow not “to get burned again” on executive bonuses — as for where he said it. A week after the last D.C.-based reporter from a Connecticut newspaper was laid off, Dodd turned to local bloggers to help communicate with constituents back home.

It’s “Torture”

Toward the end of the hour-long afternoon session in a second-floor room at the Temple Street pub, veteran blogger Al Robinson of My Left Nutmeg asked Dodd a two-part question: Is waterboarding, the near-drowning technique used by the CIA interrogators on al Qaeda suspects, a form of torture? And does the senator believe that Bush administration officials who OK’d the technique should be held accountable?

The issue has exploded to prominence in Washington (in between news of a Senate defection, a flu possible pandemic, and a Supreme Court retirement) since the Obama administration released memos last month showing the CIA waterboarded two suspects 266 times, long after receiving any useful information.

“I believe waterboarding is torture,” Dodd responded. Not only was it torture — it didn’t work, he said. He noted that one suspect was waterboarded 183 times. “How effective could that be after the 90th?”

Dodd supported a call by Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont to have a select committee investigate the case. Now that President Obama has released the memos, they should be put to use rather than ignored, he argued.

“If people in fact did something that was illegal they should be pursued,” Dodd said, no matter how high up in the Bush administration the trail leads. He spoke of the Nuremberg trials of Nazi war criminals after World War II in making the case that people responsible for the torture should be prosecuted; Dodd’s father was a prosecutor at the trials.

Click on the play arrow at the top of this story to watch his response.
Leahy arguing for select committee to review.

Playwright, The Sequel

When the session ended, Dodd spoke of why he had his staff organize it. He noted that last week the Connecticut Post laid off D.C. correspondent Peter Urban. “We have no one [left at the Capitol] — zero — covering a seven-member delegation” for readers back home, he said. Even when he’s back in Connecticut he sees fewer reporters at events than in the past. Meanwhile, the “universe” of bloggers is growing, getting more diverse, and playing a role in communicating with voters.

Dodd and five staffers sat around a table prepared, and little utilized, for drinks and food with the five bloggers who attended. Pictured from left are Tessa Marquis of Milford Democrats, among other sites; “CT Bob”; Edward Anderson; and Al Robinson. One blogger (Bob) ordered a draft; Dodd had a Splenda-sweetened coffee; a staffer ordered a soda; and Anderson brought in a Starbucks cup. (Also there was Gabe Rosenberg of CT Local Politics.)That was it. A waiter brought in two baskets of bread which remained covered atop the room’s bar counter.

The beer was flowing more prodigiously, and the atmosphere was more electric, when many of those same bloggers assembled to participate in a different Senate campaign. They came to pay homage to proto-liberal blogger Markos Moulitsas Zuniga of the Daily Kos website and to Ned Lamont, the insurgent Democrat whom the bloggers were at the time helping to raise money and visibility. (Click here to read that story; Lamont went on to defeat Lieberman in a Democratic primary, then lose the general election when Lieberman ran as an independent.)

It was clear from Sunday afternoon’s more subdued gathering that the group of bloggers is inclined to support rather than trash the latest incumbent senator from the state in danger of losing his seat. The questions were for the most part supportive of Dodd’s stands, especially his bill to limit credit-card companies’ predatory practices. Dodd’s bill passed the Banking Committee last week; he predicted a tough fight before the full Senate. And he enlisted the bloggers in getting the word out. (Read about the bill here.)

Unlike at a mainstream press conference, there were no “gotcha” questions, and few sound bites. Dodd and the bloggers dissected the credit-card bill, the bank bailout, and other issues in depth, at a leisurely pace.

In the Irish-themed pub, there were no questions about the latest scandal that threatens to sink Dodd’s career next year, a profitable land deal in Ireland tied to a businessman on whose behalf the senator won a presidential pardon. (Read about that here.)

There were no questions about the story in that day’s Courant about the $500,000 a year Dodd’s wife is pulling in serving on corporate boards.

Nor were there questions about Dodd’s receipt of two mortgages on favorable terms from the head of a subprime lender he was supposed to regulate as chair of the Senate Banking Committee.

But there were lots of real questions, not softballs. Like when Robinson asked Dodd if he has learned anything from the episode that first made his favorability ratings tank: an amendment he pushed that enabled AIG execs to collect bonuses out of government bailout money. Public outrage was so intense that the normally untouchable Dodd, whose term expires in 2010, is now running behind Republican Rob Simmons in the polls.

Dodd was ready to respond to Robinson’s question, with no hint of defensiveness.

The answer: He “won’t get burned again.”

He said he plans to play an independent role in analyzing the regulations that the Treasury Department draws up based on the amendment that passed last fall.

He repeated the theme that he had agreed to the provision that allowed the bonuses as part of a larger amendment in which he inserted strong pro-taxpayer protections; that the Treasury Department pushed for it at a time when senators were urged to act fast to prevent an imminent economic collapse; and that no other senators objected, either.

In short, he argued, he was left out to dry by the Obama administration. But he also said that moving forward he would act differently.

“You [Treasury] tell me what you want to do, and I’ll tell you whether I think it’s right or not,” Dodd said. He vowed he wouldn’t “nod and say that sounds good to me. I’ve been down that road again. I won’t do that again.”

Dodd said he’s “not hostile” to performance-based bonuses that reward execs for coming in and turning around a troubled bank. He said he does flatly reject retention bonuses with taxpayer money: “It’s a phony argument that nobody else will do these things. A lot of people who have been laid off in this business will be happy to take the job.”

Share this story

Share |

Comments

Posted by: Bill | May 4, 2009 8:13 AM

It's amazing the crocodile tears that liberals have for terrorists and murders and yet are happy to let a million unborn babies be slaughtered every year. Dodd should be more concerned about saving American lives that worrying about a terroist who was responsible for thousands of American's dying.

Posted by: jack | May 4, 2009 8:24 AM

so will the top Dems,who knew all about this,be charged with depraved indifference?

Posted by: Westville Mom | May 4, 2009 9:24 AM

Reading this article prompted me to look up the word PANDERER ... and I found the definitions very enlightening:
1) a person who furnishes clients for a prostitute or supplies persons for illicit sexual intercourse; procurer; pimp.
2) a person who caters to or profits from the weaknesses or vices of others.
3) a go-between in amorous intrigues.

It seems the metaphors of politics and sex are getting a bit too intermingled these days ... as in "feel good" policies and politics.
The party that has pretty much mastered nos. 1 & 3 (think Eliot Spitzer, Jim McGreevey, Bill Clinton, John Edwards, etc. etc.) seems to have also mastered no. 2, esp. with regard to the word "weaknesses."
The next time you Dems feel a "thrill going up your leg", you might want to ask yourself: WHY?

Posted by: Tim | May 4, 2009 9:35 AM

This is just Dodd's way to pander to the left. Lets just put this all behind us, a trial will do no good. Dodd knows he needs to pull out all the stops to save his senate seat, thats all this is about.

Posted by: cba | May 4, 2009 11:09 AM

This is the latest example of this political panderer at his swarmy best. He has the unmitigated gall to call for trial for those involved in enhanced interrogation techniques while completely forgetting how he solicited massive contributions of all those bankers to fund that DOA presidential campaign. I'm for torture trials if Dodd will submit himself for trial for misfeasance in office. Connecticut residents must wake up and put Dodd on the unemployment line

Posted by: A.D. | May 4, 2009 11:18 AM

This is the right idea -- if only he believed it.

1. Tortue is and was illegal.

2. Waterboarding is and was torture.

3. Anyone involved in criminal illegality should be prosecuted.

Unfortunately, this includes the head of the Office of Legal Counsel, the Attorney General, and then-President George W. Bush.

Given that the latter actually made the laws go into effect, he is by far the most ultimately responsible. Not that this prosecution will happen -- just that it should.

Posted by: Connecticut Bob | May 4, 2009 12:01 PM

Oh, great. I guess I'm the boozer in the crowd. Thanks Paul. LOL!

The entire 54-minute video is now online:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wQNZJVpYon4

Posted by: ignoranceisbliss | May 4, 2009 12:19 PM

"It was clear from Sunday afternoon's more subdued gathering that the group of bloggers is inclined to support rather than trash the latest incumbent senator from the state in danger of losing his seat."

Are these same guys who beat up so unmercifully on Joe Lieberman? What, dishonesty and using your Senate seat for personal gain is less objectionable if you throw the liberal blogosphere a bone on credit card interest rates?

These guys should be ashamed of themselves. Boy are we going to miss the old journalism when there were some standards of objectivity and you couldn't get bought for a beer.

Chris Dodd is dishonest and corrupt and deservers to lose his seat. Should you care to know I happen to be a liberal Democrat.

Posted by: jack | May 4, 2009 1:04 PM

A.D., it also includes bubba,pelosi,and reid.

Posted by: Good to Know | May 4, 2009 1:23 PM

It's good to know that Rob Simmons is spending his money wisely -- to pay people to comment against Dodd here in the NHI. Dodd will win New Haven with 80% of the vote but you'd never know it from the comments here. A bit odd?

Posted by: Howdy Doddy | May 4, 2009 2:08 PM

Gee, since that esteemed newsman and political pundit Jon Stewart decided that Harry Truman was a war criminal for having the atom bomb dropped on Japan, will our esteemed senior Senator support a posthumous war crimes trial against him and everyone in his administration? What about the airmen who flew the planes and the crew that supported the planes? And let's not forget the crew of the U.S.S. Indianapolis who transported the first bomb. Dodd is such a tool.

Posted by: Alphonse Credenza | May 4, 2009 3:25 PM

Listening to Dodd attempt to defend himself on this "Arms Across Connecticut" tour is torture in itself.

Posted by: Mary | May 4, 2009 3:29 PM

"This is just Dodd's way to pander to the left" - Senator Dodd doesn't need to pander, he is a Leftie. He's a proud liberal Democrat - what are you? A Republican?

Posted by: ctkeith | May 4, 2009 3:54 PM

Hey Paul,

Why does it seem you're trying very hard to seperate yourself from us "liberal Bloggers" in this peice when in actuality you were invited only because, at least in Dodds Staffs opinion, you're a "dirty F-ing Hippie" just like the rest of us?

By the way,

The reason there were no questions about the Countrywide issue is because everyone there realized it was a manufactured story.

As for Mrs Dodds employment I find it interesting that when Reporters for all Cts Corperate media were handed very similar information by some of the same bloggers in that room on Haddasah Lieberman in 2006 the bloggers were told it was "not news worthy".
Thankfully,many of those reporters are either currently unemployed or soon to be unemployed.

Posted by: mikes | May 4, 2009 4:31 PM

Good for Senator Dodd, standing up for American values against the monsters.

Of course prosecution would take down Pelosi as well as Cheney and Bush, so the self protecting bipartisan (Congressional Presidential Judicial Media )mafia in Washington will ensure it never happens.

The fact that Truman chose to commit a war crime (incinerating innocent civilians) for a good reason (saving American troops) does not mean that he did not commit the crime.

Too bad Stewart was probably pressured from backing off that. Of course Truman was a war criminal. To even consider the matter as in need of discussion reveals the frightening lack of morality in our public discourse, if not the outright ignorance of history.

In a world in which Truman is not considered a war criminal for the atomic attacks, it is no surprise really that torture goes unpunished.

That's just the way it is in the big bad world. Large empires (like ours) are organized criminal enterprises, beholden not to law but only to power and countervailing power - a struggle of all against all as Hobbes would have it. Law comes in only to justify and legitimize, never to actually limit the exercise of power or punish wrong doing.

Posted by: susan barnes | May 4, 2009 5:40 PM

Senator Dodd is the poster boy for term limitations. Hanging in the local pubs is hilarious considering he moved his entire family to Iowa in his ill fated presidential campaign. Two four year terms is enough for a president and should be enough for a senator. Specter's fear of leaving his political career in the hands of those that nominated him in the past says it all. A grass roots movement for limitations is in order.

Posted by: Diane | May 4, 2009 5:45 PM

Senator Dodd avows his respect for blogs and bloggers.

And they seem to respect him.

But does Dodd get that blogs are also about comments and criticisms and responses (as opposed to just grateful one-way conveyers of his official message)?

For example, on April 29th your sister site, CTNewsJunkie, ran a glowing piece about Dodd's efforts to crack down on credit card companies.

In the "comments" to that article, several people raised serious questions about loopholes in the bill.

And what happened next?

No response from Dodd's people.

No response from Dodd's supporters.

No response.

Paukl, is that respectful?

Or is that just how Senator Dodd has decided to "play" the "liberal bloggers"???

Posted by: kamb | May 4, 2009 9:41 PM

UNREAL! This tree-hugging liberal is nutts! Do they have any idea of what war is? Did Dodd ever serve? What a joke. THIS COUNTRY is becoming weaker and weaker with these PC moves.

Dodd is an ASS !

Posted by: Tim | May 5, 2009 7:21 AM

Mary -

Yes I know he is a liberal Dem. but everyone knows he is on this tour just to save his job, do you think he actually believes what he says? He allowed the AIG bonuses but then goes on TV saying how the bonuses are an outrage. He is going agaisnt credit card lenders for high fees but he gets contributions from payday lenders and banks. Do you really think having a trial agaisnt the people that allowed torture is going do anything? It will all be for show. He is saying for the lefties want to hear, that is all.

Posted by: Joe | May 5, 2009 12:46 PM

Put in charge of the Senate Banking committee, he uses his post to raise money from the industry he's supposed to oversee in order to fund a delusional presidential campaign.

Moves to Iowa--even enrolls his daughter in kindergarten there--and spends $20 million. Carries 0.02% of the vote (no joke--check iowacaucusresults.com, the state Democratic party website). Maybe they detected a stench we've grown used to.

If you've had enough of this hack, come to the We're Done With Dodd rally at his office (30 Lewis Street) in Hartford on Saturday, May 16 at noon.

Posted by: Kit | May 6, 2009 10:19 PM

I support everyone who believes in the rule of the law. Every Bush Administration member who was involved is required to be judge; every Obama Administration member who tolerates this should prosecuted.

Posted by: Big D. | May 7, 2009 7:15 AM

Dodd needs to go. Looks like the NY Times might finally be starting to "get it":

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/04/29/the-big-number-problem/

Posted by: cokids | May 7, 2009 7:19 AM

I'd be willing to let this one 'crook' fall through the cracks in order to deal with one of the most serious challenged out of the Bush administrtaion...the torture issue! It would be nice if they took on the undermining of the Constitution (Habeos Corpus) and the patriot Act. Oh well......we can't have everything, now, can we? But the torture piece is critical and I'm willing to 'look the other way' to have it investigated and prosecuted!! We can deal with Dodd and his problems later!

Posted by: gkb | May 7, 2009 9:37 AM

Bill:
You apparently consider your self a first class Christian. Because of your stand on abortion. I ask you Bill. how do you stand on the killing of millions in a war? The destruction of homes, schools, hospitals,a whole civilization?
Another question I have for your Bill. is: show me where Jesus, ever, suggested or lifted a hand against someone!In fact if i have read my Bible correct, when he was being arrested, one of his men raised a sword and cut off an ear. I ask you, what did Jesus do at that point????
Again, show me just one passage in the Bible where Torture is an action to be used agaisnt anyone.
Dear Bill, just as Hannity has said he would be tortured, why don't you offer yourself up for this also.Then please get on the internet and tell us all what you think.

Posted by: Corinne E. Blackmer | May 8, 2009 11:02 PM

I have several observations.
1. To make an analogy between abortion and torture is little more than corrupt ideological opportunism, as there is a world of difference between the tough decisions a woman must make about her own body and future and the degradation and destruction a state visits upon detainees or prisoners in an effort to extract information from them.
2. While I do agree wholeheartedly that waterboarding (and other "intense interrogation techniques" are not only torture but also "stealth torture," in this case I believe that judgmental hindsight is problematic and fails to address all the relevant issues. In 2002, when these abominable practice were deemed lawful by the Bush Administration's OLC, there was profound fear (and ignorance) about the threat that terrorists like Al Queda represented. I believe it likely the Bush Administration feared that there would be another attack--perhaps nuclear. Likely, they were terrified that they would be held responsible in the event of another strike.
3. The 9/11 Commission's findings also heightened these fears, as it pronounced that earlier American "police interdiction" efforts had been a failure, and that our government needed to be less risk adverse and more aggressive in collecting intelligence.
4. The public mood in 2002 was far different than it is today. We all know that democracies have a poor memory and that threats can reappear.
5. Therefore, what seems to be most important at this time is determining what interrogation techniques are or are not effective in producing reliable intelligence. Second, if it is determined that so-called "intense interrogation techniques" are effective, it remains to be determined whether or not there are alternatives that are as if not more effective. For, even if waterboarding "worked," we still need to question whether or not the threats we confront can or should be met by breaking our laws and treaties.
6. I think we also need a national conversation about what to do with our intense fears, and some transparent communication about what we do and do not have the right to expect our elected leaders to do in response to them.

Dodd Open To Torture Prosecutions

Comments

Special Sections

Legal Notices

Some Favorite Sites

Government/ Community Links

Flyerboard

Sponsors

N.H.I. Site Design & Development

NHI Store

News Feed