Groups seek disbarment for Bush's top lawyers

[hank scorpio]

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A coalition of progressive groups sought Monday to have 12 Bush administration lawyers disbarred for their roles in crafting the legal rationale for so-called enhanced interrogation techniques that many view as torture.

"It is time to hold these lawyers accountable for violating their legal oath," Kevin Zeese, an attorney for the coalition, said in a written statement.

"Just as the bar would suspend an attorney who advised a police officer to torture and brutalize a detained immigrant or criminal defendant, the bar must suspend these attorneys for advocating and causing the torture of war detainees. The disciplinary boards that hear these complaints must act or they will be seen as complicit in the use of torture."

Zeese called disbarment "an important step toward the ultimate accountability of criminal prosecution."

The group registered formal complaints against David Addington, John Ashcroft, Stephen Bradbury, Jay Bybee, Michael Chertoff, Douglas Feith, Alice Fisher, Timothy Flanigan, Alberto Gonzales, William Haynes II, Michael Mukasey and John Yoo.

Ashcroft, Gonzales and Mukasey served as attorney general in former President George W. Bush's administration. Chertoff served as homeland security secretary.

The complaints, filed with the bars in California, the District of Columbia, New York, Pennsylvania and Texas, also seek other forms of disciplinary action in addition to disbarment.

A preliminary internal report on the Justice Department investigation into the authors of the Bush administration's "torture memos" indicated that the federal government might also urge state bar associations to take sanctions against the memo writers, according to two government sources.

The draft, which has been sent to Attorney General Eric Holder for approval or revisions, reportedly does not call for criminal prosecutions.

Sources said investigators for the Justice Department's ethics unit, the Office of Professional Responsibility, have focused heavily on internal communications involving Bradbury, Bybee and Yoo.

The three former Office of Legal Counsel lawyers were top officials who provided legal guidance, including permissible interrogation procedures to the CIA and other executive branch agencies. Guidance written by Bybee and Yoo in the aftermath of the September 11 attacks allowed for harsh interrogation techniques that later were withdrawn.

The draft report is said to be critical of Yoo and Bybee in particular.

Do any of our posters with a law background think this has any teeth or merit? I am sure it will not happen, but it seems like an interesting angle to play.

[JoltinJoe]

Hard to say without knowing the facts.

Of course, any attorney, including an attorney in government services, can be disbarred for felonious or other illegal actions -- even without conviction. I believe Bill Clinton was disbarred for committing perjury. And more recently Scooter Libby was disbarred.

But that observation begs the question of whether they engaged in illegal action.

[Cleets Part 2]

The U.S. attorneys appointed by President Bush - in what I find to be one of his most suspicious acts - and he has a lot of suspicious acts under his administration...

Anyway:
The U.S. attorneys appointed by Bush, after firing perfectly qualified lawyers -then- hiring replacement lawyers from third rate programs with little to no experience so he and his administration could subvert legal precedence and influence change without resistance is ridiculous...

Hysterically many of his replacement appointees were effectively C- grade lawyers with failing practices...

all so he could solicit favors with no resistance and effect change without consequences...

How any American could be "proud" of that Administration is puzzling

[dbackjon]

Yet Cleets, many long for the return of Bush - right Z?

[AZGrizFan]

Yet Cleets, many long for the return of Bush - right Z?

Absolutely not. I long for the return of McCain.

[dbackjon]

Yet Cleets, many long for the return of Bush - right Z?

Absolutely not. I long for the return of McCain.

He was blathering on like an idiot this morning on Good Morning Arizona today

[AZGrizFan]

Absolutely not. I long for the return of McCain.

He was blathering on like an idiot this morning on Good Morning Arizona today

As opposed to Obama blathering on at Notre Dame yesterday?

Same shit, different day Jon. Only difference is, McCain's blathering was withOUT the aid of a teleprompter.

[dbackjon]

He was blathering on like an idiot this morning on Good Morning Arizona today

As opposed to Obama blathering on at Notre Dame yesterday?

Same shit, different day Jon. Only difference is, McCain's blathering was withOUT the aid of a teleprompter.

Obama gave a very good speech at Notre Dame...

[danefan]

The U.S. attorneys appointed by President Bush - in what I find to be one of his most suspicious acts - and he has a lot of suspicious acts under his administration...

Anyway:
The U.S. attorneys appointed by Bush, after firing perfectly qualified lawyers -then- hiring replacement lawyers from third rate programs with little to no experience so he and his administration could subvert legal precedence and influence change without resistance is ridiculous...

Hysterically many of his replacement appointees were effectively C- grade lawyers with failing practices...
all so he could solicit favors with no resistance and effect change without consequences...

How any American could be "proud" of that Administration is puzzling

I think you may have overgeneralized a bit Cleets.

We all know you think lawyers are the scum of the earth, but what are you basing the bolded statement above on? What law school they graduated from?

Anyone who has ever had any experience in the legal profession knows the truth about law school - where you go to law school has very little to do with the quality of your legal work. The law school people go to is by and large due to how well they performed on one single day of their life (the LSAT test). It speaks little to the intelligence or legal ability of any lawyer.

I do agree with you that Bush's US Attorney appointments were way too political in nature. But I'm not sure they were "C- grade lawyers".

[AZGrizFan]

As opposed to Obama blathering on at Notre Dame yesterday?

Same shit, different day Jon. Only difference is, McCain's blathering was withOUT the aid of a teleprompter.

Obama READ a very good speech at Notre Dame...

FIFY

[SeattleGriz]

The U.S. attorneys appointed by President Bush - in what I find to be one of his most suspicious acts - and he has a lot of suspicious acts under his administration...

Anyway:
The U.S. attorneys appointed by Bush, after firing perfectly qualified lawyers -then- hiring replacement lawyers from third rate programs with little to no experience so he and his administration could subvert legal precedence and influence change without resistance is ridiculous...

Hysterically many of his replacement appointees were effectively C- grade lawyers with failing practices...

all so he could solicit favors with no resistance and effect change without consequences...

How any American could be "proud" of that Administration is puzzling

I might be confusing facts, but aren't Presidents allowed to replace the US Attorneys at will? Didn't Clinton get rid of all of them and then replace them with a new bunch? Once again, I might be mixing facts here.

[danefan]

The U.S. attorneys appointed by President Bush - in what I find to be one of his most suspicious acts - and he has a lot of suspicious acts under his administration...

Anyway:
The U.S. attorneys appointed by Bush, after firing perfectly qualified lawyers -then- hiring replacement lawyers from third rate programs with little to no experience so he and his administration could subvert legal precedence and influence change without resistance is ridiculous...

Hysterically many of his replacement appointees were effectively C- grade lawyers with failing practices...

all so he could solicit favors with no resistance and effect change without consequences...

How any American could be "proud" of that Administration is puzzling

I might be confusing facts, but aren't Presidents allowed to replace the US Attorneys at will? Didn't Clinton get rid of all of them and then replace them with a new bunch? Once again, I might be mixing facts here.

Yes, US Attorneys serve at the pleasure of the President. However, the issue Cleets is referring to is in 2006 when a bunch of US Atty's were fired mid-term, which was unprecedented.

The Wiki page on the issue is pretty accurate:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dismissal_ ... ontroversy

[Cleets Part 2]

I might be confusing facts, but aren't Presidents allowed to replace the US Attorneys at will? Didn't Clinton get rid of all of them and then replace them with a new bunch? Once again, I might be mixing facts here.

Yes, US Attorneys serve at the pleasure of the President. However, the issue Cleets is referring to is in 2006 when a bunch of US Atty's were fired mid-term, which was unprecedented.

The Wiki page on the issue is pretty accurate:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dismissal_ ... ontroversy

And replaced by bible thumping poorly qualified hacks that aligned with the administrations desire for complete obedience and submission regardless of the constitution or precedence..!!!

[Wedgebuster]

What the F is the name of that hack Jesus based law school that all his ass minions got their degree from?

[Cleets Part 2]

Anyone who has ever had any experience in the legal profession knows the truth about law school - where you go to law school has very little to do with the quality of your legal work. The law school people go to is by and large due to how well they performed on one single day of their life (the LSAT test). It speaks little to the intelligence or legal ability of any lawyer.

Now you know I have no personal preference in law schools... talis est vita - I always say

However:
wandering around on a campus with 5,000 students - 4,000 of which are puppet wanna-be attorney blow-hards with a tendency for self aggrandizement and false importance may have had an effect on my general disposition

the other 1,000 students - being hard working applied science students and amazingly gifted historians... I can't imagine where you come up with the idea that I have a distaste for lawyers

[Cleets Part 2]

What the F is the name of that hack Jesus based law school that all his ass minions got their degree from?

(Shhhhh....)
actually I have no idea - I'm just being a total ass-hat

[danefan]

What the F is the name of that hack Jesus based law school that all his ass minions got their degree from?

Regency Law School - and it wasn't all his asshats - just Monica Goodling. And BTW she was a complete scapegoat for Gonzales.

There is a fundamental flaw with Regency Law school that has nothing to do with its place in the BS world of US News Rankings. This is where I lose faith (pun intended) in Regency:

However, training in legal skills alone is not enough. What makes Regent unique among law schools approved by the American Bar Association is that we thoroughly integrate a Christian perspective in the classroom. We are committed to the proposition that there is truth--eternal principles of justice--about the way we should practice law and about the law itself. We believe character matters. We talk openly about how an attorney can have integrity and humility in a profession that challenges both. And we discuss not only what the law is, but also its origin and what it ought to be.

http://www.regent.edu/acad/schlaw/dean/home.cfm