Geez it’s hard to keep any balanced feelings towards any of these guys the more you read. I’ve tried to keep a little respect for Levin, based on several things from before, but after looking at what’s been produced that’s all pretty much shot now as well.

EW – something to factor in when you are looking at things like the Aug 6, 2004 letter to Rizzo is that the Rasul case was decided in June of 2004. That’s where they all got the shocker that yes, the Judicial branch of the US gov was going to say it had jurisdiction over the legality of the actions of the Executive branch, even when the Executive branch was claiming that when it acted outside of the US territorial boundaries it was no longer subject to the US laws that create it and empower it to operate at all.

So when Levin says in his 8-6 and 8-27 letters that they can only be relied upon to the extent the techniques being authorized are taking place outside of US jurisdiction, he’s being about as irresponsible as you get. We’d just had a big shake up on the jurisdictional front and the only way he touches on it is to say, “go ye forth and torture with impunity – provided you never end up before a US court that says it has jurisdiction, in which case, don’t come lookin at me bubba” Unfreakinbelievable.

Something else he does – on waterboarding is pretty indicative IMO that he had plenty of reason to believe tha the “facts” being presented to him were untrue (and since he probably should be charged with constructive notice of info that someone in DOJ, like Dan Coleman at FBI, had and spoke about freely and would have anted up with the exercise of any due diligence … argh, I won’t even go there I guess)

Anyway, what he says about the waterboarding he is greenlighting in 2004 is that

As we understand the facts, the detainees previously subjected to the technique are “in good physiological and psychological health”

and

they have not described the technique as physically painful

and

This understanding of the facts is material to our conclusion that the technique, as limited in accordance with this letter, would not violate any statute of the United States.

Ok – so he’s saying if someone already waterboarded had mentioned it was painful, the opinion can’t be relied upon? Sheez louise – the things that opens up are legion.

And then there’s the psychological health and physiological health of Zubaydah. You have to pretty much infer from all this, what with Comey’s involvement in the original Padilla motions and allegations of ill treatment of the “sources” and Comey heading up the investigations prior to his big presser June of 2004 with all the Zubaydah info supposedly collected for that, etc. that just maybe Levin had a freakin hint that Zubaydah wasn’t in primo mental and physical health. So instead of dealing with it, he carves himself a CYA niche.

Everything in that summer / fall of 2004 time frame that I’ve looked at (the 7-7 Goldmsith letter is a good example) reeks of CYA about the DOJ’s role in authorizing Abu Ghraib types of abuses. It tries to wrap up reliance memos with ribbons and bows that will give it the ability to disclaim the known deaths and atrocities as being “outside” the limits it gave, yet still protect all the crimes with a layer of classification and “national security need to protect our uber confidential *advice*” to just get through the 2004 elections with Bush still in place so they can all get saved by his efforts to destroy evidence and use the Exec office to cleanse them all.

That so many were so unjust is pretty traumatic. Rivkin can go with jarring, but I’m just too shook to be able to wade through any more of it for awhile.