Feeds: 
symbol identifies content for paid subscribers only.
JAY BYBEE'S ANONYMOUS APOLOGY TOUR.
Jay Bybee has become a focus of civil-libertarian anger not just because of his role in drafting OLC memos that "legalized" torture but because he is a sitting federal judge. Today, Bybee began his public charm offensive in a piece for The Washington Post, which contains a number of quotes from friends and associates saying things like "On the primary memo, that legitimated and defined torture, he just felt it got away from him." Bybee should fire whoever is organizing his public outreach. The Post piece completely undercuts the idea that Bybee and the administration didn't know the methods they were using was torture, despite Bybee's own legal arguments. Rather than defending the notion that the methods Bybee approved were not torture, his friends are confirming that Bybee knew the methods were torture, and that's why he feels bad now. But there's no "feeling bad about breaking the law" exception to breaking the law. You're no less legally liable because you feel bad about what you did.
But this final passage is what is truly devastating:
Bybee's friends said he never sought the job at the Office of Legal Counsel. The reason he went back to Washington, Guynn said, was to interview with then-White House counsel Alberto R. Gonzales for a slot that would be opening on the 9th Circuit when a judge retired. The opening was not yet there, however, so Gonzales asked, "Would you be willing to take a position at the OLC first?" Guynn said.Being unable to answer for what followed is "very frustrating," said Guynn, who spoke to Bybee before agreeing to be interviewed.
So Bybee knew he was breaking the law in allowing the use of torture, but you have to understand, he only did it because he really wanted to be a federal judge. That's not exculpatory information, that's motive.
-- A. Serwer
COMMENTS (8)
Yup. And the rest of the article makes a damning case that Bybee is utterly unsuited to serve as a judge. His friends' "defense" is that he didn't manage to gain a command of the material he was assessing, didn't grasp the real-world implications of his legal conclusions, and has no spine.
And this is a guy who's campaigning to keep his seat on the federal appellate bench. Jesus.
Posted by: Angus Johnston | April 25, 2009 11:40 AM
From the article:
"Getting to the personal side of him, my sense is he would love to repudiate them all [i.e. the memos]," Blakesley said. "Which gets to: Why'd you sign it?"
No, actually, it gets to this: Why don't you actually repudiate them now?
Posted by: RSA | April 25, 2009 11:44 AM
Who cares? The Bad, Mean, Nasty Terror Guy's [sic] didn't come here and start hacking off head's [sic], which proves that the Shrubya Administration's apparent crime's [sic] were actually for the good of all...even terrorist-coddling lib's [sic].
I'm not laughing, because I have friends (and a former boss) who actually believe it.
Posted by: Dean Keeton | April 25, 2009 1:57 PM
I hope all Americans understand that the acts of torture that were given the cover of law under Bybee's grotesque memo could easily, and probably were, used AGAINST AMERICANS!
I think it was Frank Rich of the NYT that hit the nail on the head when he described Bybee as the banality of evil. THat he sits in the bench of one of America's most powerful courts is a tragedy for this country and a daily reminder of our shame as these acts of torture were done in our name.
Posted by: Vinnie From Indy | April 26, 2009 2:30 PM
Bush appointed 2 S Ct judges, 61 of 179 appellate court judges, and 261 of 678 district court judges - more than 40% of all federal judges. And most of them they were selected on the same criteria as Bybee. They went out of their way to find spineless, bootlicking worshippers of arbitrary authority.
Posted by: Bloix | April 26, 2009 10:46 PM
Bybee sent the word through the Deseret News. The Mormon militia is out in force to protect him, including both Harry Reid and Orin Hatch, who otherwise don't agree on anything.
Posted by: Alex M | April 27, 2009 1:31 PM
"I came, I saw, I conquered, I felt really really bad about it"?
Posted by: Anonymous | April 28, 2009 10:08 PM
Living in Canada, I was shocked to find out that Alberto Gonzales also interviewed John Roberts for the Chief Justice appointment to the Supreme Court, and that Roberts didn't recuse himself in the important Hamdan case while waiting for Gonzales' appointment.
So, the same happened with Bybee: dangle a position on the bench, and then watch the toadying take place.
http://www.newsday.com/news/printedition/nation/ny-uscort184388315aug18,0,2097425,print.story?coll=ny-nationalnews-print
Posted by: jeffry house | April 29, 2009 2:09 PM