Thanks for nothing, Victoria Toensing
posted at 7:11 pm on August 25, 2009 by Karl
printer-friendly
Victoria Toensing, former chief counsel for the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, former deputy assistant attorney general, criminal division, and cable news fixture, seems outrageously outraged about Attorney General Eric Holder’s decision to to investigate possible abuses by CIA interrogators in using harsh tactics on terror detainees:
“All volunteers step forward. We have a person in custody who is high-ranking al-Qaeda. He taunts that an attack on United States soil is imminent but laughs mockingly when we ask for specifics. We need interrogators.” Such was the threat in the summer of 2002 when the CIA asked the Justice Department for guidance on what its personnel could do to get such information from captured al-Qaeda lieutenant Abu Zubdayah.
Since then, the lawyers who stepped forward to provide carefully structured counsel have been criminally investigated and told that, even if they are not prosecuted, their conduct will be turned over to their state bars. The interrogators who stepped forward were promised in early spring by President Obama that, even if they erred in judgment while protecting our country, the president would rather “move forward.” However, in late summer, they are under criminal scrutiny.
Even though an earlier investigation by career prosecutors reviewed the same conduct and refused prosecution of all but one contract employee who was brought to trial in 2007. Even though congressional leaders had knowledge of the interrogation techniques and made no attempt to stop them. Even though the conduct is more than six years old. Even though the CIA has taken administrative action against some of the personnel involved in the interrogations. Even though being just a target of a criminal investigation costs thousands of dollars in legal fees. Even though being just a target of a criminal investigation takes a horrendous mental toll. Even though the morale of the CIA will plunge to the depths it did in the wake of the Church Committee attacks. Even though the release of the names of those being scrutinized will make them terrorist targets for the rest of their lives. Even if they are cleared.
The next time our government employees are asked to step forward to get information of a possible, even probable, imminent attack, no one will. Even though…
Of course, what is missing from Toensing’s venting is any mention of Attorney General Eric Holder. The reason for the glaring omission might just be that, as Byron York reported at the time, Toensing backed Holder:
I just got off the phone with Joe DiGenova, the former U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia who, along with his wife and fellow lawyer Victoria Toensing, signed a letter in support of Eric Holder’s nomination to be attorney general. DiGenova told me he and Toensing were approached by Republican lawyer Mike Madigan about signing the letter, but they were in favor of Holder’s nomination much earlier than that. “Victoria and I signed the letter, but we were supporting him before that,” DiGenova told me. “Our support comes from the fact that we have known Eric for many years, that we respect him as a lawyer, and, more importantly, we are very concerned about the Justice Department. There have been too many AG’s who don’t understand the place. Eric is very qualified to fix it, because it is a mess. It isn’t just the politicization of it, it’s the career people who need supervision…We know Eric personally, and we believe him to be a superbly qualified candidate to fix the place.” DiGenova added that he and Toensing also went to Capitol Hill to speak in support of Holder with Judiciary Committee chairman Sen. Pat Leahy (this also happened well before the letter was sent).
Toensing does not even have the wafer-thin fig leaf of “private assurances” from Holder that the most clueless GOP Senators are modeling today. If Toensing wants to vent at someone, she could start with a mirror, then move on to her husband and the rest of the chummy “go along to get along” Beltway Republicans.
You must be logged in to post a comment.


Greenroom Feed
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Two things:
#1, Toensing opposing Holder’s nomination would not have made a whit’s difference. She should be embarrassed for supporting him and we can hope she’ll learn from it.
#2, Holder has a boss and his boss is ultimately responsible. Yes, Holder is an embarrassment – he’s also Obama’s guy; we’re getting the justice Obama wants us to have.
Which is where our focus ought to be.
BD57 on August 25, 2009 at 7:59 PM
Obama was having enough vetting problems that if the GOP had wanted to make this an excruciatingly big deal, they could have, and made it far more difficult for Obama and Holder to pursue this course. Toensing opposing Holder’s nomination might not have made a difference, but her support for him helped grease the skids, when the GOP should have been dragging Holder over eight miles of broken glass.
Karl on August 25, 2009 at 8:22 PM
Great piece!
Cinday Blackburn on August 26, 2009 at 5:13 AM
The GOP plays nice and Democats pound them. Democrats can beat up a Hispanic judicial candidate but Republicans are warned not to do the same. Why didn’t it cost the Democrats?
When will these tools learn the lessons?
drjohn on August 26, 2009 at 9:14 AM
I am withholding my vote from Senator Johnny Isakson next year because of his voting for Holder. It is inexcusable that he got any GOP votes.
bill30097 on August 28, 2009 at 12:12 PM