Playing Constitutional Chicken

Nevertheless, Schmitt writes in the LA Times: "Legal observers say that Bates, a former section chief in the U.S. attorney's office in Washington, is a conservative and thoughtful judge who may sympathize with Congress' dilemma.

"'He might be willing to get past the threshold issues . . . because he's sophisticated, and because he knows that in telling the U.S. attorney for D.C. not to proceed with a criminal contempt, Bush left no other choice,' said Charles Tiefer, a professor at the University of Baltimore law school and a former House general counsel.

"House lawyers said that they would seek an expedited hearing to have the case heard as soon as possible. Bates could rule in the late spring or summer."

Whatever decision Bates reaches, however, will almost certainly be appealed to a higher court -- meaning that resolution might not come until the final days of Bush's presidency, or maybe even later.

Speaking of Bush's Lawyers

The Washington Post editorial board writes: "Since its creation in the early 20th century, the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel has been considered the legal conscience of the executive branch, rendering judgments to presidents and executive agencies about what the law allows. . . .

"Unfortunately, during the Bush administration, the OLC has become known as a partisan enabler of legally and ethically questionable presidential policies, including those involving the use of torture. The OLC's decisions have eroded the legitimacy of the office and given legal cover to behavior that most Americans -- and most lawyers -- regard as improper. . . .

"The Justice Department and congressional overseers need to take further steps to ensure that the OLC performs properly in the future. Most important, the OLC should publicly release more of its opinions, as was routinely done during Janet Reno's tenure as attorney general during the 1990s. Too many Bush OLC memos remain secret, with only a handful of administration officials being privy to their conclusions. Congress has the right to know how laws are being interpreted -- or whether they're even being enforced."

Torture Watch

The New York Times editorial board writes: "President Bush used his radio address on Saturday to try to scare Americans into believing they have to sacrifice their rights and their values to combat terrorism. . . .

"This is not the first time that Mr. Bush has misled Americans on intelligence-gathering and antiterrorism operations, and it may not be the last. It will be up to the next president to restore the rule of law."

The Los Angeles Times editorial board writes: "In a shameful Saturday radio address justifying his veto, Bush argued that CIA interrogators can't be confined to techniques allowed by the Army Field Manual 'because the manual is publicly available and easily accessible on the Internet.' So, of course, are the Geneva Convention and the Detainee Treatment Act, which prohibit 'cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment.' By the president's logic, acceptance of the humanitarian standards included in those documents also deprives the United States of the element of surprise."

And here are a few more excerpts from Washington Monthly's special torture issue: No More.

Jack Cloonan, who worked as a special agent for the FBI's Osama bin Laden unit from 1996 to 2002, writes; "We gave our word to every detainee that no harm would come to him or his family. This invariably stunned them, and they would feel more obligated to cooperate. Also, because all information led to more information, detainees were astonished to find out how much we already knew about them--their networks, their families, their histories. Some seemed relieved to reveal their secrets. When they broke, the transformations were remarkable. Their bodies would go limp. Many would weep. Most would ask to pray. These were men undergoing profound emotional and spiritual turmoil--the result of going from a belief that their destiny was to fight and kill people like us to a decision that they should cooperate with the enemy. . . .