The Fall of Greg Craig

| Fri Nov. 20, 2009 10:42 AM PST

Time has an interesting tick-tock this week about Greg Craig, the White House lawyer tasked with dismantling Bush-era interrogation and detention policies.  At first, Obama was on board with Craig's plans.  Then, reality set in.  Here he is deciding whether to release a set of "torture memos" last spring:

Obama arrived at [Rahm] Emanuel's office a few minutes later, took off his windbreaker and sat down at a table lined with about a dozen national-security and political advisers. He asked each to state a position and then convened an impromptu debate, selecting Craig and McDonough to argue opposing sides. Craig deployed one of Obama's own moral arguments: that releasing the memos "was consistent with taking a high road" and was "sensitive to our values and our traditions as well as the rule of law." Obama paused, then decided in favor of Craig, dictating a detailed statement explaining his position that would be released the next day.

But for Craig, it turned out to be a Pyrrhic victory. Four days later, former Vice President Dick Cheney attacked Obama on Fox News Channel for dismantling the policies he and Bush had put in place to keep the country safe. More significant was the reaction within Obama's camp. Democratic pollsters charted a disturbing trend: a drop in Obama's support among independents, driven in part by national-security issues. Emanuel quietly delegated his aides to get more deeply involved in the process. Damaged by the episode, Craig was about to suffer his first big setback.

Obama repeatedly promised during the presidential campaign to close the prison at Guantánamo Bay, but Guantánamo proved much easier to say than to do....But inside the White House, the mood had changed amid the furor over the release of the torture memos in April. McDonough and other NSC advisers assembled in the Oval Office to discuss it. Obama raised questions about security — were the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security on board? Separately, his legislative-affairs staff warned of stiff congressional resistance — and Republicans responded on cue. Word of the plan leaked on April 24, and Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell launched three weeks of near daily attacks on the idea of letting the Uighurs loose in the U.S. Dick Durbin, Obama's mentor and the Democrats' No. 2 in the Senate, called the White House asking for ammunition to fight back against McConnell and the Republicans. "What's our plan?" Durbin asked.

....Obama needed to regain control quickly, and he started by jettisoning liberal positions he had been prepared to accept — and had even okayed — just weeks earlier. First to go was the release of the pictures of detainee abuse. Days later, Obama sided against Craig again, ending the suspension of Bush's extrajudicial military commissions. The following week, Obama pre-empted an ongoing debate among his national-security team and embraced one of the most controversial of Bush's positions: the holding of detainees without charges or trial, something he had promised during the campaign to reject.

The whole piece is worth a read.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Kevin Drum is a political blogger for Mother Jones. For more of his stories, click here.

Get Mother Jones by Email - Free. Like what you're reading? Get the best of MoJo three times a week.

Comments

scaredy-cat.

scaredy-cat.

Governing by day-to-day

Governing by day-to-day polls is rarely a good idea and it seems to be behind a lot of Obama's worst moves.

you know

The Obama administration's deep and abiding distaste for anything even faintly liberal really makes me less likely to go out to vote in 2010 and 2012.

If it really doesn't make any fucking difference when I do get the guy I voted for in office, why even bother? Let the GOP take over, burn the entire fucking country down with the Democrats, and then let's start over.

This could be good politics,

This could be good politics, or it could be a lack of backbone. More and more, Obama tends to demonstrate the latter.

So the upshot is

So the upshot is, he didn't change his position because he changed his views on national security, he changed his position because of polls and resistance by other branches of the govt. What a wuss.

Time

I'd trust time to get this story right about as far as I'd trust Fox News.

Executive Power is an institutional/power problem

Just more evidence that executive power is a "situational" situation, not just a dispositional one. The executive cannot give power away even if it wants to, it has to be taken, and the legislative branch (Senate, especially) has no incentives to do so, at least compared to its incentives to demagogue on national security issues.

Well, I'll probably vote for

Well,

I'll probably vote for the Democrat on the ticket, whoever s/he is. But gone are the days of active support for Obama and Change We Can Believe In. The man is a wuss, enabled by that puffed up waste of protoplasm who used to be a a congressman from Chicago. He can't even call down L'il Timmy at Treasury and Loquacious Larry in his own building. This will not end well.

I have long held the view

I have long held the view that the Democrats are determined to prove that Nader was right in 2000.

Obama seems to be oin way to being the next Carter.

Realpolitik

Realpolitik

I'm glad he has a moral compass

That's exactly what I thought I was voting for.

Kevin quotes the Time piece

Kevin quotes the Time piece on the Obama team's bloodletting over the torture memo release and Guantanamo closure issues and adds without comment "The whole piece is worth a read."

But a couple of days after the 2008 election (Nov 7), Kevin wrote more passionately about this. He wrote a post urging Obama to confront these issues sooner rather than later and concluded it with "here's hoping that the constitutional law professor doesn't wait too long."

My comment to that post was:

On the other hand, it may be better if [Obama] doesn't spend political capital reversing these things right away -- and focus, instead, on a major policy initiative (such as health care, or fixing the financial system) letting this Bush stuff atrophy for now. Doing otherwise will invite an enormous amount of right wing criticism which will paint him as weak on security and will make it harder for him to be the "persuader" we need.

Shop for a nba jersey at

Shop for a nba jersey at SFGate Fan Shop:Why buy a nba jerseys from us? Our competitive prices on discount nba jerseyare a good reason.

I'm glad Kevin brought this

I'm glad Kevin brought this Time article to my attention. But here as on other occasions he shys away from direct criticism of Obama, merely citing the piece as "worth reading" rather than speaking the criticism directly. Kevin, Obama's decision to sustain indefinite detention is a terrible decision on a non-negotiable issue, and I think you should be a bit more direct about saying so -- even if it offends many of the folks who read Mother Jones! Fiat justitia...

This is annoying: Obama, a

This is annoying:

Obama, a onetime constitutional-law professor, told Craig he needed more time and asked for an extension. But when Michael Hayden, Bush's CIA director who had stayed on in Obama's first month, learned that the memos might be released, he went ballistic. (See pictures of the CIA.)

"What are you doing?" Hayden, just retired, demanded in a March 18 call to Craig. If Obama released the memos, Hayden argued, al-Qaeda would be able to train its warriors to resist the techniques described in their contents.

"The President is never going to authorize any of those techniques," Craig replied assuredly, so there was no danger in disclosing the methods to the enemy. (See pictures of do-it-yourself waterboarding.)

Hayden pressed on: "Lemme get this right. There are no conditions of threat this nation might face that would prompt you to interrupt the sleep cycle of somebody who may have lifesaving information?"

There was a long silence. Craig would not concede the point.

Nice sleight of hand there, Hayden. Sure, under the right conditions the Administration might "interrupt the sleep cycle" of a detainee. But, of course, the pictures don't show sleep cycle interruptions. And even if they did, how exactly might seeing such a picture enable al-Qaeda to "train its warriors" to resist sleep deprivation? Seriously, is this the best our CIA Director can do? That's just stoopid. And yet, he wins. Thanks Obama!

Post new comment

Alternately, you may login to or register an account
The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <ul> <ol> <li> <blockquote>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

MoJo Comments: Send Us Your Feedback

We changed our spam software to better filter comments. Should you encounter any issues, please let us know.

Photo Essays

The chaos and humanity of war.
The craftspeople and musicians of Appalachia.
A selection of '70s ads depicting African-Americans.
As climate change melts the permafrost, native villages slip into the sea, taking a way of life with them.