Also, the Times picks up on that footnote in the Steven Bradbury memo that we highlighted earlier. Reports the paper:
In a footnote to Mr. Bradbury's Jan. 15, 2009, memorandum sharply criticizing Mr. Yoo's work, Mr.
Bradbury signaled that he did not want his repudiation of the legal reasoning employed by Mr. Yoo to be used against Mr. Yoo as part of the ethics probe. Mr. Bradbury wrote that his retractions were
not "intended to suggest in any way that the attorneys involved in the preparation of the opinions in question" violated any "applicable standards of professional responsibility."....................
Why would Bradbury have gone out of his way to make this point -- especially in the context of repudiating those opinions?
Perhaps because the Justice Department's Office of Professional Responsibility has been working on a report on whether OLC lawyers violated standards of professional responsibility when they approved harsh interrogation tactics like water-boarding. And, as Newsweek revealed last month, a draft of the report is sharply critical of three senior OLC lawyers in particular -- John Yoo, Jay Bybee, and Steven Bradbury.
more at:
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/03/is_footnote_in_olc_memo_designed_to_protect_its_au.phpand:
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/03/more_olc_memos_to_come.php