Political Punch
Power, pop, and probings from ABC News Senior White House Correspondent Jake Tapper

« Previous | Main | Next »

Civil Liberties Activists Embrace 'Law & Order' Season Premiere

September 26, 2009 11:55 AM

As we all know, in the criminal justice system, the people are represented by two separate yet equally important groups: the police who investigate crime and the district attorneys who prosecute the offenders.

Last night's episode of television's longest running drama -- NBC's "Law & Order" -- featured District Attorney Jack McCoy prosecuting a John Yoo-esque Bush administration Justice Department attorney for writing a legal memo authorizing the torture of detainees.

"Jack, you want to prosecute a member of the Bush administration for assaulting suspected terrorists?" McCoy is asked in the season premiere episode, titled "Memo from the Dark Side."

"The word is 'torturing,'" says McCoy, played by Sam Waterston. "And yes -- it's about time somebody did."

The episode has been embraced by some of the most vocal advocates for prosecuting actual Bush administration officials for torture.

Anthony D. Romero, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union, wrote on the Huffington Post that "[w]hat McCoy understands is that in America, the rule of law applies to everyone. No one is above the law, not even (and some might say especially) the most powerful. ... In real life, there has yet to be an investigation into the high-level authorization of torture, a crime that has stained the reputation of our nation at home and abroad."

Writes Romero: "Toward the end of the episode, the assistant D.A. declares, '[I]t is not disloyal to hold our officials to the highest standards of conduct.' Indeed. In fact, it is the epitome of loyalty and patriotism to do so. Now the question is, in real life, will Attorney General Holder rise to the occasion?"

Over at Salon, Glenn Greenwald interviews the show's executive producer and lead writer René Balcer.

"Three specific aspects of the episode impressed me most," Greenwald writes, "(1) its depiction of torture and those who authorized it is deliberately realistic, so it's crystal clear exactly which Bush officials they are indicting (it contains the infamous Yoo endorsement of presidential testicle-crushing); (2) it focuses on the deaths caused by the American torture regime, not merely some 'water poured down three people's noses'; and, most of all: (3) it develops a plausible and thoughtful theory for how criminal liability could be imposed on the DOJ lawyers who authorized Bush's torture.  If nothing else, this depiction of the brutality of America's torture and the need for accountability will likely reach at least some who haven't been previously exposed to such arguments, and provides a good counterweight to the standard depiction of torture in American entertainment as something employed by heroic protectors."

-jpt

September 26, 2009 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (46)

User Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

What do we expect from Hollywood? These are the same people who are trying to shield Roman Polanski and outraged that he would be extradited to face trial for drugging, raping, and sodomizing a 13 year old girl. But apparently it's ok, since the girl is now in her 40's and finally got over it (eg: holds no malice towards him).

Posted by: SjB | Sep 29, 2009 12:05:00 PM

The torture I find most abhorrant is using children as human bombs, beheading,chopping off other limbs, and blowing up innocent people hence 9/11. I don't recall America ever doing this. As for Cambodia, we left and what did the left do? Did they protest the killing fields? That is what happens when you have barbaric leaders!I don't recall the peace loving left protesting that! Where was the Geneva Convention after 9/11? Humiliation, water boarding, or any other punishment we have done to terrorists connot be compared to what they have done or would like to do to every living infidel( Non-Muslim)living. Just read the Koran.

Posted by: Been There | Sep 29, 2009 1:27:40 AM

A show with such a long record and running time regularly gets this sort of publicity. But it's good though in my opinion because the show is very critical and I think that people in those fields of law do notice it.

You say batman I saw Vawncast

Posted by: Roger | Sep 28, 2009 10:07:23 PM

as an independent voter and a patriotic american i can only say that this episode speaks loudly to me. conventional or unconventional combatants should be treated the same. i used to believe that america stood for something greater but alas, we've succumbed to the low road regarding our view of torture. we americans are better than this and need to shout it out loudly. we aren't the best and brightest because we follow the lead of the lowly but because we believe in a greater society than most of the rest of the world. our vision has become clouded by right-wing zealots.

Posted by: Rod Ellis | Sep 28, 2009 8:36:35 PM

I used to love L & O. Lately it is less entertainment and more in you face politicized. Last night was the last episode for me.

Posted by: Elaine | Sep 28, 2009 9:58:49 AM

I absolutely loved this episode. IMO, it wasn't left wing or right wing, but reminded us that we, as Americans, must adhere to a higher standard of ethics. How can we criticize terrorists when we ourselves condone & practice terrorist torture methods?

As a New Yorker who watched the Twin Towers burn & fall, I know how easy it is to feel that we must protect ourselves at any cost. But at the cost of our innate goodness? No.

Posted by: DonnaJo | Sep 28, 2009 9:06:57 AM

Interesting, too, how the show is over before you know if the verdict is "guilty" or "innocent". The left, foolishly, automatically and always presume guilt first; when it is the opposition being taken to task.

If the show's proverbial show ere on the other foot? You can be darn sure the left's inclination would be to presume innocence first and to allow the trial to play out to its just conclusion.

It's a shame the left is so filled with hate instead of reason and rationale.

Posted by: Guest Comment | Sep 28, 2009 4:55:56 AM

I used to love L&O. But over the last couple of years, the writing has followed the radical leftist Hollywood propensity, although they would like to think they accomplish it subtly and cleverly... another example is the episode earlier in the summer when L&O found a completely convoluted way to somehow link/compare tea party protests to the Baader Meinhof gang/RAF of the 70s/80s in Germany. Absolutely absurd and not at all surprising. Those who sympathize with radicals turning the table... which is a main component of Rules of Radicals. Hardly subtle or clever.


Posted by: BK | Sep 28, 2009 12:30:09 AM

the US and the russians are the greatest terrorists in the world since Hitler. they turned their foreign policies into crusades for their respective ideologies, willing to instigate, invade, torture and even murder in the name of their dogmas. both love to preach water while gulping down wine. both love to defend the law while breaking it as often as they can. both will go down in history as the ultimate failures of the mankind.

Posted by: jaymzz | Sep 27, 2009 7:21:16 PM

There is a new book describing the Democratic Party’s libertarian roots and how they switched from Jefferson and Jackson to Rousseau and Marx in the 20th century. You’ll find it on Amazon Books or on the website

Posted by: Clay Barham | Sep 27, 2009 6:25:32 PM

Hot air from conservative, right-wing commenters. Your intolerance is disgusting. This show was not about promoting a left or right view, but about the principles of our Constitution and the values that underpin them. It was about the struggle to be true to those principles in difficult times and complex situations. Those people who are saying they will never watch the show again would prefer that everything in life be forced into neat categories of black and white. They want music, poetry, television, movies, novels, etc. to present a neat, unconflicted, unsophisticated view of the world--namely, their view. Fortunately, it's a free country, and you are free to turn off your tv, cancel your newspaper and magazine subscriptions, throw out your library card and hide in a bunker where you can create your own entertainment. Just don't fool yourself that you'll be missed!

Posted by: David | Sep 27, 2009 3:02:41 PM

I like it when Hollywood postures like the font of all truth and morality. It's comedic, but perhaps not in the way they intend.

Does anyone need to be subjected to pious sanctimony from Hollywood writers, producers and actors who have never stood eyeball to eyeball with someone who wants to cut their heads off? No.

This country has enough of the left's "courageous" calls to patriotism made from behind the shield of brave men and women who do stand eyeball to eyeball with the worst of humanity. That's why nobody watches TV anymore, and why newspapers are going bankrupt. Their views are not patriotic or courageous, just obnoxious.

Posted by: mr | Sep 27, 2009 2:02:39 PM

“Even our schools have fallen victim to the same phenomenon. Political correctness will wreck havock on our country”

I hate it when my havock gets wrecked. The repair work wreaks havoc on my pocketbook.

Posted by: Rudy | Sep 27, 2009 5:41:53 AM

I saw part of a movie not long ago, I stopped watching about 1/2 an hour into this piece of garbage. The movie was about a terrorist plot to commit some atrocity, I think a biological weapon.
And, imagine, the terrorists were blond Scandanavians ......
Tell me how plausible that is.

Posted by: Terry | Sep 27, 2009 4:20:53 AM

This isn't a new phenomenon - plenty of movies & TV shows are basically propaganda to brainwash viewers into supporting left-wing ideas.
What is more troubling is that the mainstream media which is supposed to report facts & accurate analysis does the same. Even our schools have fallen victim to the same phenomenon.
Political correctness will wreck havock on our country, much as it's already done in Europe.
This is especially true re: anything to do with Islam.

Posted by: Terry | Sep 27, 2009 3:01:36 AM

"I find it interesting all the people saying they turned it off. It made an argument for both views of the debate."

I didn't see the episode (have never seen L&O). What were the "pro" interrogation views and what makes you think they were presented as forcefully and in as caricature-free manner as the "anti" interrogation views?

Posted by: PD | Sep 26, 2009 11:19:12 PM

pdogg757,
I think your a "suspected terrorist". Say "Good bye" to that family of yours and please report to GITMO so we can get some "human intel". (Do you see the problem with this?)

Posted by: steve3589337 | Sep 26, 2009 6:26:49 PM

I am against torture i am neither right wing or left. I am an American. The Hague rules and Geneva conventions were cavalierish rules created and agreed to by countries to be gentlemanly about war and prisoner treatment. That is the conventional way of thought. Al Queda is an unconventional enemy and will require unconventional methods to get human intel. Terrorist have no state, no prime minister, no infrastructure to bomb out to force them to conform. No i don't believe in torture, what i do believe is that making a suspected terrorist as extremely, extremely uncomfortable as possible without causing death. If that keeps my mother from being blown up in building or keeps my daughter from being killed a terrorist attack i am cool with that. if someone has a better way that works than i am open to it.

Posted by: pdogg757 | Sep 26, 2009 5:53:46 PM

I can't help thinking we'd be much better of if Ford hadn't pardoned Nixon, and he stood to account for his crimes, especially the fourth article of impeachment, the illegal bombing of Cambodia.

Posted by: Flash Override | Sep 26, 2009 5:32:02 PM

No surprise. "Law and Order" has increasingly had a left wing/civil liberties slant.

Posted by: HenryC | Sep 26, 2009 4:51:39 PM

Post a comment





 

POLITICAL VIDEOS