The Inside Story of How Bill Clinton Sacrificed Prisoners’ Rights for Political Gain
(The Intercept) On the eve of the New York state primary last month, as Hillary Clinton came closer to the Democratic nomination, Vice President Joe Biden went on TV and defended her husbands 1994 crime bill. Asked in an interview if he felt shame for his role passing a law that has been the subject of so much recent criticism, Biden answered, Not at all, and boasted of its successes among them putting 100,000 cops on the street. His remarks sparked a new round of debate over the legacy of the crime bill, which has haunted Clinton ever since she hit the campaign trail with a vow to end the era of mass incarceration.
A few days later, on April 24, a lesser-known crime law quietly turned 20. The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 or AEDPA was signed by Bill Clinton in the wake of the Oklahoma City bombing. While it has been mostly absent from the recent debates over the crime policies of the 90s, its impact has been no less profound, particularly when it comes to a bedrock constitutional principle: habeas corpus, or the right of people in prison to challenge their detention. For 20 years, AEDPA has shut the courthouse door on prisoners trying to prove they were wrongfully convicted. Americans are mostly unaware of this legacy, even as we know more than ever about wrongful convictions. Barry Scheck, co-founder and head of the Innocence Project, calls AEDPA a disaster and a major roadblock since its passage. Many would like to see it repealed.
If the Clintons have not been forced to defend AEDPA, its partly because neither the law nor its shared history with the crime bill is well understood. AEDPAs dizzying provisions from harsh immigration policies to toughened federal sentencing were certainly a hasty response to terrorism. But the law was also the product of an administration that long before the Oklahoma attack had abandoned its partys core principles on criminal justice, deciding instead to wield crime policy as political weapon. After the Republicans seized control of Congress in the historic 1994 midterm elections, the Clinton White House sought to double down on its law-and-order image in advance of the 1996 presidential race. In the short term, it was a winning political strategy for Clinton. In the long term, it would help pave the way to one of the worst laws of his presidency.
The story that sets the stage for AEDPA can be partly told through White House memos from the time, a trove of which were released in 2014. Buried among hundreds of thousands of digital records housed in the Clinton Digital Library are previously confidential documents that shine light on Clintons criminal justice strategies in the mid-90s, yet have been largely overlooked.
One memo reveals a White House weighing its options in the weeks after the Republican Revolution. Dated November 22, 1994, it was written by top Department of Justice lawyer Ron Klain, who sent it to his boss as well as members of President Clintons inner circle, including Bruce Reed (the operative behind the famed pledge to end welfare as we know it) and senior White House adviser Rahm Emanuel. The memo was titled Crime Bill Redux. ..................(more)
https://theintercept.com/2016/05/04/the-untold-story-of-bill-clintons-other-crime-bill/
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)Greenwald has publicly said he will do everything in his power to prevent a Hillary presidency no matter the cost...
So why should I view Glenn's "news" site any differently than Fox, Glenn Beck or the Daily Caller?
Asking for a friend
marmar
(77,109 posts)Are these things not documented truths?
enough
(13,268 posts)leaving no time for actually discussing the facts of any given article.
marmar
(77,109 posts)Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)You mean exactly like that?
Let's call it what it is...
xocet
(3,874 posts)Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)xocet
(3,874 posts)through the flood of fallacious piddling that this thread's lack of substance so sincerely promises to that effort.
Nitram
(22,945 posts)Keep it up if you support Trump. It's either Trump of Clinton.
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)So why don't you go Greenwald your grandma in the Greenwald, you Greenwalding piece of Greenwald?
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)assuming you have the stones to show your face...
But that's cool... Call me names, spew out the insults, etc... That's all you Snowdenistas have been able to use against me for two years now... I'll take all you fucking people on.
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)Never before have I seen so much attention from the pseudo left paid to a 22-year-old crime bill (and I remember when it was being debated, so I know what pundits were saying then) while at the same time whitewashing the fact that Sanders himself voted for it...
Then when you have some free time, go scour the Intercept site and count all the negative hot takes about the Clintons and Obama (they average out to about one per day), and see how many negative think pieces you'll find about Sanders (and Putin, for that matter).
clg311
(119 posts)Because the victims of his policies voted for him.