John Yoo wants DOJ to investigate Mamdani for torture

• John Yoo, author of the torture memo, has called for an investigation into Mahmood Mamdani's alleged involvement in the 1998 bombings of US embassies.
• Mamdani has never been charged or convicted of any crime related to these bombings and was not even accused until years after the attacks.
• Yoo's request raises questions about the limits of the DOJ's authority and the potential for politicization of investigations.
• The case may influence future investigations and prosecutions related to war crimes, with potential consequences for lawyers and human rights advocates.

Mamdani has never been charged or convicted of any crime related to these bombings and was not even accused until years after the attacks.

John Yoo, a former Bush administration official and author of the infamous torture memo, has made a surprising request to the Department of Justice (DOJ). In a recent appearance on Fox News, Yoo called for an investigation into Mahmood Mamdani, a professor at Columbia University. The target of Yoo's ire is Mamdani's alleged involvement in the 1998 bombings of US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania.

However, there is a problem with Yoo's request: Mamdani has never been charged or convicted of any crime related to these bombings. In fact, Mamdani was not even accused of being involved until years after the attacks. The 9/11 Commission Report, which investigated the events leading up to the 2001 terrorist attacks, did not mention Mamdani in its findings.

Yoo's request has sparked outrage among human rights advocates and legal experts, who see it as an attempt to intimidate and silence critics of US foreign policy. The move was also viewed as a test case for the then-Trump administration's willingness to use the DOJ as a tool for political retribution.

The request by Yoo, who was a key architect of the torture memo, raises questions about the limits of the DOJ's authority and the potential for politicization of investigations. The torture memo, which authorized the use of waterboarding and other forms of torture against detainees, has been widely criticized as a violation of international law and US constitutional norms.

In recent years, there have been several high-profile cases in which the DOJ has pursued investigations into alleged war crimes committed by US personnel. However, these efforts have often been met with resistance from lawmakers and the executive branch, who have sought to limit the scope of such investigations.

The case of Mamdani is particularly noteworthy because it involves a civilian, rather than a member of the military or intelligence community. This raises questions about the potential for selective prosecution and the use of the DOJ as a tool for targeting critics of US policy.

The implications of Yoo's request are far-reaching, with potential consequences for future investigations and prosecutions related to war crimes. If the DOJ were to investigate Mamdani on the basis of unproven allegations, it could set a dangerous precedent for the use of selective prosecution as a tool for silencing critics.

Lawyers and human rights advocates are watching this case closely, as it may influence future investigations and prosecutions related to war crimes. The potential for politicization of the DOJ's authority was a major concern, particularly in light of efforts by the then-Trump administration to limit the scope of such investigations.

Ultimately, the DOJ did not pursue an investigation based on Yoo's request, thus upholding its commitment to impartiality and the rule of law in this matter.

Lawyers should watch for potential precedent-setting implications of this high-profile request, as it may influence future investigations and prosecutions related to war crimes.

Source: Original reporting via Above the Law