1115.org

Steven G. Bradbury, acting head of the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, clearly knows how to say something, how not to say something and maybe even how not to say anything.

Then there’s also how to come across as having said something other than what you will later be able to argue you actually said. (If there’s a word dancing tantalizingly at the edge of conscious thought, it’s probably Buttercheeks.)

Here’s what AP thinks Bradbury said:

Justice Says Waterboarding Not Legal

But let’s read the fine print together, and then you be the judge:

A senior Justice Department official says laws and other limits enacted since three terrorism suspects were waterboarded have eliminated the technique from what is now legally allowed.

“The set of interrogation methods authorized for current use is narrower than before, and it does not today include waterboarding,” Steven G. Bradbury, acting head of the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, says in remarks prepared for his appearance Thursday before the House Judiciary Constitution subcommittee.

“There has been no determination by the Justice Department that the use of waterboarding, under any circumstances, would be lawful under current law,” he said.

Here’s what he didn’t say: “”There has been a determination by the Justice Department that the use of waterboarding would be unlawful under current law, under any circumstances.”

Or, since these things are very much a matter of taste and style, here’s what he implicitly said: “”There has been no determination either by the Justice Department that the use of waterboarding would be unlawful under current law, under any circumstances.”

So, here’s the wriggle room built into Bradbury’s consummate Justice-Department-speak:
The set of interrogation methods authorized for current use does not today include waterboarding but, hey, that could change any time, because the Justice Department has made no determination that it’s actually unlawful. It’s just unauthorized, folks, and only for the nonce.