Obama: Prosecutions of the architects of U.S. torture policy remains a possiblity
By David Neiwert Tuesday Apr 21, 2009 11:00am
President Obama today:
On the one hand, we have very real enemies out there. And we rely on some very courageous people -- not just in our military, but also in the Central Intelligence Agency -- to help protect the American people. And they have to make some very difficult decisions because, as I mentioned yesterday, they are confronted with an enemy that doesn't have scruples, isn't constrained by Constitutions, is not constrained by legal niceties.
Having said that, the OLC memos that were released reflected, in my view, us losing our moral bearings. That's why I've discontinued those enhanced-interrogation programs. For those who carried out these operations within the four corners of legal opinions, or guidance that had been provided from the White House, I do not think it's appropriate for them to be prosecuted. With respect to those who formulated those legal decisions, I would say that is going to be more of a decision for the Attorney General, within the parameters of various laws. And I don't want to prejudge that.
As the New York Times notes, he went on to seemingly encourage Congress to get involved:
Mr. Obama, who has been saying that the nation should look ahead rather than focusing on the past, said he is “not suggesting” that a commission be established.
But in response to questions from reporters in the Oval Office, he said, “if and when there needs to be a further accounting,” he hoped that Congress would examine ways to obtain one “in a bipartisan fashion,” from people who are independent and therefore can build credibility with the public.
Obviously, Obama's not keen about this because he's focused on moving forward with his political agenda, and he's afraid a partisan fight over holding Republicans accountable for their lawbreaking during the Bush years will derail that.
In other words, it will take courage. We'll be watching to see how much he actually possesses.
Login or Register to post comments.
Him?
http://www.bradybunchshrine.com/bradybunch/Pi...
Stall, baby, stall. If they can drag this out they can be saved by the statute of limitations.
Do. It. Now.
Unless I'm wrong there is NO statute of limitations on willful MURDER ie. 108 or so that couldn't answer the $64,00 question because they stopped breathing. Doe's that clear it up.
I don't think there's a statute on water torture either.
International and domestic laws require you Obama to do your damn job , this isn't an option , its not another play in the game book and if he doesn't care about the hundreds , if not thousands of people , scooped up , stripped , drugged , beat up , slammed against the wall , tortured endlessly several times a day , it shows that the Globalist do control you , as well as the military industrial complex .
Steal a loaf of bread , you go to jail , ...torture, murder , & brutalize , you get praised , promoted or a book deal and speaking fees . No justice , no peace !
That is why they keep finding Nazis and putting them on trial.
Obama may want the country to "move on" but he is NOT going to be able to move on until this is dealt with correctly.
Too many consciences are involved.
hopefully in my lifetime, but if not...my boy is well aware of history and of the importance of this heinous violation of our principles.
The standard is the legal and their TRAiNING. If you've been given orders that are ILLEGAL you must not follow as per Nuremburg.
No amount of words can erase the bright line, EVER.
Once again,as with the fired AGs, who morally quit rather than break their oath to uphold the constitution. Rehire those people and fire the goons that carried out this extraordinary breech of their oath.
Does anyone know where the rope is we hung Saddam with.
,not that I would EVER support capitol punishment rather then have them rot in jail.
I keep saying that I'll wait for Obama to speak before I assume that Emanuel or Axlerod is speaking for the administration. It wouldn't suprise me a bit if Rahm was trying to cover his own ass when answering the question. Something he never adressed was that neither he nor Obama have the power to tell the AG what to do.
Just don't stand in the way of justice. People were tortured, some with waterboardings of 183 times. I doubt that waterboarding was the only form of torture this person received. Let the investigations begin.
when asked by reporters reply, "There is an ongoing investigation, no comment."
that this has become highly politically charged issue. That's right. And WE did it! They KNOW it! Obama is smart. He knows he cannot actively start this process on his own. He has made his position clear that he does not want the underlings prosecuted. And now he has left the architects open for such prosecution.
It is now extremely important that we put pressure on the Justice Dept., specifically the Attorny General. Pressuring the president any more is a useless endeavor. He has left it to the DOJ to go after these guys, and can no longer be involved in the process.
I mentioned something to this effect on an earlier thread about this issue.
Obama is smart, and he is doing what a President is supposed to do.
He is leading, something that has been missing for some time in American politics.
Redjalapeño!
Short, simple and simply the truth! I guess some of these people are so frazzled by the past eight years they would rather wallop in misery than let themselves hope! That's easy to understand. But when they back themselves into corners, they will have to pay the price for their errors, misconceptions and outright lies.
What Obama did was genius. He forced us to put pressure on him from the left, much the same way LBJ did during the civil rights movement. Now he can say......we'll I don't want to look backward but if the DOJ wants to prosecute.....that is up to the DOJ.......either that or let the Hauge prosecute.
Don't let up until every last treasonous scumbag is in irons!
It's a very real possibility that Bush/Cheney will go down in history as war criminals. It will take some time but it's certainly possible.
Bush did say after all: "History will be the judge of this administration."
Karma - it's a bitch.
a bitch...but only if you're a bastard...karma's been pretty good to me so far.
*knocks on wood*
And of course it will take a long time. If they are formally charged with war crimes. Their lawyers are gonna use every dirty trick in the book, and the prosecution can't make one mistake.
There is always that possibilty that they could get off scott free. The DoJ prosecutors and investigators have to be on top of their game. But at least the accused will get their day in court, which is much more than what the Guantanimo detainees got under Bushco. Ironic isn't it?
There is absolutely no doubt torture was committed. Both Bush and Cheney admitted so on national tv. Cheney actually said he encouraged the use of torture. The torture memos leave no doubt.
Prosecution is not only appropriate it is demanded by treaties signed by the U.S. and our own laws. Appropriate?
This is nothing but feet dragging on a preidential level.
We needed a patriot and we got a goddamned politician.
Obama cannot initiate investigations.
He can only offer opinion.
Only the DoJ can investigate this matter.
Question (for the correct thread this time!)
Where would you prefer to see the Cheney/Gonzales/Bybee/Yoo War Crimes Trial conducted:
Washington DC?
The Hague?
Nuremberg?
Guantanamo?
Crawford, TX?
A "non-disclosed location"?
Other?
They love a good show there.
;)
Actually, I think Vegas will be a great venue for the treason trials of the "performers" who are attempting to whip up seditionist fever in order to line their own pockets:
Rush
Hannity
O'Reilly
Beck
Dobbs
Did I leave anyone off?
Malkin.
Coulter
I vote for Nuremberg.
I agree with Obama, the DOJ should investigate. The Lawyers should be subjected to the same treatment they instructed their underlings to dole out. But I think those that asked the questions to clearify the terms of treatment should not be imprisoned JMHO
to start an investigation of these criminals - it has to be brought by the Attorney General and the Department of Justice - so it's not that the DOJ should investigate - that entity is the only one that CAN investigate these crimes. And, Holder and the DOJ must do so independently of the White House - the Bush Crime Family destroyed the line between the WH and the DOJ - and it seems Americans have very short memories when it comes to the separation of the two. Remember the "independent counsel" Ken Starr that AG Reno assigned to investigate a failed land deal....now that's separation of the WH and DOJ, even though Starr had a partisan axe to grind...but that's a whole other story.
offer the possibility of immunity if those involved come forward "NOW."
While the proper order for prosecutions should be from the top down, I'm not sure I agree that those in the CIA and other agencies (?) who directly tortured prisoners should get off scott free. They are the ones whose faces and voices and brutality the prisoners experienced directly. Those are the ones who would be retaliated against by a tortured prisoner if possible because they directly did the hurting, humiliating, and sometimes killing. If you have a mad master and a mad dog, you may do away with the master, but you sure don't set the dog free. Brutal Nazi prison guards didn't avoid the consequences -- they received punishments along with their masters.
There are reports that some US agents even went beyond the (illegal) "permissible" limits, and I suppose these are those who should certainly bear severe consequences. But if America is going to deal with its shame, all those involved in harming those prisoners need to experience the consequences.
I'm beginning to think that Obama is living in some sort of Presidential Fantasy Land. What Republican would get involved in any way shape or form in an investigation or hearing of Bush administration abuse of power?
How can he continue to talk about wanting/needing bipartisanship when Republicans all around him make it clear, every time they open their mouths, that they harbor only the utmost disrespect for him and Democrats.
It's really beginning to bother me. There's a "sensible approach" to upholding the law? Someone please explain that to me. Besides, it's not up to Obama or Biden or Emmanuel to initiate a hearing or investigation. That's up to the DOJ and/or Congress. However, his statements may either instigate or, in this case, potentially stall investigations or hearings from going forward, especially in Congress.
I suppose this will be a true test of whether we finally have an independent DOJ. Wouldn't that be refreshing!
The Repugs have already proved that they have no interest in bipartisanship. It's about time that Obama casts that anchor overboard and goes after the Repukes who have screwed up this country and the world. If anyone has EVER had a MANDATE to do so, Obama does.
The "spirit of bipartisanship" crap is important to him. Of course, it usually WOULD be important - who doesn't want everybody to work TOGETHER?- but coming on the heels of the last 8 years it's simply impossible.
I know Holder is technically independent but let's get real. To believe these new headlines you'd have to believe that Holder will go against the clearly and repeatedly stated wishes of his boss, the guy who hired him and can fire him at will. To believe that would go beyond Hope (tm) into the realm of "clapping for fairies".
Regards, Steve
... that's just not how it works.
Also, I think Obama wants some retribution, but is politically constrained from outright saying so. He'll be happy enough to let Holder do the (initially) unpopular investigations.
He or she serves at the pleasure of the President and can be removed by the President at any time.
Regards, Steve
once he is in office, only Congress can act to remove him!
Or he can resign.
Here
I'm willing to be shown wrong by a cite.
Regards, Steve
because what is under discussion is referred to a the Executive's Removal Power, and that is a court developed doctrine in the Meyers case. There is no express Constitutional provision.
I could perceive that an Attorney General might possibly argue to the Supreme Court, should he or she be facing removal that Congress, who also advised and consented to his appointment, should be final arbiter because, for example Vice-President intermeddling was resulting in a politcalization of the Justice Department. Would that have been wild if Mukasey would have had some huevos!
But for now the issues seems settled.
http://law.onecle.com/constitution/article-2/...
I believe you are patterning after the last administration. Gonzo was bush's attack dog, Holder does not play that part in this new administration. He heads the Justice dept, he doesn't wait to be told who to go after or why.
Right!
Holder is Obama's AG for the duration, unless he resigns or is convicted of a crime. The decision to investigate is Holder's to make.
I'm starting to get a very good feeling about all this.
Saturday Night Fever was once more meaninful than an L.Ron Hubbard investment vehicle. AG's can and will be canned for less.
I believe you are referring to Archibald Cox, not Fox. and it was the Saturday Night Massacre. He was a Solicitor General who Nixon tried to have fired by then sitting AG Elliott Richardson. Richardson refused and then resigned. William Ruckleshaus then became the AG, but also refused and then resigned. The next in line was none other than Robert Bork who gladly canned Cox.
Sorry Ricky, but Nixon and Bork are not shinning examples there, bud.
I meant Friday Night Lights.
Actually Cox was Special Prosecutor. Bork was Solicitor General.
And I was joking because I thought it funny people were making the somewhat humorous assertion Holder could not be fired.
Uh-huh. Right.
Actually Cox was a Solicitor General who took leave to be named as a Special Prosecutor in the Watergate investigation.
And just what does Friday Night Lights have to do with L. Ron Hubbard?
It was referred to as the "Saturday Night Massacre", but I found your version hilarious. ;-)
Thank you, Spain!
I think the question really is whether or not these events would have unfolded in the way they are even if officials from Spain had not publicized their views. I think at the very least they have added tremendous credibility to the issue.
and it will remain so all the way up to his last day in office , jan 13 , 012!enjoy the fantasy!
on whether or not Obama gets two terms?
"The swamp fox."
in a Virginia swamp.
Ticks were the worst. Foxes are pretty harmless.
And at least foxes don't whine, be careful.
but you haven't dealt with the tyree swampfox, his other moniker.
I did tweak it the other day, but it got mad.
tell that to the chinese pod ner
put up or shut up! sorry i ment jan 2013
well heres what the 'swampfox thinks , obama has no intention of seeing anyone in prison ! he knows any real and honest investigation will show the dumbocrats are in all this up to thier filthy necks and americas form of government would be DESTROYED by revealing what both the dumocrats and the repigs have done in your name! and besides it would most deffinatly upset the corporations who had him elected to squelch any such ideas of real justice , spain my ass , so now we have to beg another country to do what obamas unwilling to do ,what planet am i liveing on , jesus all i hear are alibis and excuses from the pods as to why obama never does what you thought he was going to do for youuuuuuuuu!
Joyce's "Ulysses" or "On the Road"?
..ask me again if, in about three years, there's been no appointment of a Special Prosecutor. Until then, I do not care to comment on BHO's chances for a second term.
If BHO's administration and DOJ doesn't do it, someone has to! Whether its Spain, Iraq, Belgium, the Boy Scouts of America or us, don't care. There must be some way to take this to a court of law without being a Government entity.
It is early, but if Bush can make two terms...
"If BHO's administration and DOJ doesn't do it, someone has to!"
If the USA isn't going to do it, do you really think other nations are going to risk their necks to do it? When push comes to shove, they all cave to American pressure. You guys rule the world. Have you forgotten? They might put on a show, but when it comes to getting tough with the USA nothing will happen.
This is just a snippet, but read about Maher Arar at Wiki:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maher_Arar
Because many americans have come to realize that even a bad, ineffectual Democrat is better than a "good" Republican.
..a Green Party candidate? A Progressive Candidate? A cranky cub scout?
Anybody but a Republican!
His time is coming (again, and again, and again...)
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1122/867616642...
but who is that?
I like the sybolism of the car he saved us from.
the mayor of Munchkinland or Herve Villechaize before he...well, you know.
Even Bush did one thing right...he "F"ed things up so bad that even some racists became willing to vote for the black guy. See, I admitted it.
Obama may not be the one to do the investigation, but there is no guarantee that the DOJ will do it's job ...it fact I'm betting that they won't ... if an investigation were to take place it could lead back to a lot of the elite in the DNC ... and they simply can't have that ... no folks ... if anyone is going to prosecute ... it will most likely be Spain ... or some other country ... an investigation would lead to the truth of 911 ... and they would mean the downfall for many elite ...
Obama is smart, I hope the DOJ does investigate the Lawyers. I can't see the foot soliers being prosecuted for following orders. They even questioned to ensure they knew the rules, and have these memos to prove they wished to clearify. Not following orders would have been insubordination, and they would have been subject to disipline then too.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Only_following_o...
Thanks for the link but unfortunaltly this is the loop hole in that law... The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him. We know they will all have the best Lawyers money can buy. Perhaps Spain would be better to prosecute??
It's a law to easily squirm out of. But it has successfully been used. Not that I think they'll get it to stick. Especially since the US in the guilty party, sorry, allegedly guilty party, and not some Germans, Arabs or brown people
Who says the DoJ and Spain both can't prosecute?
will they ever be extradited?? My money is on not..It will almost have to be the DOJ... IMHO
DOJ probably would not get a conviction here. Spain probably could, but we'd never hand them over.
Or some Franco memorabilia?
It will be necessary for us to be a nation of men, and not laws.
Dick Cheney
Turn up the volume! Drown out "may" "could" "possibly" give the world
CHANGE AND HOPE!
Spain, the eyes of the world are on YOU to change the way the u.s. fucks with the world. Unfortunately it won't do much for citizens in the u.s.. See, we're feeling a bit doomed here. Obama won't carry this out, so we're COUNTING on you to bring out the rats multiplying in the basement.
Please, embarrass the united states.
Who's the treasonous bastard here? Give up your cushy life here in the united states if it is so horrible and move your ass to Spain. See how they treat terrorist.....oh, thats right, they just roll over, then let them bomb their trains.......get real you moron! AND THE REST OF YOU BETTER WAKE UP REAL FAST AND GET THE HELL OUT OF THIS FANTASY LAND MENTALITY. They will use our virtue to crush us and will be waitng to pick up the pieces after we impolode from within. You are all falling perfectly into the plan like a bunch of Lemmings....one by one jumping off the cliff......
I don't think courage is the issue. Obama clearly has it. It's a very complex political situation, requiring coalitions with remnants of an opposition party in shambles. He needs the strength to take advantage of this situation and run with it. Unfortunately, we can't separate out the deeply moral issues here from the need to re-grow the economy, to provide health care, and to fix a reasonable foreign policy. They are all connected, and it shows from the delicate language he's using here.
I've never held my breath on bringing anyone from the bush administration to justice for their criminal behavior. Even now, it still seems rather unlikely.
Obama made a mistake by not appointing a special prosecutor to investigate these memos and see where the road takes them. That would have taken the burden off him and his administration and there wouldn't be the potential political backlash.
Now, he is facing his first real test as president. Does he do the right thing and allow the law to work as it should or does he allow political convenience dictate what he does next?
"Obama made a mistake by not appointing a special prosecutor". I have a feeling I know where this came from, but it wasn't a legtimate source, or a sanitary one either, if you get my drift.
...or war crimes. Do not even presume to commit atrocities in my name because of some threat, real or imagined.
I'm not buying what Mr. Obama is attempting to sell. Every individual is an independent moral being capable of making independent moral decisions. They are required by law, treaty and precedent to refuse any order that is questionable, especially those that would shock the conscience.
Those so-called "four corners" of legal opinion were specifically crafted to avoid the operation of law, treaty and human morality. they had no other purpose. In that regard the effort was exactly identical to a process the nazis government of Germany went through. Exactly. Nuremburg decided the illegitimacy of such efforts, one would have thought for all times. No government can use legalistic subtrefuges to legitimize atrocity, and those who indulge themselves using such subtrefuges are still completely liable.
Mr. Obama is as wrong on this issue as it is possible for anybody to be. He is once again throwing away principle in favor of "pragmatically" pursuing an easy expedient of the moment. To my eyes, his refusal to face up to the crimes of the past and to seek the easy way out is every bit as much an act of sociopathy as were the twisted acts of the regime that proceded him. That his position is put forward with much greater polish than the brutish attempts of the Bushies, makes no difference. In the end, both approaches support an identical outcome. What I find particularly repugnant is that his administrations rationalizations carry with them an aura of practical and savvy wisdoms, as if that somehow excuses the profoundly shameful and the profoundly criminal.
These crimes are material for war crimes tribunals, not just everyday criminal prosecutions. Mr. Obama is a fool's fool if he thinks he can just sweep everything under the rug and expect to maintain respect in the world.
I also take exception to his comment about enemies who aren't contrained by legal nicities. Seems to me we stop being Americans when we choose or make excuses for acts of atrocity. and the people who choose to craft or commit acts of atrocity are neither brave, or heroes or servants. They are thugs who disgrace the nation.
Mr.Obama should be ashamed of himself.
the right just can't handle obama being different a contrast from BUSH/cheney. the last administration
was rude/arrogant. obama got elected for many reasons one being "change" that people like to belittle.
this is the change. this guy is secure in himself and his objectives. in a global economy i believe this is good business sense. how chavez governs his country is little meaning to me. this is just a move by obama. i haven't yet seen any ACTIVE (r) lawmakers speak up. it's been talking heads and people who use to be involved in government. why we should be preoccupied with another country's politics i don't get.
"And they have to make some very difficult decisions because, as I mentioned yesterday, they are confronted with an enemy that doesn't have scruples, isn't constrained by Constitutions, is not constrained by legal niceties."
Uh, if legal precedent or a constitution is what 'constrains' you from torture, that's still morally bankrupt. What he's implying is that he would be down with all that stuff if it didn't actually say so.
Oh...and within this explanation, Obama basically accepts the "just following orders" excuse.
The whole "following orders" thing that Obama is using really bothers me a lot. Even as a private in the Army, were were specifically taught about following orders and not following them. We could still be held accountable for our actions even if we were ordered to commit an illegal or immoral act. It was considered an unacceptable defense.
I'm getting to the point where I hear a Repuke talking when Obama opens his gob.
Maybe the more you say, the more you will realize how stupid that sounds.
it is what it is! if it talks like one and acts like one its ONE!
I know that all I have to do is turn on the news to hear a Repuke whining every time Pres. Obama opens his mouth.
kinda gives you away.
Isn't this the same thing as FDR telling activists, "I agree with you, I want to do it, now make me do it."
But the trolls and Hillery supporters weren't listening... and they still aren't.
It's of little consequence, though. Things will proceed, albeit at too slow a pace to please me, and in the end Obama will be proven right.
how much he possesses."
The courage was already demonstrated by his nomination of Holder.
All he has to do is sit back and let things unfold. He knows what he is doing. He is the most intelligent person in decades, if not ever, to hold the Presidency.
dissed the idea of prosecutions the day before O made this comment.
Obama is a fraud.
about your comment about Vegas as the place to hold the trial upthread,{hate to have to wait to post], nobody does it like we do here! OJ FINALLY got taken care of here.Lovelock Nev sure gets HOT here in the summer!Poor Juice,no more golf!
Deb VEGAS
Unless Obama wants to face charges of obstruction of justice then there'd better be some prosecutions!
Login or Register to post comments.