Jan 12 2009
Obama Not Hot on Idea of Looking Into Controversial Bush Programs
In a recent interview, President-elect Barack Obama indicated his reluctance to look closely into the legality of some of the Bush administration’s more controversial programs such as domestic spying and the treatment of prisoners suspected of terrorist activities.
David Johnston and Charlie Savage of the New York Times have more on the story.
“As a candidate, Mr. Obama broadly condemned some counterterrorism tactics of the Bush administration and its claim that the measures were justified under executive powers. But his administration will face competing demands: pressure from liberals who want wide-ranging criminal investigations, and the need to establish trust among the country’s intelligence agencies. At the Central Intelligence Agency, in particular, many officers flatly oppose any further review and may protest the prospect of a broad inquiry into their past conduct.”
Despite his reluctance to authorize a broad inquiry into the actions of his predecessor’s administration, Obama also said “prosecutions would proceed if the Justice Department found evidence that laws had been broken.”
“The Bush administration has authorized interrogation tactics like waterboarding that critics say skirted federal laws and international treaties, and domestic wiretapping without warrants,” Johnston and Savage add. “But the details of those programs have never been made public, and administration officials have said their actions were legal under a president’s wartime powers.”
How Obama handles this issue and whether his administration chooses to seek indictments over the execution of these policies or continue or discontinue them will be a point of interest for people on both sides of the political aisle.
Oh he better not leave them off the hook completely. I want some heads to roll, from high up too.
War crimes are war crimes - it doesn’t make a difference if you’re the president, vice president, general, CIA, FBI, NSA I don’t care.
This country needs more accountability. Letting the previous administration off the hook completely would be… well, not very accountable at least.
“Oh he better not leave them off the hook completely. I want some heads to roll, from high up too.”
That’s probably how it will go down. That’s how it always goes down.
I’ve been over this on that other site before.
No, it won’t go down that way. Obama is reluctant for good reason - he doesn’t want his Administration bogged down in legal wrangling over past policies. There are very good legal reasons why nobody involved will ever get indicted nor convicted, which is why Bush had a legal decision provided by his Attorney General that the policies were legal. That is enough, even if wrong and eventually overturned by another AG, to get the rank and file career federal employees off the hook, even the ones at senior levels.
They won’t try to indict higher ups in the White House because there are good political reasons - if the Democrats try that with the Republicans, there is nothing to stop the Republicans from doing that in return at the end of a Democratic regime later.
Come on, folks, there ARE enough questions about legalities and Constitutional issues that this issue will never reach a court, nor should it. Our country should move forward, not back. Looking back holds you back and creates hard feelings.
By electing a black President, the Democrats have done tremendous damage to Bush and his legacy by showing that the country has thoroughly rejected his policies - and in a way that is very insulting to many conservatives.
Isn’t that enough?
Not only will Obama not do anything, he’ll continue the same policies!