Interrogation investigations are a farce
posted at 4:31 pm on May 6, 2009 by Karl
printer-friendly
The New York Times was among those breathlessly reporting:
An internal Justice Department inquiry has concluded that Bush administration lawyers committed serious lapses of judgment in writing secret memorandums authorizing brutal interrogations but that they should not be prosecuted, according to government officials briefed on its findings.
Naturally, unhinged hysterics like Andrew Sullivan find the report — which is not yet public — “damning,” despite the fact that the conclusion flatly contradicts his view that the Bush Administration was filled with war criminals.
The Left is certainly not going to want to hear the truth from Andrew McCarthy:
Yet, even as the OPR report is being finalized, even after Obama declared himself open to the possibility of criminal prosecution against the Bush officials, and even after Holder promised to conduct an investigation that would “follow the evidence wherever it takes us, follow the law wherever that takes us” (emphasis added), the Obama Justice Department is relying on the very same legal analysis in order to urge a federal appeals court to reject torture claims. In fact, as the Obama Justice Department argued to that appeals court a little over a week ago, the torture law analysis in question has already been adopted by another federal appeals court.
Adopted by a whopping 10–3 margin in a decision of the entire Third Circuit federal appeals court sitting en banc, in fact — with full knowledge that they were adopting the 2002 guidance from former DOJ officials John Yoo and Jay Bybee.
But wait, there’s more! ABC News Correspondent Jan Crawford Greenburg reports:
It appears John Yoo cannot be disciplined or disbarred for writing those memos, even if the Office of Professional Responsibility says it has evidence he should be.
That’s because OPR’s five-year investigation—carefully timed for release only as Bush was leaving the White House and Obama was coming in—dragged on too long. As a result of that timing, OPR blew the deadline for referring possible misconduct allegations against Yoo.
***
And what about Bybee? Now a federal appeals court judge, Bybee is admitted in DC and Nevada—those jurisdictions don’t have comparable limitations periods. But how strange would it be to only refer Bybee, when his involvement largely amounted making a few edits and signing Yoo’s legal work?
Then there’s the report itself. The bar for disciplinary action is incredibly high. Legal ethics experts, like Geoffrey Hazard at the University of Pennyslvania, say they expect nothing to happen, even if the state disciplinary boards were to investigate.
Greenberg then details the degree to which the preparation of the report looks like “old-fashioned politics.” The only debatable part is “old-fashioned.” This exercise is part of a much more recent strain called Bush Derangement Syndrome.
Cross-posted at Patterico.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Greenroom Feed
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
BDS?
Perhaps to a large extent, but I have to wonder, BDS or no, if these people have given any serious thought to their demands for “justice?”
Having been involved in a multi-agency crisis management sub-Cabinet-level live video discussion from within the “bubble” many years ago, I saw very frank and very open discussion, at times heated, as various members of an Administration tried to deal with a looming issue that if handled poorly could have gotten a lot of our best young men and women in uniform injured or killed.
But, it was that we had that open discussion, all options laid bare in front of us, heated to be sure, but rational nonetheless, that led to a successful conclusion of the matter.
We were able to avert something that the Administration at the time was pushing for, for no other reason than to show that the President at the time was tough…not a wimp.
Jump forward 20 years…if this Administration goes ahead with any sort of retribution against any members of the previous Administration who offered legal advice what is the expected result? If this Administration stands to one side, playing passive-aggressive games, while such takes place, what will be the result?
Is it merely a one-time attempt to seek “justice?”
Not hardly.
And it opens a Pandora’s Box that once opened can never be closed entirely.
Thus, in a little over three years from now, will the new Administration have the power of precedent to go after any officials who gave advice to Obama?
Will officials in a new Administration shirk their sworn obligations and fail to offer clear, brutally frank advice for feae their words and advice may be used against them in a criminal proceeding?
If the Bush Administration broke the Law, if there is a clear article or section of the US Code willfully violated…then prosecute them. Make it open and very public. The DoJ has this obligation, as does the chief law enforcement officer in the nation, President Obama. Seek an indictment, file charges, let’s get with it…and in the full view of the public.
Personally, I doubt such will happen, not because the Obama Administration fears that this may be a distraction, but because under US Code there is no violation of law.
As each day passes and the Administration allows its Attorney general to run around libeling members of the previous Administration we draw ever closer to a point where as a matter of form, as each new Administration comes to Washington there will be show trials, and purges, and all the rest that comes with it, and within a generation we will be more like banana republics of the Third World, and less and less a nation of laws.
Obama is allowing his minions to engage in word games, to the detriment of the citizens of the United States. That he will not pick up the phone and call his Attopenry General and tell him to stop shows of what stuff Obama is made. Not man enough to pursue to its end his supposition that the law was broken…finding no law yet that will enable this, myself, he let’s his minions pursue the same, offering that while he does not support such a thing, he cannot control his Attorney General nor members of his own Party?
When we make it official policy of government to criminalize policy advice, you can expect the toadies of each Administration to not offer any advice at all.
End it, Obama. Use your super-secret Blackberry to tweet your Attorney General and Congressional leadership to stop it…immediately.
Or, reap the whirlwind that is sure to follow.
coldwarrior on May 6, 2009 at 5:47 PM
John Bolten has a piece in today’s WaPo…why is Obama allowing a foreign government to proceed with prosecutions of US government officials?
coldwarrior on May 6, 2009 at 6:01 PM
coldwarrior,
No. Obviously not. Which is why the idiocy with the Spanish magistrate gets rolling. The Obama folk — who know this is crap, and probably what a bad precedent would be set — are just trying to get this off the domestic radar, in the hopes that the Sullivans of the world will eventually tire of it.
Karl on May 6, 2009 at 8:51 PM