To argue that new administrations should refrain from investigating crimes that were committed by past administrations due to the need to avoid partisan division is to announce that the rule of law does not apply to our highest political leaders. It's just as simple as that.
Yeah, and? What's your point, Glenn?
NOTE Via the splendiferous Avedon.
- lambert's blog
- Login or register to post comments
- 1+[encrypted]+#b94+
Printer-friendly version


Front page



Comments
related-"blanket presidential pardon"
-- Beware Bush's preemptive strike on torture
The president might issue a blanket pardon to block prosecution of top U.S. officials behind brutal interrogations -- including himself. -- http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/200...
and torture is only one small part of the massive and wholly criminal trashing of our rights and laws and Constitution --as well as checks and balances.
I don't see Obama or Congress or the Supremes pushing back at all--unless it comes out that Obama is daring to use them the way Bush did--but maybe he'd get away with it -- where previous Dems haven't?
Pardon himself?!
I was led to believe he can NOT pardon himself.
Nothing prohibits Bush from pardoning himself
Never been tried but hey, we're way past precedent now.
That would be the ultimate FU, and make for a huge and awful mess. Nothing for it but to take it to the SCOTUS and hope they don't validate; double plus really bad if they did.
Better, I think, for Obama and us if the whole thing is kept back-burner for now, until after the inaugural. If Bush reads the portents as not too threatening, he may just walk off with his big ego and feel secure enough that nobody can touch him. Make lots of threatening gestures now and no telling what he'll do. If he's already planning to pardon everyone around and himself, nothing to be done about that right now anyway.
Further, there is no way for Obama to know now what exactly has been done by BushCo, or under what constructs. Obama has said he wants to differentiate between bad policy which should not be prosecuted, that's what elections are for, and criminal behavior which should be prosecuted; fair enough. Knowing for sure and certain what crimes have been committed and by whom is something that Obama cannot be expected to know at this point in time.
What it sounds like will happen is a Church Committee sort of thing, wise heads getting together with some investigative authority from Congress to poke around and generate an accurate history. What is or is not criminal would be up to DOJ to decide some time after the commission issues a final report.
This approach does several things. One, it moves the issue of criminality and prosecution off the plate of Obama and the DOJ for a while. Obama has other fish to fry, from the economy to Iraq to Afghanistan to health care to education, last thing he needs to get bigged down with is an investigation of BushCo run by the Executive.
Second, DOJ itself needs to get rebuilt and back on the tracks; a mega-investigation of the past 8 years of BushCo is too much of an immediate burden. Third, Obama wants to be as non-partisan as possible; he doesn't want to be seen as vindictive, not his desired style/image. Better to hand it over to some third party to deal with and then act down the road if politics, power and evidence allow.
I'm not much myself on Reconciliation without punishment, but a Truth Commission would IMHO be a good approach. The case for criminal prosecution needs to be driven by those who desire it, once evidence is obtained and presented. I want it but I also want Obama to get a lot of other things done, now; I can wait a while to get BushCo properly sorted.
It's never been done.
But he hasn't been impeached. Someone has offered the opinion that he could do it prior to impeachment.
Hmmmm. Interesting.
Ah, impeachment is different
The presidential pardon power is unlimited (apparently) except for impeachment:
So the president can't protect him/herself or others from impeachment, but can protect anyone from Federal criminal prosecution. On the other hand, if he does pardon himself he will I think lay himself open to being forced to testify. Precedent there for a past President to avoid testifying on matters of state in general is very weak, and none at all regarding actual criminal behavior.
Too difficult for the
Village
idiots, apparently.