Oh, goodness, what a great article. Just the kind of reasoned and rational direction we will need to go forward, in order to purge our national soul of the stench of Bush. And not by avoiding it, like some foul-tasting medicine we all know we need in order to get well, but by chugging it down quickly and "taking our medicine". Or maybe a vaccination shot might be a better analogy - something to keep us from ever getting that disease again. If we leave it hidden it will be a continuing cancer on us all, as Nixon has proven to be, after Ford in 1974 pre-empted our need to clear the decks. Would there have ever been a Lee Atwater or a Karl Rove if we'd taken care of business then?

And without making all that hidden stuff transparent, how can we ever know what kind of country we live in? Ever again? If so much of that was still out there, and possibly in the hands of a John McCain or a Newt Gingrich type? Oy vey!

As Sy Hersch has said, his phone will probably be ringing off the hook on January 21st. There will be plenty of insiders ready to tell the real story of just what went on inside the Bush administration. There will be many book deals inked and it will most likely be worse than we know now. So, whether or not there's any sort of commission or hearings or formal criminal proceedings, we will most likely learn the ugly truth anyway. And we should.

As I see it there are domestic abuses and international abuses. It would be great if the international abuses (war crimes) were handled overseas at the Hague. I don't know the mechanics of that, but I would support it totally. I have little hope that criminal domestic-abuse proceedings will take place here. With players and enablers from both sides of the aisle, there's little incentive to investigate (themselves) and indict. I also think, once the Bushies leave, any momentum to go after criminal investigations/charges will quicky wane. It should have happened in 2006-07, but alas did not. Now, we're on the verge of a depression and the Republicans will castigate the Dems for pushing forward any sort of investigations.

Although there's a good argument that the 8-year Bush term was one one of unaccountable, brazen displays of lawlessnes, greed and corruption I'm afraid the only "justice" will be in the historical record.

You make a good point. Investigations and prosecutions where warranted are necessary if for no other reason than deterrence of copycats, Republican or Democrat. Every agency and bureau should be thoroughly audited and special prosecutors assigned when evidence of criminality is uncovered.

If, as gpanfile suggests above, the Bush Administration attempts to issue preemptive pardons, I hope someone has the good sense and fortitude to challenge their legality and, even better, explicitly make them illegal in the future through legislation.

Beyond specific acts unconstitutional or criminal, the Bush/Cheney vision of the role of the President and his relationship to the electorate must be challenged in the court of public opinion. For example,

"I'm the commander - see, I don't need to explain - I don't need to explain why I say things. That's the interesting thing about being the President. Maybe somebody needs to explain to me why they say something, but I don't feel like I owe anybody an explanation." - George W. Bush, Washington Post, 11-19-02

Is the President a public servant or its master? It will be easier to resolve the question in favor of public servant if it is divorced from specific personalities.

I just spent the last 20 mins writing all about how I thought a TRC with teeth, (i.e. the power to prosecute and withhold consular protection for individuals who didn't testify, or who testified but weren't forthcoming) could at least bring the truth out, which would be better than nothing.

Then I realized that there's a civil, as well as a criminal dimension to the misdeeds of the past eight years, and I changed my view.

Possibly trillions of dollars have been misappropriated, actions were taken that caused thousands of deaths, near bankrupted state governments, corrupted the judicial process and caused unlawful incarceration, etc, all in the pursuit of very narrow interests.

If there were to be an undisputed account of a government operating in bad faith, millions of people would have documented grounds to sue some entity or individual for non-trivial amounts of money. How can the TRC model work if it allows criminals not only to avoid jail (which may be justifiable), but also to continue to profit hugely from their past crimes, at the expense of those who now have proof that crimes were committed against them?

My guess would be that it can't.

I don't see as the ideas of a commission and criminal prosecutions are mutually exclusive. If prosecutions were to be the sole avenue pursued, it would take years just to sort out all the charges and evidence in any event. If a commission were, there would be calls for immunity for witnesses, but only if they were truthful. A possible middle position would be having a commission first, with immunity granted (if at all ) to lesser echelons of government officials only. If they are found to have been untruthful, then they will face future prosecution. In a few years, when the full facts are better understood, and hopefully the country's more immediate and pressing problems have been addressed, criminal charges will be in order.

That there is even a discussion as to the relevance or validity of at least knowing what was done and who did it points to the fact that we have really lost our way in this country. If we remove the politics from the equation are we even having this discussion? Pragmatism is one thing, but at some point instead of the emperor having no clothes shouldn’t we be feeling our own nakedness? Maybe the emperor has no shame but we should!