.

There's plenty to point out . . .

Here's an interview from December with Jonathan Turley.

What are the offenses of Bush Administration officials that you think need to be redressed or punished?

“The two most obvious crimes in this administration are the torture program and the unlawful surveillance program. Despite the effort to pretend that there is some ambiguity or uncertainty on these crimes, the law is quite clear.

“Waterboarding is not some new concept in the law. This torture technique goes back to the Spanish Inquisition and probably earlier. Courts in the United States, England and other countries have long held that waterboarding is not only a crime but a war crime. We prosecuted Japanese officers for this war crime in World War II. The English sentenced people to death for this form of torture.

“After the Spanish American War of 1898 in the Philippines, Major Edwin Glenn was court martialed and sentenced to 10 years hard labor for waterboarding an insurgent. The Senate denounced the practice. President Theodore Roosevelt dismissed a general for allowing his troops to waterboard suspects.

“What is fascinating about this situation is that Congress and the Administration continue to pretend that they do not see a crime committed in plain view. However, the rest of the world sees an unambiguous war crime, particularly with Cheney casually discussing his role on national television.

“This could prove a bit of a problem when Bush, Cheney, and others travel after leaving office. While they would no doubt object to the comparison, there is a similarity with General Augusto Pinochet who was constantly faced with the threat of arrest during international travel. Home countries are generally given the first opportunity to prosecute for such crimes. When they fail to do so, international efforts often follow."

What is the crime involved in the surveillance program?

"The law is equally clear. It is a felony to engage in warrantless surveillance of this kind. Congress has enacted two statutes that provide the sole means by which the government can obtain the necessary approval for electronic surveillance: Title III of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (“Title III”), 18 U.S.C. § 2510 et seq., and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, 50 U.S.C. § 1801 et seq. Together, Title III and FISA supply “the exclusive means by which electronic surveillance . . . and the interception of domestic wire, oral, and electronic communications may be conducted.” 18 U.S.C. § 2511(2)(f) (emphasis added). One federal court in Detroit has already declared the program to be unlawful and we challenged the law in the Al-Timimi case."

December 23, 2008
Q&A: Jonathan Turley on Holding Bush and Cheney Accountable

Continues at: legaltimes.typepad.com/ ... /holding-bush-and-cheney-accountable

~OGD~

I'm just pointing out that U.S. law might well not apply at all to acts committed on foreign soil, like Guantanamo, and that international treaties banning torture and the like do not carry criminal penalties (if they did, the United States wouldn't sign them).

FISA is a more interesting issue, but even outside of the "Nixon Defense" (You guys saw Frost/Nixon, right? If the President does it, it isn't illegal), there are serious Constitutional and legal impediments to prosecuting the President of the United States for something the FBI did.

I'm not saying there aren't acts of arguable legality. I'm just noting that A. It's arguable. and B. Not all the acts were committed by people Obama is going to want to prosecute.