There Must be Investigations and Hearings of the Activities of the Bush Administration
There are three positions on the actions of the Bush administration: there should be an investigation, there should not be an investigation, and there should be a truth commission (with immunity). I argue that there definitely should be a special prosecutor, public hearings should be held, and people prosecuted if warranted by law.
President Obama has stated numerous times when pressed on this issue that he wants to move forward. Eric Holder has stated in relationship to waterboarding that it is torture. However, in the release of Legal Counsel memos to the public, the DOJ issues its own response. That response hedges all around about special circumstances while taking a position against Bush's Legal Counsel regarding a variety of (expanded) Presidential powers. The way that I read this is that the current Department of Justice is loathe to pursue violations of the law and the Constitution in relationship to the Bush administration.
The reason that investigations must be held, and prosecutions pursued if found, is that the extension of executive branch powers must be challenged. If we argue "exceptional circumstances" led to acceptable broadening of Presidential powers, it will be used as a precedent. Those expanded powers (and the justification for them) pass to each President - Obama and whoever follows him ad nauseum.
Torture, is one of the major issues on the list. Holder has clearly stated that waterboarding is torture. Obama has clearly stated that the United States will not engage in torture. However, he has refused to stop extraordinary rendition, and more and more "enemy combatants" are ending up at Bagram. Further, Obama is maintaining the Bush policy of no rights for those held there. Therefore it is as difficult to believe Obama's "no torture" policy as it was to believe Bush's.
Backed by myth, there is some basic faith among the public that torture is effective in generating "actionable" information. Speaking from personal experience, I would argue that it likely does not.
I experienced what would be counted as torture as a child. I was "interrogated" for hours at a time. I was beaten for information. I had my fingers broken to extract information. Every time I talked. Every time it was a lie. What I divulged under repeated episodes of torture was exactly what the torturer (my foster mother) wanted to know. The truth was not what was wanted. Specific information was. Since the truth (or what I knew) did not match what she wanted to hear, those were lies.
Now I am certainly not arguing that my foster mother was an "experienced" interrogator, but the outcome is the same - as has been stated by experts over and over again. Yes, people will talk (endlessly) under torture. However, they will ultimately tell the interrogators what they want to hear - which is not necessarily accurate or even known to the person being tortured.
I do not want any President of the United States approving torture. I do not want any President to have the powers that the Bush administration carved out. Simple statements of "That was wrong, but the past is the past" do not remove the presumed acceptability (or even legality) of the expansion of powers and the overriding of the Constitution. As a student and professor of Constitutional law, Obama is fully aware of this.
There is an argument that we have many more pressing matters than to take the time to address the potentially criminal activities of the last administration. I am sorry, but that is simply not an adequate response. Every elected federal representative (and member of the military) pledges to defend the Constitution. That is Job One. Without the Constitution, we are not the United States. Without the protections of the Constitution, we are not a republic.
So it is our responsibility to tell President Obama, and our elected representatives, that failure to pursue investigation (and prosecutions if warranted) sends the implicit message that Obama wants those powers and ability to craft the law to his purposes.









We need investigations. This new disclosure of a quick memo from the Office of Legal Counsel five days prior to the end of w's administration disavowing memos over five years old is amazing. Enlightening. Shocking.
I want full investigations. But I am still for a 'truth commission' with subpoena powers.
I am against torture. Propaganda has made torture look like a necessity for over a hundred years.
Every single television drama employs it. Hollywood films depend upon it.
Your personal experience is shocking and probably reflects the experience of thousands of other children.
This is a fine post. TheraP is so interested in this subject as are so many others at this site.
March 3, 2009 5:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
I would support a truth commission with subpoena powers AND without immunity, but then that is not in the spirit of a "truth commission." Without those powers, it is unlikely that the damage done does not become precedent for such action (and more of it) in the future.
Even with active pursuit of the potential crimes committed, it could take more than a decade to repair the damage. Remember COINTELPRO?
March 3, 2009 10:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
There is already information out there. w admitted right in front of god and everybody to authorizing torture, warrant-less spying, etc. The recent release of the memos from the DoJ and the admittance that 92 videos of terror suspects were destroyed by the CIA is fuel for the fire.
The day after his inauguration, Obama issued a presidential memo stating,
To me that signals, "Let's get the information out there, let's beat the bush (pun intended) and flush the gamebirds, let's lift up the rug and see what was swept under, let's shake the tree and see what rotten fruit falls out." The investigations are beginning. Really.
And then, after we have the evidence to prove the case, let the prosecutions begin. It has to be done in proper order because there are no 'do-overs' with stuff like this.
A truth commission without punishment is no deterrent to this happening again in the future. Democrats won't always be in a position of power, the pendulum will swing back to a more conservative government and when it happens, those in power will be able to point back in history and say, "Well, bushco got away with it...let's try it one more time."
We have to be sure that the molestation of our Constitution does not happen again. We have to get it right more than we have to get it fast. If it seems like it is taking longer than any of us wants, well, I have no cure for that. I'm more interested in justice than I am in revenge.
Just my two pennies worth of thought.
Great post, Rowan. Rec'd.
March 3, 2009 8:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
I truly appreciate the Obama approach of openness in government. He has been much more reticient about pursuing what the information portrays.
Knowing and not following up as the law demands is virtually the same thing as giving tacit approval. I believe that real harm to our nation has been done with the crafting of the "Unitary Executive." Those expanded powers need action to roll back to a balance of powers. (In my opinion)
I am definitely not calling for revenge; however, I am for justice and openness in government. From what I understand, there is a clock ticking on the justice side of a number of the potential issues.
March 3, 2009 10:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
I do not believe there is a time-limit for war crimes. And if war crimes are prosecuted, even one crime will do. We may never get the full accounting we would wish for. All rights must be accorded any who are accused and tried. They will be given what they denied others.
If you want to follow this, keep an eye particularly on emptywheel. There is a blogger, Mary, who comments there. She has been following the torture issue very, very closely. For a very long time.
http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2009/03/02/92-destroyed-tapes/
March 3, 2009 10:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for sharing the link. I have kept an eye on that site, but it is good to share that site.
While there is no deadline (as far as I know) on war crimes, that is not the only issue at stake. I am particularly concerned about the construction of a "unitary executive." [I have written several articles on this, but here is one that explains what it is.]
These other issues that have tattered the Constitution and the Bill of Rights will only be partially addressed by war crimes. While I detested the activities of the Bush Administration, I don't want ANYONE to be the king of the United States.
March 3, 2009 2:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for this link. I completely agree about the unitary executive. That is why it is so important that OLC weigh in here. Dawn Johnsen wants the OLC guidelines codified. We must have a Congress that stands up. And the judiciary should not be, as in many states and localities, up for election and corruption due to campaign donations.
Your view here bears a great deal of weight. I'll check out your link.
March 3, 2009 2:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Very glad you're here among us now. Keep writing eloquent pieces like the one you linked. These issues were much discussed at TPM Muckraker several years back (around the time you wrote that) and many who have been regulars for years are well versed in all the wrongs committed under bush. And eager to see them righted.
My concerns go deeper. Are there flaws in our process that might permit a de facto dictatorship? I fear the answer is yes. It lies within the office of OLC and also within the strength of the Congress. And of course the discernment of the voters. But flaws have clearly been exposed. And may never completely be closed - given the potential for abuse of power by a malign executive.
We'll do out best in our lifetimes. But history has a sad way of repeating itself - as people forget and Tsunamis arrive.
March 3, 2009 2:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
This topic deserves its own post (hint to everyone), but here goes.
One of the problems of living in a culture that is goal oriented is that goals are interpreted as final points. In other words, "accomplished the goal, so take it off the list." However, my experience is that most things are processes where the end is never truly achieved as it is part of a bigger process.
The same is true of lots of things. Some examples ... Womens' Right to Choose was a "goal." When Roe v Wade came down, vast numbers of women in the Women's Movement celebrated and then went home to go on with their lives. They had achieved a "goal." It was over. same is true of the Civil Rights struggle.
Marriage? Many have a goal of getting married. However, getting married is just the beginning of a long process of building and maintaining a relationship.
Likewise our democracy. It too is a process - not simply a label or a fait accompli. Many who enthusiastically campaigned for Obama accomplished their "goal" with the election - and went home to go on with their lives. Democracy takes constant citizen vigilance and participation or it risks being co-opted or perverted to a tool of the powerful.
SO... I would argue a conceptual change to process or journey, and away from goals/end points.
March 3, 2009 3:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
I completely agree. It goes against the American grain. But yes, life is mostly process, journeys, a series of awakenings followed by commitments, like a circular staircase that you can look up and down.
March 3, 2009 6:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree with you, Rowan. A special prosecutor must be appointed. Whether there should be public hearings, I'm not sure about that, since I think at first justice must be pursued quietly so that people can come forward with their evidence without the possibility of any public reprisal - I am thinking of whistle-blowers here. At a certain stage, public hearings may become necessary. But I would much prefer that the FBI and prosecutors go about their work as they usually do - in the background.
Your plea is a powerful one. Especially your plight as a child and how that plays into the fact that torture is nothing but sadism and the desire to try and control the will of the victim. Sadism you experienced. But your will did not break. For you grew up. And you speak the truth.
My heart goes directly to your heart. I have worked with victims of torture in childhood, even much worse than you describe. It is painful for the therapist. It is hugely painful for the person who has been victimized. For as you likely know, to tell the truth makes it more real and more painful for a while. It requires tremendous courage. For it goes against all the threats that accompanied the torture.
I am literally having trouble thinking as I wrote the above paragraph. Torture is that disruptive, even to its witnesses across time and space. My mind is numb.
Torture not only harms the victims. But those forced to engage in torture are harmed as well. Guards of tortured prisoners are harmed. Many will come forward to tell their stories. They should not have to do so in public.
Thank you for this blog. I commit myself once more to never give up until we see justice done here. Over and over I've written about this. I'm glad you're doing so as well.
I am also counting on Dawn Johnson, the head of OLC. If you've not read her, you will be glad to know that she too believes there was torture and it must be investigated and prosecuted. (If you want a link, it's back in my blogs and I can easily find it.)
March 3, 2009 10:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
TheraP,I am not sure what to say. Abuse and torture leaves scars - physical and emotional. I was abused, and I was also tortured. My guess is that too many children and adults have lived through as well (though some have been lost). I made it through, and I (generally) no longer experience intense pain in speaking to the issue. It does however, make me very personally connected to the issue of torture and how damn dumb and cruel it is.
I feel deeply for those who were ordered to torture. I suspect that for at least some of them they will bare deep wounds. However, it is likely that it is those who were given the orders who will bear the culpability for doing so - not those who gave the orders and established the policy and climate. At least that is what we saw with Abu Ghraib. That is not justice either.
Thank you for sharing your very personal response.
March 3, 2009 2:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
This blog deserves to move up. I would gladly give up my place for this blog - if such were possible.
March 3, 2009 11:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
at first justice must be pursued quietly so that people can come forward with their evidence without the possibility of any public reprisal
This is what they are doing concerning the destroyed videos. They are looking for persons who may have viewed them, or participated in them, to have them tell their story without fear of it blowing up in their faces. It's truth-seeking...not blame gaming. I believe Obama has also let it be known that they should not fear 'whistle-blowing'. He's got it out there that they should not fear it at all.
I hope more people step forward...I hope they know that We the People understand their position and that those who seek to shame them are truly the guilty ones.
bushco had a big thumb.
March 3, 2009 11:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, may more who know about the torture please step forward.
March 3, 2009 11:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
I believe that creating an environment where people will step forward is critical. However, even with that environment, whistleblowers (and witnesses) often bear long term consequences. We may see them positively (or as heroes), but inside the system they may not receive such a positive welcome. Whistleblowers often pay a high price for doing the right thing. For this reason, we need to enforce protection of those who do come forward. The same is true for corporate whistleblowers.
March 3, 2009 2:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Whistle-blowers pay a high price. But they live in the knowledge that they did not pay a worse price. Silence is a worse price.
March 3, 2009 2:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes. I posted some of my own thoughts on this here. At some point, I don't care whether or not we grant immunity. I think we must air the nation's dirty laundry even if it lacks real teeth in the realm of punishment. Our failure to at least do that, wholly undermines whatever moral authority we still maintain in the world.
March 3, 2009 2:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
When it comes to war crimes, we are obliged under Geneva and the Torture Statute to prosecute. We don't get to "decide." It's justice before the world!
March 3, 2009 2:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
_Any_ President wanting dictatorial power (or even allowing its possibility) is anathema to the American ideal in my opinion. I noted in a post under the muckraker article about the Yoo memos that this should be above-the-fold front page stuff. The notion that Bush came a hair's breadth from (and indeed cleared the way for) a unary dictatorial proclamation should be shocking.
Where's the outrage?
March 3, 2009 2:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Please, give us more outrage! Try to outdo oleeb.
March 3, 2009 2:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
I continue to believe that the prosecution of international war crimes requires international pressure. I wish domestic pressure was enough but it isn't and it shouldn't have to be.
How should this international pressure manifest itself? One way is for certain countries to set pre-conditions before sitting down with the U.S. for diplomatic talks.
Those pre-conditions should be the complete investigation and prosecution of all those in the Bush administration who committed war crimes.
Don't misunderstand me. I want Obama and Sec. Clinton to succeed with their foreign policy agenda but I think part of that is to make things right with the rest of the world.
March 3, 2009 3:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
I continue to believe that the prosecution of international war crimes requires international pressure. I wish domestic pressure was enough but it isn't and it shouldn't have to be.
How should this international pressure manifest itself? One way is for certain countries to set pre-conditions before sitting down with the U.S. for diplomatic talks.
Those pre-conditions should be the complete investigation and prosecution of all those in the Bush administration who committed war crimes.
Don't misunderstand me. I want Obama and Sec. Clinton to succeed with their foreign policy agenda but I think part of that is to make things right with the rest of the world.
March 3, 2009 3:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
WAR CRIMES!
War Crimes / Shock and Awe / Shock and Awe/ Shock and Awe / Shock and Awe
War Crimes / Shock and Awe / Shock and Awe/ Shock and Awe / Shock and Awe
They gave us the P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act written before the 9/11 attack
They gave us the fraudulent vote, racist – virtual – remote
They gave you (your Orders), Do Not Tell (its Torture)
Bush and Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, frozen in a lake of ice
War Crimes / Shock and Awe / Shock and Awe/ Shock and Awe / Shock and Awe
War Crimes / Shock and Awe / Shock and Awe/ Shock and Awe / Shock and Awe
All the dead are staring back, Babylon under attack
The birth of civilization dead, the U.S.A. is full of dread
They watch us on the Internet, take our names and mark our debts
We can’t keep silent now as then, we must remember never again
War Crimes / Shock and Awe / Shock and Awe/ Shock and Awe / Shock and Awe
War Crimes / Shock and Awe / Shock and Awe/ Shock and Awe / Shock and Awe
Wolfowitz, Gonzales, Richard Pearl
Neocons in the media whirl
Hoods and leashes, dogs and sand
“Rapture out” their final plan
War Crimes / Shock and Awe / Shock and Awe/ Shock and Awe / Shock and Awe
War Crimes / Shock and Awe / Shock and Awe/ Shock and Awe / Shock and Awe
War Crimes / Shock and Awe / Shock and Awe/ Shock and Awe / Shock and Awe
War Crimes / Shock and Awe / Shock and Awe/ Shock and Awe / Shock and Awe
*********
The Patriot Act is actually a compromise version of the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2001 which was a legislative package conceived of before September 11.
http://epic.org/privacy/terrorism/ata2001_text.pdf
March 3, 2009 8:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
BEAUTIFUL. Awesome. When the blog retires, go ahead and just make your own blog.
March 3, 2009 8:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
do you know precisely when and from who's desk this act originated?
March 3, 2009 9:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Looks like Republican Senators Orrin Hatch and Arlen Specter, and Democratic Senator Patrick Leahy.
“Meanwhile, Republican Senators Orrin Hatch and Arlen Specter (R-PA), along with Democratic Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) had been working with John Ashcroft on a draft bill, called the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2001. Many of the most controversial aspects of the USA PATRIOT Act were first part of this draft and it was later to be introduced as the PATRIOT Act/USA Act — which in turn became the basis for the final USA PATRIOT Act.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_USA_PATRIOT_Act
also:
The USA PATRIOT Act Was Planned Before 9/11
by Jennifer Van Bergen
Truthout.org
20 May, 2002
http://www.globalissues.org/article/342/the-usa-patriot-act-was-planned-before-911
March 3, 2009 11:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
thanks
March 4, 2009 9:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
GO STRATOFROG!
Very powerful and apt poem. Thank you for taking the time and energy to write and share it.
I felt that shock and awe was the staple of the Bush administration strategy.
March 3, 2009 9:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't think there is any stomach for investigations or prosecutions of any type either of the WH or anything congress may have done.
There is just too much exposure for government in general. Right now, with the mood of the country, investigations etc would push an already deeply stressed population that much closer to the edge. I happen to think the Bush administration intentionally ignored FBI warnings of fraud in real estate, mortgage and banking and if an investigation starts it will morph into an all out political war.
It needs to be recognized that the situation right now is every bit as serious an emergency as 9/11 or Katrina, probably greater. Preventing a major global depression has to be the focus right now. That has a lot of pieces and will take all the resources the WH and congress can muster. Unfortunately, the republicans are in total disarray so they aren't going to be any help even if they were so inclined. That pretty much leaves everything up to democrats.
As an interesting aside I haven't liked a lot of the decisions of Speaker Pelosi. However she is perfect in this circumstance. She is all about partisan politics, is mean as hell and after Obama is the one person we have to have a lot of trust in. Her decisions will almost always lean to protecting the democratic majority in the house. Apart from that she'll get the job done.
The politically pragmatic view would specify that democrats understand Bush has handed them at least ten years of control that could easily be stretched to two decades if democrats play their cards well. While it may suck big time for some people, I think others are willing to make that trade off. The upside is democrats get a real opportunity to reverse three decades of republican control that brought us all this grief. Its a choice between being assured of well more than half a loaf and risking everything for the whole thing. Political prudence says to take the sure win.
March 4, 2009 12:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
I would agree with you if the ONLY thing that was going on in Congress was the economy, however it is not. It is one thing.
I am not trying to minimize the dire situation we (and the world are in economically); however, pursuing this issue goes to the heart of our continuing existence of a system of checks and balances.
I DO agree that it is politically unpalatable; but then so is addressing most of the situations we are facing right now - economy, war, health care, global warming, energy issues. All of them are highly political.
March 4, 2009 2:22 PM | Reply | Permalink