EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
War Criminals, Including Their Lawyers, Must Be Prosecuted
Since he took office, President Obama has instituted many changes that break with the policies of the Bush administration. The new president has ordered that no government agency will be allowed to torture, that the U.S. prison at Guantánamo will be shuttered, and that the CIA's secret black sites will be closed down. But Obama is non-committal when asked whether he will seek investigation and prosecution of Bush officials who broke the law. "My view is also that nobody's above the law and, if there are clear instances of wrongdoing, that people should be prosecuted just like any ordinary citizen," Obama said. "But," he added, "generally speaking, I'm more interested in looking forward than I am in looking backwards." Obama fears that holding Team Bush to account will risk alienating Republicans whom he still seeks to win over.
Obama may be off the hook, at least with respect to investigating the lawyers who advised the White House on how to torture and get away with it. The Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) has written a draft report that apparently excoriates former Justice Department lawyers John Yoo and Jay Bybee, authors of the infamous torture memos, according to Newsweek's Michael Isikoff. OPR can report these lawyers to their state bar associations for possible discipline, or even refer them for criminal investigation. Obama doesn't have to initiate investigations; the OPR has already launched them, on Bush's watch.
The smoking gun that may incriminate George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, et al., is the email traffic that passed between the lawyers and the White House. Isikoff revealed the existence of these emails on The Rachel Maddow Show. Some maintain that Bush officials are innocent because they relied in good faith on legal advice from their lawyers. But if the president and vice president told the lawyers to manipulate the law to allow them to commit torture, then that defense won't fly.
A bipartisan report of the Senate Armed Services Committee found that "senior officials in the United States government solicited information on how to use aggressive techniques, redefined the law to create the appearance of their legality, and authorized their use against detainees."
Cheney recently admitted to authorizing waterboarding, which has long been considered torture under U.S. law. Donald Rumsfeld, Condoleezza Rice, George Tenet, Colin Powell, and John Ashcroft met with Cheney in the White House basement and authorized harsh interrogation techniques, including waterboarding, according to an ABC News report. When asked, Bush said he knew about it and approved.
John Yoo wrote in a Wall Street Journal oped that Bush "could even authorize waterboarding, which he did three times in the years after 9/11."
A representative of the Justice Department promised that OPR's report would be released sometime last November. But Bush's attorney general Michael Mukasey objected to the draft. A final version will be presented to Attorney General Eric Holder. The administration will then have to decide whether to make it, and the emails, public and then how to proceed.
When the United States ratified the Convention Against Torture, we promised to extradite or prosecute those who commit, or are complicit in the commission, of torture. We have two federal criminal statutes for torture prosecutions - the Torture Statute and the War Crimes Act (torture is considered a war crime under U.S. law). The Torture Convention is unequivocal: nothing, including a state of war, can be invoked as a justification for torture.
Yoo redefined torture much more narrowly than U.S. law provides, and counseled the White House that it could evade prosecution under the War Crimes Act by claiming self-defense or necessity. Yoo knew or should have known of the Torture Convention's absolute prohibition of torture.
There is precedent for holding lawyers criminally liable for giving legally erroneous advice that resulted in great physical or mental harm or death. In U.S. v. Altstoetter, Nazi lawyers were convicted of war crimes and crimes against humanity for advising Hitler on how to "legally" disappear political suspects to special detention camps.
Almost two-thirds of respondents to a USA Today/Gallup Poll favor investigations of the Bush team for torture and warrantless wiretapping. Nearly four in 10 favor criminal investigations. Cong. John Conyers has introduced legislation to establish a National Commission on Presidential War Powers and Civil Liberties. Sen. Patrick Leahy advocates for a Truth and Reconciliation Commission; but this is insufficient. TRC's are used for nascent democracies in transition. By giving immunity to those who testify before them, it would ensure that those responsible for torture, abuse and illegal spying will never be brought to justice.
Attorney General Eric Holder should appoint a Special Prosecutor to investigate and prosecute high Bush officials including lawyers like John Yoo who gave them "legal" cover. Obama is correct when he said that no one is above the law. Accountability is critical to ensuring that our leaders never again torture and abuse people.
- Posted in
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
38 Comments so far
Show All"Almost two-thirds of respondents to a USA Today/Gallup Poll favor investigations of the Bush team for torture and warrantless wiretapping. Nearly four in 10 favor criminal investigations."
It's vexing that we even have to bring up the question of broad public support for prosecutions. In a just world, they would be prosecuting because it's the right thing to do--public opinion be damned.
Most also wanted Nixon to be tried and the evidence was on the table. Another coup by Republicans brought us down so it's important to identify traitors across the board. Until we have the guts to start locking them up, en masse, we won't get anywhere. Don't give up, let's get even. Money is what they understand and we have the power to punish the bastards by not giving in to their phoney fixes.thong-girl
What commission has ever resulted in true justice? Try them and judge them before a court of We the People. .....public hearings and trials with We the People as judge and jury. Want REAL CHANGE, not rhetoric?..There it is. We the People CAN handle the truth and will act accordingly!
Exactly O! Another way of saying it: How can you expect justice when the unjust try the unjust?
i believe the key phrase here, mr. obama, is "generally speaking." we are not generally speaking here. do what you swore you would do.
Put Bush and Cheney's war-crimes trial on pay-per-view television and make it available around the world for $49.95.
We'd make enough money to pay off the national debt in about 10 minutes.
Cygnus,
Thanks for the laugh! It would certainly be one way to pay off the debt.
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of
patriots and tyrants. ....Thomas Jefferson
I think you have hit upon a legitimate scenario. Why not make this a public trial judged by the public? Personally, I am more for an "open arena" type hearing...some huge stadium.....actually not much different than what you propose. Get it all out in the open and let the average citizen be the judge and jury through some kind of referendum.
Forget about "commissions"...the fox judging the fox...never goes anywhere with NO true justice or satisfaction.
Obama may have won the first election, but his boss is now Netanyahu, and he will have to answer to him. With Fienstein, Schumer, Boxer, Harman et al holding the reins for Netanyahu here, it is clear what our mission is for now and the future. Until these slimy bastards are also brought to justice, we are all subjects to the coup. Hopefully, Iran now has the nukes and will use them to eliminate the experiment in the desert.
thong-girl
M.A.D. works. Barring better solutions, that's what any nuclear state wants. Why should Iran be any different? Thinking that Middle Easterners are totally crazy is an urban legend fomented by a conservative opposition.
How many of us are indirectly complicit in these atrocities by the Bush administration, and also previous ones that have had scandals come to light, like Iran-contra, the Central American death squads and SOA... (list would go on too long...) by not saying anything or voting to re-elect these people. How many here write regularly to their representatives in Congress (probably higher than in the average population, which is regularly indoctrinated by FOX...) In Chalmers Johnson's third book in his Blowback trilogy, he says that we can be forgiven, to a certain extent, for the crimes committed in the first Bush term, but we made it close enough for the them to take in the next and so we are all guilty, at least by association. The government is not just some nameless entity. We are the government, and we keep putting the same bastards in, again and again. I didn't vote for Bush either time, and I also vote third party when it comes to the other elections. Maybe I didn't talk long enough, write to my Congress people enough, whatever... And now when most of us want these investigations, we wonder why “our” government sits on its butt. I forget who, but a poster to a previous article some time ago on CD suggested that we establish an investigatory committee for every administration when they leave office to look at crimes committed, as a standard practice. But it isn't enough to investigate. If we really want to start getting honest politicians, there must be real prosecutions from the top down. It might be too late now, though, because our politicians expect to get away with their bs, and they do. George Carlin said maybe it isn't the politicians who suck, maybe it's We, the People; after all, that's where the politicians come from.
This falls under the category of "speak for yourself." I have no guilt about the atrocities or any other criminal acts nor do any of the children alive. If you do, you need to deal with that yourself. I understand that many "citizens" or "consumers" do but not all, so please be clear and accurate in your statements.
thong-girl
My point was that we are all complicit by not holding our government to high enough standards collectively. If you re-read my post, I do include myself in the blame. If We, the People, are the government, if the politicians come from We, the People, even if mostly from the wealthier sections, We are all still complicit in whatever our government does, as long as we are still voting and voting for the same people time and again. I'm not assigning individual blame, but doing so collectively. Just as the terrorists did on 9/11. If they were to have sat down and had a long conversation with many of the people who died in the towers, the pentagon and on the airplanes, preferably individually, I'm sure they would have come to the same conclusion you did, that they were not individually responsible for the crimes the US has committed against their countries and people. Yet they might still assign collective blame. Any future acts of terrorism committed against anyone, no matter the individual victims, are the ultimate result of the actions of their group/government, regardless of whether those actions were right or wrong to the people who died. I am equally sure that if the people who fly planes and drop bombs on villages, killing many innocents just to eliminate one suspected bad guy, had sat down and discussed every day matters as well as the reasons for dropping those bombs, most of them would come away thinking that the bombing victims are decent people, yet would still follow orders to drop those bombs. Are they responsible individually or collectively for the decision to actually drop that bomb? The decision to do so. That is the point of terrorism: it an expression of impotent rage at a collective for injustices done to them by that collective. The point I'm trying to make is that we are all in this together and thus all responsible.
Yes, but our "government" for years has controlled information flow and the media. Most people aren't even aware what we have done to the Iranian people and many don't particularly care if we assassinate or exterminate. How do you deal with people who feel we can do no wrong? How do you deal when you are called a traitor for criticizing anyone? We have learned well from terrorist nations and we may actually be the first country to practice genocide since Hitler's Germany. We have much to correct though few feel the need to do so. So I do understand what you say and mostly agree.
thong-girl
David,
What do you mean by "collective blame"? Are you impugning my performance as a citizen because of how the elite in this country treat the rest of the world? Your rhetoric is empty, and your logic lacking. If you want to include yourself in American government and its treasonous actions then you must feel guilty. Just don't slime me with 3-day old vomit. I am not responsible for dropping bombs on innocent people, nor for starving them to death, nor for subverting popularly elected governments in other nations, or a lot else the government of the land mass where I live does while proclaiming these actions are in my best interests. I've been very clear a multitude of times about the government not representing my interests.
If I give you a dollar for a sandwich, and you instead buy a gun and kill a child, I'm responsible? What if I withhold my dollar and you still buy a gun and kill a child, I'm still responsible? What if I kill you, and your collaborator kills the child? What if I just kill all potential collaborators, and the child steps on a land mine, am I still responsible? Your vacuous logic and misuse of the concept of responsibility soon leads down a slippery slope that most of the world's religions have already taken us: guilty from birth.
I've been a peace and environmental activist since about 1972. I've always voted for independent and third-party candidates with progressive platforms. From 2002 to 2008, I likely wrote over 1000 letters to Congress and others, demanding an end to imperialism, return of troops, reduction in military spending, eliminating nuclear and chemical weapons, and much more. I've been visited by Homeland Security and the Secret Service, and investigated and harassed by state government for BEING A RESPONSIBLE CITIZEN and speaking out against the laws that are broken every day by the people in government. Blaming responsible citizens, collectively or individually, is simply an act of cowardice - I'm no more to blame for American imperialism than a breadmaker in Budapest. I've voted, and urged, and demanded, and marched, and stood in politician's offices - short of violence I've done a lot to attempt to effect change in how government works. What would you suggest I do to be more "responsible"? How exactly does a marginalized, outspoken dissident become part of the "collective"? If I truly represented anything approaching what you call the "collective," we'd have a different government with different policies, or we'd all be dead or in the fascist state's prisons. If I chose to kill one of those responsible for American government or American corporate crimes, would that mean I took responsibility?
Why don't you expend as much misdirected rhetoric against those actually responsible: the elite in the government, media, corporations, and military? Why not name a few names, because the list of those responsible is not really all that long compared with the "collective"? Why not convince us, the proponderance of witless idiots in America and their self-defeating choices for representation notwithstanding, that we don't live in a representative democracy, but a fascist corporate state of greed and consumption ruled by standards that cannot be violated without dire consequences for the individual, even a collective of individuals?
You've completely failed here to demonstrate any distinction between "collective responsibility" and bullshit.
Jarhead
Crimes are only for the middle class and below. One of these people will go to prison if they steal a pair of socks from the chinese destributor WALMART. The top class can do anything, you know like murder at will,steal millions from the lower class, war crimes, any crimes and the people that can do something about it laughs about it. It seems that Eric Holder will be the fourth A.G. to sit in a seat and pretend everything is according to the law of the land.He will do nothing as the last three did. He said the american people were cowards.Wonder how high on the hero pole he places himself? I would say below the bottom since he is now taking orders from Bush and Cheney. No one wants to hear his snide stupid remarks. We want him to do his job we are paying him big money to do.
Jarhead: " Crimes are only for the middle class and below ". So true! Reminds me of the saying: The U.S. Justice system lives by the golden rule; the man with the most gold makes the rules! One example: How come a guy in the local paper, just robbed a bank of a few hundred $ from the outside and gets several years in prison, while people like Paulson, Madoff, Wall Street criminals, and their ilk, can rob and embezzle billions of $ from the citizens of the U.S; from the inside----- and get off scott free!
Madoff investors will be bailed out, or, more accurately, they will get taxpayers to pay for the money Madoff robbed from them. This in spite of the fact that there were no investments. A ponzi scheme by definition has no profit or cash. Some banks have already been ordered to pay off even though they have no culpability.
thong-girl
Time to take the guillotines out of mothballs...
This is ridiculous. Just because Madoff did not make any investments doesn't mean that people did not invest their money with him. In many cases, they DID NOT KNOW that their money was with him. Their BANKS / INVESTMENT FUNDS, whom they trusted with their money gave that money to Madoff.
The banks have no culpability? Ridiculous.
Jarhead, did you see this: http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/02/18-10
thong-girl
In case anyone missed the comments by Pelosi, she essentially said she and others knew the "evidence" for going to war was based on lies and for that reason didn't think it would go very far. Others, such as Harmon, knew about the torture and said nothing. It will be the will of the people that will end this spiral into hell that we are headed for, and even that may not work.
thong-girl
too many dems in leadership positions are complicit. the neocons made sure enough were told in advance. this was cover, knowing if anything ever came up, the dems would not throw themselves under the bus.
If we let some other country bring these hooligans to justice, SHAME ON US. If anybody missed the old movie "Judgment at Nuremberg" it's worth looking for.
At the end of the day. I am afraid that the most accurate word to describe Obama with regard to investigating and prosecuting Bush and his cronies for rendition and torture, lying to the people, spying on the people and many other potential crimes (I have lost count now) is COWARD! This Rule of Law and defending the Constitution is the one area he is obliged to deal with and like the Wicked Witch Pelosi and the brainless Scarecrow Reid, Obama will become the Cowardly Lion. It looks like Obama would now fail the course on Constitutional Law he once taught.
Constitutional law? Hell, his argument wouldn't pass basic civics!
By nature, so-called "liberals" are not able to deal with the truth or the work that is necessary to fight for justice. Obama so what happened to Clinton when he stood up to the Pentagon and I'm sure he got an earful when he asked about the 'don't ask, don't tell' thing. We are a military state. That fact needs to be screamed by the masses and we must disarm, sort of like Japan, before we can begin to fix anything.
thong-girl
I hope the OPR refers the lawyers for criminal investigation. It's the thin end of the wedge than will expand to encompass the entire criminal gang.
Consider the possibility that the detentions and torture were to cover the tracks and neutralize witnesses to the perps of 9/11.
Get the records of the sessions and the people involved.
"Put Bush and Cheney's war-crimes trial on pay-per-view television and make it available around the world for $49.95.
We'd make enough money to pay off the national debt in about 10 minutes."
Great idea. Then execute them for treason.
But Obama wants to put it all behind us. He'd be a hero to the American people and the world if he put Bush and Cheney away forever.
I like it.
In case you haven't heard, or followed along, there is an activist in the Seattle area who has, after reading Vincent Bugliosi's book, The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder, decided to take matters into his own hands and, through the help of Mike Malloy (http://www.mikemalloy.com/live/) and his listeners/friends bought and shipped copies of that book to all 2,700 prosecutors in the U.S. in an attempt to motivate them into a prosecution.
Should anyone be interested in supporting this cause (w/emails/phone calls/etc. -- they don't need money), the website is: http://www.prosecutegeorgebush.com/index.php
Today is kickoff day to contact your local district attorney. Minimally, you may wish to encourage the County Attorney in your area with either a phone call/email or a letter --
Tarry-I have the book but haven't gotten around to reading it yet (I have a stack of books to read but keep getting sidetracked). I found out about it via CSPAN.
Prosecute war criminals, yes. Prosecute their lawyers, no.
The only entity we need is a well financed Special Prosecutor with subpoena power and a mandate to follow the truth where ever it leads.
Blue Ribbon Commissions have a history of failing to find the whole truth and white washing what truth they do find. Few are happy with the findings of the 9/11 Commission and other recent commissions.
What can we do to get the various activist organizations out in the street regularly pushing for a Special Prosecutor? They are wasting their time fighting the anti-war battle. We lost that one. All we accomplished in 2006 was electing a bunch of ungrateful Democrats who then proceeded to ignore stopping the Iraq War and Impeachment in order to win yet another election in 2008.
Now, having helped the Democrats win in 2008, we are presented with a scenario where the leading Democrats want to avoid having to take a principled stand of any kind and want to completely ignore prosecuting the Bush-Cheney criminals.
And among the peace activists groups, why is it popular to be anti-war but not to be pro impeachment or pro Special Prosecutor?
Except for some ineffectual yammering on the internet, most of the major national anti-war groups have gone as completely silent on having a Special Prosecutor as they became on Impeachment.
The ACLU went to great lengths to avoid supporting impeachment and even now doesn't seem to be particularly concerned about having a Special Prosecutor. The Friends were against impeachment and now don't mention accountability. The World Cant Wait organization early on was for impeachment but as we got closer to the election avoided it like a plague. I haven't heard a word from them on having a Special Prosecutor.
And of course United For Peace and Justice appears to be for neither goal, having done nothing for impeachment and nearly as much for accountability. UFPJ brags about its 1,400 groups, but, ask yourself,
WHEN HAVE YOU EVER HEARD UFPJ Call its 1,400 groups to the streets to fight for prosecution for Bush and Cheney?
Yeah, Never!
Until activist groups start raising hell over the need for prosecution, we will continue to have more unnecessary wars. The failed but soon to be expanded war in Afganistan awaits you.
Unless all of you and I fight for prosecution of war criminals Bush and Cheney and all the underlings that supported them, we will just have more unnecessary wars.
The ongoing stalemate between the legislative and executive branch, since Obama took over the job, has caused the public to believe that the economy is not heading towards a recovery any time soon. I believe this is a correct reasoning and I believe this is why so many are not focused on war crimes and why Obama is not getting into the frey. Those who feel this will change, should understand just how serious it is for so many. The right-wing will be of no help in anything if we move to a special prosecutor. Ask yourself what you feel a low or middle income family should be focused on and you may begin to understand how serious things are. If they indict Bush, and god knows I want them to, it may just be the nail in all our coffins, metaphorically speaking.
thong-girl
I'm tired of seeing the little guy take it in the ass, for the orders of their leaders. Bush, Cheney, Rumsfield,Gonzales and all their lawyers need to go to prison. There must be consequences for their actions.
There have been a few capable, articulate commentators here on this article. Those whom, it is obvious, have been paying attention for some time. It would behoove the others to listen to those words in their minds as they read.
I abhor the travesty of the last 30 years in this country, and the last 16 have been the most redolent, the most precarious and least revealing of government involvement in military 'superiority,' civil intrusion, Constitutional disregard, political expediency, while being enhanced by paranoia, greed, documented criminal conduct, driven by cynicism and, well bluntly, hate.
The normal lawyer-client privilege has been corrupted beyond recognition by the extreme behavior 'under the cover of authority.' This truly is RICO territory.
We all know it. Every person with a breathable I.Q. knows it.
But 'THEY' know we can't do shit about it.