Obama Leaves Door Open To Investigating Bush, But Wants To "Look Forward"

Responding to the most popular inquiry on the "Open for Questions" feature of his website, Barack Obama said on Sunday that he is "evaluating" whether or not to investigate potential crimes of the Bush administration, but that he was inclined to "look forward as opposed to looking backwards."

The answer was delivered during an interview to This Week With George Stephanopoulos. But the question itself has been weeks in the work.

The Obama transition team, as part of its efforts to open up the political process, had allowed web users to vote on questions for the incoming administration to field. To the top rose a query from Bob Fertik, president of Democrats.com, asking whether the incoming administration would appoint a special prosecutor to "independently investigate the greatest crimes of the Bush administration, including torture and warrantless wiretapping."

On Obama's website, a December statement from Vice President-elect Joe Biden on the topic was offered as a response (similar older statements were used to address several other national security-related questions, which the transition team has avoided discussing). But Stephanopoulos made the matter moot by posing the question directly to the president-elect.

"We're still evaluating how we're going to approach the whole issue of interrogations, detentions, and so forth," said Obama. "And obviously we're going to look at past practices. And I don't believe that anybody is above the law. On the other hand, I also have a belief that we need to look forward as opposed to looking backwards. And part of my job is to make sure that for example at the CIA, you've got extraordinarily talented people who are working very hard to keep Americans safe. I don't want them to suddenly feel like they've got to spend all their time looking over their shoulders and lawyering up."

Pressed a bit -- was he ruling out prosecution? -- the president-elect suggested that decision would be that of his attorney general.

"I think my general view when it comes to my attorney general is that he's the people's lawyer. Eric Holder's been nominated," said Obama. "His job is to uphold the Constitution and look after the interests of the American people, not be swayed by my day-to-day politics. So ultimately, he's going to be making some calls. But my general belief is that when it comes to national security, what we have to focus on is getting things right in the future as opposed to looking at what we got wrong in the past."

I asked Fertik to share his thoughts on the president-elect's answer. This is what he had to say:

It's absurd to talk about "upholding the Constitution" and say "no one is above the law" if you refuse to look "back" at those who have subverted the Constitution and broken the law. And you can't have one set of rules for "national security" and a different set of rules for everything else.

So if there's any hope for prosecution in Obama's answer, it is that Attorney General Eric Holder will truly be "the people's lawyer" and fully represent us by prosecuting torturers, wiretappers, and other criminals who committed their crimes from secret undisclosed locations hidden within the Bush-Cheney administration.

One more thing that is worth noting. As pointed out by Think Progress, Dawn Johnsen, Obama's choice to lead the Office of Legal Counsel, has said that the next president should avoid "any temptation to simply move on." Here is the relevant quote:

We must avoid any temptation simply to move on. We must instead be honest with ourselves and the world as we condemn our nation's past transgressions and reject Bush's corruption of our American ideals. Our constitutional democracy cannot survive with a government shrouded in secrecy, nor can our nation's honor be restored without full disclosure.

CORRECTION: An earlier version of this article referred to Fertik as a "former Clinton White House technology official." This description is incorrect. His co-founder, David Lytel worked as a technology official under Clinton.

Comments

[crica]

05:02 AM on 01/18/2009

How can Obama instigate an investigation into the Bush crime of warrantless wire-tapping when he himself voted in favor of it? By the way, Hillary voted against it.

[Samalabear]

11:50 AM on 01/13/2009

After listening to Jonathan Hurley again last night and reading here, I am more nervous than ever that Obama is just going to "look forward." NPR is finally picking up on this story, too, which is terrific. They gave the analogy once again about a bank robber (drug dealer, murderer, etc) who goes before the judge and his lawyer argues the "that was the past, we need to look forward" argument to the judge, and the judge just laughed his sides out. But that is what Obama is doing here. It's very serious, IMHO. I really hope he is just not wanting to "show his hand" at this point.

[BelGazou]

05:56 PM on 01/12/2009

There is still the possibility that Bush will give preemptive pardons to himself and the rest of Bush & Co. before he leaves office, making impossible to prosecute any of them.

Should Bush do this, the least that we should expect are hearings on all of Bush & Co.'s various abuses of power. No doubt, there are likely many ex-administration officials who would just love to spill their guts on the issue. Even if no prosecutions can be made, let all the poison be leeched out and the administration seen for what it is in the clear light of day. Then appropriate steps be taken to prevent any future abuses by "imperial" presidents.

Better still, if there could possibly be an amendment to the constitution to disallow any president from pardoning himself or his administration from any wrongdoing, preemptively or otherwise.

[ObjectiveRealist]

05:13 PM on 01/12/2009

Unsatisfactory answer, Mr. President.
quote:
And I don't believe that anybody is above the law. On the other hand, I also have a belief that we need to look forward as opposed to looking backwards. And part of my job is to make sure that for example at the CIA, you've got extraordinarily talented people who are working very hard to keep Americans safe. I don't want them to suddenly feel like they've got to spend all their time looking over their shoulders and lawyering up."
/quote
If everybody in the CIA is guilty of water board torture, convict them all. The Bush administration absolved itself of ordering flagrant, widespread NSA violations of the Fourth Amendment with the non sequitur "if you don't have any terrorist activities to hide, you have no cause to object to illegal government surveillance of your innocent activities."

President Obama is too knowledgeable to parrot that slippery slope argument. The CIA's black ops do not keep us safe, they keep the most over-privileged 1/10th% of Americans' foreign business competitors unsafe.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/johann-hari/why-bananas-are-a-parable_b_156102.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/30/ex-cia-executive-pleads-g_n_130594.html?page=2
http://www.democracynow.org/1998/5/11/cia_crack_connection_reporter_releases_new

The Cold War relic known as the CIA has no place in the post-Soviet world anyway. Sheltering them from worry is not a valid argument, for anything.

[rpagan]

03:27 PM on 01/12/2009

I am so tired of politicians saying we need to look forward. What's the saying - people who don't look at history are bound to repeat it - or something like that. Mr. Bush et al. should be tried for war crimes in The Hague like all other war criminals. We have to show the world that we do not consider ourselves any different from any other country that breaks the laws of the world and we need to prove to Americans that no one is above the law. If that precedent is not set what prevents it from happening again with this president or the next or the next. Each one can site this administration as an excuse for their abuse of power. I don't like President Bush or what he's done to this country and his "exit interviews" turn my stomach but he's no different than you or I. If we break the law and we get caught - we pay the price!

[walk0nwalls]

11:44 AM on 01/12/2009

Ahhhhh, so that's why they're so focused on Eric Holder.

[Yarrr]

10:11 AM on 01/12/2009

75% or more of the country would LOVE to see BushCo jailed. I mean cmon, you couldn't ask for a better popularity boost than that. Obama would be a fool not to pursue it for all it's worth.

[KarenGeorgetown]

09:51 AM on 01/12/2009

"Moving on" is such a lame term and we should consistently nail them on it at every opportunity. What is any prosecution of crime but a "looking back"? Crimes WERE committed. If this is America, they must be punished.

[Telemachus]

01:40 PM on 01/12/2009

Gee, now that I look back on it, I'm really sorry I robbed that gas station and killed those people. And now that the whole thing is over, I want to express to you my regret for the intelligence failures that led me to undertake what I believed, in good faith, constituted the best course of action available at the time.

In addition, let me express my full support for any additional safeguards you'd like to adopt to keep people like me from doing the same thing in the future.

Well, I guess that's about it. I'm gonna take the contents of the cash register and be on my way now. Y'all take care! Better luck next time!

[TLaw]

06:00 AM on 01/12/2009

Why waste the "precious tax dollars" of the American people if the investigation isn't going to lead to JAIL TIME?

There are starving children in America who I'm absolutely certain could use the monies that will surely be wasted on this "investigation"

[Telemachus]

01:30 PM on 01/12/2009

How do you know it won't lead to jail time? Also, RICO penalties include forfeiture of ill-gotten gains. Current and future taxpayers could actually benefit.

[jan4insight]

02:12 AM on 01/12/2009

Well, good for Dawn Johnson. That's the first clear statement from anyone connected with the incoming administration that indicates they might actually listen to the will of the people in this matter. Let's hope there will be many more such statements - and actions to follow.

[prudd]

01:27 AM on 01/12/2009

How come it's only wiretapping and torture in all of these articles? What about illegal war?

[Emerald1943]

12:22 AM on 01/12/2009

President Obama should appoint a special prosecutor and let him "do his thing". We all know what he will find! Bush&co are criminals and should be tried for their crimes!

[AlwaysaLiberal]

11:20 PM on 01/11/2009

Honestly people need to shut up about this if they don't want Bush issuing pardons!!! If they want Holder nominated they need to shut up. His attorney general has not been nominated why would he be broadcasting to the entire nation what is going to happen!!! This is ridiculous.

[maca]

10:31 PM on 01/11/2009

"No one is above the law. On the other hand..."

So sad to hear those words from Obama. "No one is above the law" is an absolute. There IS no other hand. This is the same rhetoric we heard when Ford pardoned Nixon in the name of "letting the country heal". A country doesn't heal by seeing that its elected leaders are above the law; it heals by seeing those leaders go to jail when they commit crimes. It heals by seeing that the Constitution works. And the crimes of this administration make Watergate look like pilfering a candy bar.

I can only hope that Obama is keeping his cards close to his vest until he's sworn in, and will then start making heads roll. But I'm sad to say I doubt there will ever be prosecutions of anyone in this unimaginably corrupt administration. Disappointing to say the least.

[Joserendon]

10:02 PM on 01/11/2009

Since Bush is such a strong advocate of enhanced interrogation techniques we should apply the same techniques to Bush, Cheney and the rest of the gang to obtain the important information about what really happened for the last eight years.

[Bubba Gump]

10:05 PM on 01/11/2009

Hmmm...interesting proposal. I've heard some police departments inflict their rookie officers with a taser jolt, to give them an idea of why they should be careful of using tasers too often. Perhaps that might be a deterent all by itself.