Holder Torture Investigation Likely

WASHINGTON — Contrary to White House wishes, Attorney General Eric Holder may push forward with a criminal investigation into the Bush administration's harsh interrogation practices used on suspected terrorists.

Holder is considering whether to appoint a prosecutor and will make a final decision within the next few weeks, a Justice Department official told The Associated Press. The official spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak on a pending matter.

A move to appoint a criminal prosecutor is certain to stir partisan bickering that could create a distraction to President Barack Obama's efforts to push ambitious health care and energy reform.

Obama has repeatedly expressed reluctance to having a probe into alleged Bush-era abuses and resisted an effort by congressional Democrats to establish a "truth commission," saying the nation should be "looking forward and not backwards."

Justice Department spokesman Matt Miller said Holder planned to "follow the facts and the law."

"We have made no decisions on investigations or prosecutions, including whether to appoint a prosecutor to conduct further inquiry," he told the AP on Saturday. "As the attorney general has made clear, it would be unfair to prosecute any official who acted in good faith based on legal guidance from the Justice Department."

Newsweek magazine, which first reported the development, said Holder was aware of the political implications of having a probe and preferred not to create unnecessary trouble for the White House. Still, the attorney general was troubled by what he learned in reports about the treatment of prisoners at the CIA's "black sites."

The probe would focus in part on whether CIA personnel tortured terrorism suspects after Sept. 11, 2001. Holder has said those who acted within the government's legal guidance will not be prosecuted, but has left open the possibility of pursuing those who went beyond the guidance and broke the law.

Holder has discussed with his staff the possibility of a prosecutor, saying he needed someone with "gravitas and grit," the magazine reported. In the end, the attorney general asked for a list of 10 candidates, five from within the Justice Department and five from outside.

"I hope that whatever decision I make would not have a negative impact on the president's agenda," Holder told Newsweek. "But that can't be a part of my decision."

Comments

[4news4]

Mr. Attorney General
Law only has meaning if it is enforced. When a society fails to enforce its laws it leads to chaos because people will do what ever they want, since there are not consequences. We clearly see this with antitrust litigation. Corporations are now TOO BIG TO FAIL because they do what ever they want. When government fails to put regulations in place and enforce them we are all doomed.

This applies to our elected officials who break the law. If we fail to investigate and not hold our elected officials accountable we are going down a slippery slope.

As the Attorney General you are selected by the President (an elected official), and thus are subject to the obligations of the law and the promises made by the person who selected you.

In order for us to move on we must find out what was done in our (the voters and citizens) name over the last 8 years. We are the voters and we will eventually hold all elected officials accountable through our votes.. Unfortunately a lot of damage can be done in the interim.

Therefore Mr. Attorney General please do you job of enforcing the laws, and stop exonerating people a priory.

Your actions will be a component on how the President is viewed and whether he gets reelected.
Thank you.

[TruthnPolitics]

This article mentions "suspected terrorist" and "interrogation practices". Give it a break. The real story is what Obama and Holder are doing to the Constitution and our Bill of Rights. February 26, 2009 - Erick Holder stated that he would be reinstating the assault weapon ban. Holder and Obama have long been against gun ownership and now they will work hard to take away your right as citizens to own firearms. President Barack Obama is pushing for a One Million Dollar liability insurance for everyone who wants to own a gun. In 1996, Obama supported a ban on the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns. In 2003, he voted in support of legislation that would have effectively banned most of the privately held hunting shotguns, target rifles, and black powder rifles in Illinois. In 2004, he voted against legislation drafted to protect homeowners from prosecution in cases where they used a firearm to halt a home invasion.
Check out: http://www.stop-obama.info/barack_obama_013.htm

[GreatTruthsSeeker]

You are speaking about different wickets than this article, though many wickets seem extra sticky lately. It's probably all the slime on them. Context in regard to the facts is important. So are the facts. In our world, ignorance is not bliss, it's malignant. I love my guns too, but I don't think they are going to taken away by Obama and Holder. I love sharing my perspective of reality, and that won't be influenced by you. Thank you for sharing your views. I can't validate your data points. Please provide non- Fox related links to your information.

[GreatTruthsSeeker]

Excuse me, I meant, please provide more non FOX & NRA links to your data points. I'm a Texan. The rules down here are different than where you probably are. The majority of us here are not afraid of someone taking away our means of defending ourselves.

But, the article is about torture. What do you think about torture? I think it is criminal, but am not influenced by fiction like "24" or James Bond flicks. i mean you no ill will.

Peace.

[redstrat]

How can we push democracy and the rule of law around the world if we can't do it here?

[jmpurser]

Good point.

[ReedYoung]

Should we really "push" anything around the world? I thought encouragement with development and relief aid, and discouragement by not being generous to unjust countries, was the best, least risky approach.

[jimbeaux1961]

Are we a nation of laws or not? Does the law apply to everyone or not?

[redstrat]

it had better

[fredisfred]

Of course not.

[pomegrante]

holder & co. are probably afraid of d.i.c.k.-the-don. surely they must beprosecut­ed,but....­.i do understand.

[jmpurser]

We might as well go ahead and investigate the Bush Administration for war crimes and if they are found they should be prosecuted whether they were committed by a private in Iraq or the President.

The Obama Administration's argument against this was that doing so would derail his agenda. So far his agenda has been too small to notice on the economy, failed before starting on health care and the environment, and is solidly headed in the wrong direction on civil rights. Amazingly the man with a stunning percentage of the nation behind him has made his "agenda" irrelevant in less than 6 months.

So we might as well try to restore our reputation and our justice system over the next 3.5 years. It doesn't look like we're going to get much else done.

[MyNameIsJames]

WOW! I am AFRAID that you are CORRECT!

The obsession with bipartisanship - the so-called 'pragmatic" approach. This may work when things are relatively stable like the Clinton years. However, when the house is on fire and the gdamn children are still ASLEEP upstairs - "pragmatic" meandering isn't going to get the job done.

At this time, we need bold and decisive leadership-- present a clear coherent case to the American people for REFORM - This strategy that our President has used -- is causing him to hemmorage supporters and it seems like momentum is already lost.

How is this possible
1) Timid Clintonites - calling the shots
2) A concerted effort to distance himself from his progressive base - and tamp down on their expectations
3) Inability to exert substantial influence over the US Senate
4) Obsession with reaching concensus - Strong majorities don't seem to be enough for this President!

[jmpurser]

Sadly, tragically, against all hope and reason, I agree.

[twilight druid]

Obama's agenda on the economy has been Bush's: bailout.

Why anyone would follow a plan set forth by the person who helped run the economy into the ground is beyond me.

[Siara]

It's obvious that the people who did these things during the Bush administration would like nothing better than to get back into power and do exactly the same things again. So it's time to use our legal system as a deterrent. Throw the criminals in jail.

[fredisfred]

I trly hope Holder follows through with this, but I've lost all faith in justice ever being carried out on the ones responsible for this debacle. We have damned ourselves as a nation, and have forever lost the moral high ground. Thanks, Bush Administration.

[Chbronze]

Yeah, if things were only governed as well as they had been during the Johnson administration. I mean Vietnam allowed us to be held in such high esteem around the world, remember thats what McNamara told us.

[higgins1990]

What comes around goes around in politics. Expect the Obama administration to be prosecuted under the next Republican president (and at the rate Obama and the Dems are disenfranchising voters, will most likely happen in 2012).

[GreatTruthsSeeker]

You present a huge fallacy in logic to assume that there will be another Republican president (soon, if ever), and that the Obama administration will do anything remotely as illegal as what has been perpetrated by the Bush administration and therefore be prosecuted because the DoJ in the Obama administration is honoring binding treaties by investigating and prosecuting the perps of this debris field.

What about the fact that it is never ok to torture? What about the fact that people that support torture make extremely large clusters of "Thinking Errors", and present difficulty with both inductive and deductive reasoning? Google "Thinking Errors" for more information on why they think like they think. Then, scroll down to "Criminal Thinking Errors".

Peace

[fredisfred]

The repubs will not take back the Whitehouse in 20 years, much less 2012. They have managed to run their party into the ground. Time for a third party to rear its ugly head.

[kindGSL]

If Obama falls flat in 2012, it is more likely a third party candidate will do it to him than a Republican.

Go study the politics of the era just before the civil war for a similar political event. We are just repeating history.

We should start making bets as to how long it will take for the party to collapse and be replaced with a new one. Republican party implosion is creating a terrific opportunity right now for a brave new party. I think it will be great to see what kind of creative new energy that infuses into our political system.

The Republican party is the party of pollution and failure, who wants that?

Nobody!

[higgins1990]

And the Democratic party is the party of extreme debt and failure. Who wants that?

[HumanityEqualsLaw]

This has to happen if the US wants its credibility and good reputation at least among western democracies back. And it has to happen by US authorities and within US justice system. If this is ignored long enough, eventually the binding treaties will force a trial in some other country. That is not a good option for USA, so it is about time to get to work even though it may be very inconvenient for some.

[twilight druid]

From the article: "A move to appoint a criminal prosecutor is certain to stir partisan bickering that could create a distraction to President Barack Obama's efforts to push ambitious health care and energy reform."

Well a nation that allows war crimes to go unpunished doesn't deserve health care benefits, a better economy or cheap energy.

If we don't stop letting administrations get away with criminal behavior then we will have a unitary executive.

[kindGSL]

Not only that, we still have lots of war criminals in high office, do we really want them to write more control legislation?

The next congress will be a lot better. I hope.

[Whinger]

Good enough for Germany, good enough for the USA, but I won't hold my breath.

[Jelperman]

Failure to prosecute torturers means approving of what they've done. They did it; they brag about it,

Hang 'em high!

[Marcospinelli]

Failure to prosecute means that there is no US of A any longer, no democratic republic based on rule of law, and that the noble experiment is over.

[urweatherman]

This will backfire, as the vast majority of Americans oppose wasting time on any investigation into this matter, despite what you might think if you read the articles/comments here. This action is just another example of how we are becoming more of a laughing stock to the entire world. Also, this is being used to divert attention away from the health-care debacle and lack of positive economic news.

[rich misty]

The USDoJ does not waste time or distract from legislative agendas.

http://blog.aclu.org/2009/07/09/president-obama-the-whole-world-is-watching/

The entire world is watching. And if we are too weak to prosecute our own, the burden falls on other countries. They are already stepping up to the plate.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&rlz=1G1GGLQ_ENUS331&q=bush+six&aq=f&oq=&aqi=g10

You post is discredited.

[RTIII]

Thanks, RM, for the attention you're giving this. ...I'm not sure s/aying to//s does anything for the tro//s but it helps keep up morale among the concerned patriots among us.
.

[rich misty]

Thank you RTIII. Republicans have nothing good to offer America, but the bad things they do offer should be confronted at every turn imo.

[DrDemon]

IT'S ABOUT TIME !