iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Nadler: Obama Violating Law By Not Investigating Bush

First Posted: 09/21/09 06:12 AM ET Updated: 05/25/11 02:55 PM ET

Obama Bush

Even as the issue of torture appears likely to burst back onto the public agenda next week -- thanks to the much anticipated release of an internal CIA report -- one of the most progressive voices in Congress is arguing that the Obama White House has a legal obligation to investigate the Bush torture legacy.

New York Congressman Jerry Nadler, a senior Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, told the Huffington Post that he believed that President Obama would be breaking the law if he decided to oppose launching investigation into the authorization of torture.

"If they follow the law they have no choice," Nadler said in an interview this past weekend.

The logic, for Nadler, is straightforward. As a signatory of the convention against torture, and as a result of the anti-torture act of 1996, the United States government is obligated to investigate accusations of torture when they occur in its jurisdiction.

The alternative, Nadler said, "would be violating the law. They would be not upholding the law; they would be violating it."

Nadler said that a special prosecutor should handle the task, because some of the likely subjects of such an investigation worked in the Justice Department. "There is an inherent conflict interest," said Nadler," which is why you must appoint a special prosecutor. But, again, you have no choice because that's the law."

Respected by his colleagues as one of the sharpest legal minds in Congress, Nadler has taken a leading role in pushing the Obama administration to investigate its predecessor. Beyond the legal requirements, he argues that there is a moral and political imperative - lest the precedent be set that potential illegalities go un-probed. In recent weeks, Attorney General Eric Holder has hinted that he would support a special prosecutor to look into the narrow issue of whether some interrogators exceeded their instructions. But Nadler is far from satisfied with what he's seeing from DOJ.

"[Holder] was strongly inclined to support a special prosecutor," he said. "But not for the lawyers who wrote the memos justifying the torture, and not for anybody who acted within the scope of those memos; only for some local level guy who acted beyond the scope of those memos, who waterboarded with too much water or whatever."

"You must not limit it that way," he added. "Again it would be against the law to do it because you have got to investigate everybody involved in torture or in a conspiracy to order torture."

But Nadler is no dupe. He recognizes that this matter is complicated by politics. He says his major concern is not whether the Obama administration sees the legal rationale for such an investigation, but rather whether it has the political fortitude for tackling such a task.

"If you start prosecuting the Bush people," Nadler said, "you know what is going to be said? What's going to be said is, this is politically motivated payback for the Clinton impeachment. That is what they are going to say."

"And you know that if you do this, there is going to be a tremendous pushback starting with Fox News and everywhere else," he added, "not on the merits but on the political motivation of the Obama administration for vengeance... Who needs that? So from a political point of view it is the last thing you want to do. From a point of view of reestablishing justice in this country, it is essential."

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS

Even as the issue of torture appears likely to burst back onto the public agenda next week -- thanks to the much anticipated release of an internal CIA report -- one of the most progressive voices in ...
Even as the issue of torture appears likely to burst back onto the public agenda next week -- thanks to the much anticipated release of an internal CIA report -- one of the most progressive voices in ...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 395
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (12 total)
10:25 PM on 08/29/2009
An avidity to punish is always dangerous to liberty. It leads men to stretch, to misinterpret, and to misapply even the best of laws. He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to Himself -Thomas Paine
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DevonTexas
Eternal Optimism
09:40 AM on 08/24/2009
Such an investigation would create a wonderful smoke screen behind which we could get health care reform passed WITH all the desirable aspects.
08:26 AM on 08/24/2009
I have always agreed with Nadler's position that not investigating torture was a crime and a violation of Obama's oath of office. But a couple more things have to be said than what was in this article. 1. Obama has been attempting to obstruct justice which is also a crime. His Administration's backing of threats made under the Bush Administration against the British high court over some documents involving the torture of Mohamed Binyam to prevent their release to the plaintiffs is a prime example of this. His refusal to release the torture photos would be yet another. And his defense of Bush positions involving torture, indefinite detention, and rendition of people who were tortured is yet another example of this obstruction.
2. I would also claim that if Holder even attempts to "immunize" former or current DOJ officials/employees from their involvement with Bush's torture program if and when he appoints a Special Prosecutor that would be a conflict of interest and he too would become liable for both obstruction of justice and violations under the same statutes that were referenced by Nadler in his claims against Obama for failing to do the same.

I would also like to urge more people to call progressive media. Threatening one of our closest allies with the loss of intelligence sharing should be considered a serious immoral act on our part. We can only hope the British high court refuses to kowtow to our threats.

RJ Crane, topplebush.com
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
04:00 AM on 08/24/2009
A year ago who would have thought that there'd be any question about investigating war crimes?
Wasn't that supposed to be included in the Change package?
02:47 AM on 08/24/2009
did i say that i agree with this 1000 percent?
01:26 AM on 08/24/2009
looking like payback for clintons impeachment kinda went out the window by bushes fifth year.
he should have been impeached.
a LONG time ago.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
the Lensman
Facts Have a Liberal Bias
12:20 AM on 08/24/2009
You know, the Republicans impeached Clinton for purely political reasons and that didn't seem to hurt them in the 2000 election. And if the Rep's were in power now they wouldn't hesitate to go after the previous Dem Prez for anything from jay-walking on up.

But then the Republicans do control the Mass Media.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
leftbehind2000
If money = speech, then no speech is free.
12:37 AM on 08/24/2009
the choice to investigate should not be predicated on any perceived impact to future electability.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
lizr
goofing off here
11:06 PM on 08/23/2009
so are we going to run our foreign policy on the basis of not offending Fox news?

cause. excuse me but I kind of think it is a given that Fox news will oppose anything and everythign the Prez tries to do. so we might as well do what needs to be done, and dam the torpedoes...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
kurtvb
Knowledge is Power
04:56 PM on 08/23/2009
"But Nadler is no dupe. He recognizes that this matter is complicated by politics".

Politics has nothing to do with the law. It must be followed, regardless of any political considerations.
10:15 PM on 08/23/2009
It may not be fair but politics has EVERYTHING to do with law.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
leftbehind2000
If money = speech, then no speech is free.
12:38 AM on 08/24/2009
how do you justify that comment?
03:50 PM on 08/23/2009
What about the thieft of the 2000 and 2004 elections?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
plaidsportcoat
01:34 PM on 08/23/2009
Thank you Rep. Nadler for your brains.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
hawkseye
we have nothing to fear but fear itself
02:37 PM on 08/23/2009
Yes, can he be cloned?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
leftbehind2000
If money = speech, then no speech is free.
12:38 AM on 08/24/2009
like...60 times?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
11:42 AM on 08/23/2009
The next piece that needs to be exposed is the truth about 9/11 and the plot to institute martial law in the US

http://www.exodus2006.com/Truth_About_9-11.pdf
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
11:27 AM on 08/23/2009
In Jane Harmons book, The Dark Side, Bush himself was intimately involved in the torture of detainees, and ordering them to be tortured. and demanding more and more extreme measures to be used. Looking back at his public speeches at the time, this could also be inferred. Many of the detainees were innocents picked up on the flimsiest of evidence, including alleged confessions of other detainees given under extreme duress of torture, when it cannot even be acertained if they even knew what they were saying at the time. Bush was desperate to get "confessions" linking Al Queda to Saddam, in order to justify his campaign to invade Iraq. There were a core of chief architects of the reign of terror within the adminsitration, and then there were the other members of the administration who were horrified by what they saw happening and quit - these are more and more speaking up, Ridge just the latest. And then there others who were kept entirely out of the loop and only following the orders they were given under extreme pressure from the White House, not knowing what they were doing, and having no control over it. If Obama administration does not investigate, doesn't matter, because the independent press will. There is no way for America to escape the revelations horror and shame that they unwittingly supported.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
12:09 PM on 08/23/2009
correction -- Jane MAYER"s book -- my bad
03:54 PM on 08/23/2009
And Bush keeps Sadaam Hussein's hand gun as a spoil of war. Wonder if he keeps mementos from the executions he presided over as Gov of TX. He is one psychopath with no moral center. I just hope their is a God.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
leftbehind2000
If money = speech, then no speech is free.
12:39 AM on 08/24/2009
I heard he has a bag of ears in his rumpus room.
11:14 AM on 08/23/2009
Where did the billions go?
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
wyldthings
as a young man I said I'd never get old an didn'
10:13 AM on 08/23/2009
It seems odd to me that you want Bush investigated. Yet years ago when a Democratic President and Congress sent 58,000 not 4500 men to their death on a lie. You never called for war crimes against Johnson. And if you think torture did not exist in Vietna you are nuts!
10:21 AM on 08/23/2009
Non sequitar much?

Please provide the evidence that Johnson engaged top-level government lawyers to create a torture policy.
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
wyldthings
as a young man I said I'd never get old an didn'
02:34 PM on 08/23/2009
I don't have to Johnson mass bombed North Vietnam. He carpet bombed all of the DMZ He authorized the rules of engagement that killed thousand of Innocent Civilians. If that is not equal to torture I don't know what is. I think you should also be aware at the time the Dems had a 67-33 advantage over Repubs. On this site I hear the Republican party is the War party. WW1,WW2. Korea, Vietnam all Democrats!!!
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
wyldthings
as a young man I said I'd never get old an didn'
03:50 PM on 08/23/2009
Valkyie, I don't have to Johnson authorized the rules of engagement that Senator Kerry called war crimes and he Carpet bombed Hanoi.Laos.and Cambodia. How's that for war crimes. I read on this post many who call John McCain a war criminal for dropping bombs in Hanoi. I wonder who gave the O.K. JOHNSON
11:43 AM on 08/23/2009
You are right, Vietnam era torture should be included in the torture investigations, especially of people who are still alive and persons, events and policies that had an impact on the issues and problems of today.

A full investigation is a full investigation. There is no statute of limitations on torture.
04:10 PM on 08/23/2009
right on.
05:15 PM on 08/23/2009
I agree. Open it up and if we have the means investigate viet nam and whatever other allegations of torture in living memory. Wrong is wrong I don't care what damn party the perps are a member of.