Netroots Summit Grapples with Bipartisan Attacks on Rule of Law
Politicians, legal experts and progressive activists grappled with Republican abuses of power at the third annual netroots convention on Friday, debating how an Obama administration might restore the rule of law. Cass Sunstein, an adviser to Barack Obama from the University of Chicago Law School, cautioned against prosecuting criminal conduct from the current administration. Prosecuting government officials risks a "cycle" of criminalizing public service, he argued, and Democrats should avoid replicating retributive efforts like the impeachment of President Clinton -- or even the "slight appearance" of it.
"Give me a break," responded former Alabama Governor Don Siegelman, when told about Sunstein's advice during an interview with The Nation. Siegelman took a court-sanctioned trip to tell attendees about his conviction for corruption, currently on appeal, which he says was motivated by a malicious Republican effort to destroy his career. Discussing alleged White House abuse of the Justice Department, which led to Alberto Gonzales' resignation, Siegelman said "what Karl Rove has been accused of doing would make Watergate look like child's play." The former governor also urged activists to press Congress to hold Rove in contempt for defying a House subpoena in a related investigation. His supporters have launched an Internet campaign, ContemptforRove.org, to advance the cause. Noting that Rove's potential testimony "could not impact" his appeal, Siegelman said he was still pressing the issue because it was fundamental to "restoring justice and preserving our democracy." He learned how blogs were scrutinizing the Republican corruption at the Justice Department when supporters sent him print-outs from TalkingPointsMemo while he was serving the first 9 months of his prison sentence.
Attendees and bloggers are disappointed with the emerging, bipartisan consensus in Washington that the lawlessness of the Bush era can largely go unpunished. 
After emphasizing more investigations over actual accountability, Sunstein and John Dean faced pointed questioning at a packed panel on "The Next President and the Law." Mike Stark, a blogger who helped organize the spying protests within Obama's social network, asked why politicians should ever be above the law. And Hunter, a popular "front-page poster" on DailyKos, captured the mood in a long post kicking off the conference:
It seems evident, at this point, that there will be no comeuppance as a result of the excesses of the Bush administration. There will be investigations; they will investigate. There will be subpoenas; they will simply be refused...We know misrepresentations were made that led us, apparently inexorably, into war. In the end, we are as a nation (public, press, and government) not particularly interested in hearing the particulars of how or why; the truth is that we were aching for a good war, and the rationale was an afterthought not just for the Bush administration, but for most of their audience.
We know the rule of law itself was politicized, made into an apparatus of partisan advantage, a weapon for the ruling party to use against opponents. We know who did it, and we know it was not just unethical, but illegal. But to push it farther than that would require taking the last step -- from investigation, to prosecution -- and that step seems illusory, at best.... There will be reconciliation, and reconciliation will be defined by the conservative punditry as letting bygones be bygones -- anything but that will be unacceptable and partisan, in itself.
The conference continues through Sunday, with addresses by Speaker Nancy Pelosi, netroots favorite Donna Edwards, columnist Paul Krugman, DLC head Harold Ford, blogger Markos Moulitsas and a host of writers and policy wonks. (I'm moderating a panel on "War Pundits.") Barack Obama, who attended last year's conference, sent several aides in his place this time. Campaign spokesperson Hari Sevugan told The Nation that the "netroots community is an important voice in our public discourse" that can impact policy and "help keep people involved after the election."
Follow Ari Melber on Twitter: www.twitter.com/AriMelber
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Cass Sunstein, an Obama advisor, says:
" Prosecuting government officials risks a "cycle" of criminalizing public service...
This kind of thinking epitomizes the mindset of the Democratic leadership these days. They protect the status quo and thereby protect their own. It has everything to do with covering up this administration's misdeeds in order to "win," and when the Democrats "win," what do we, as citizens, get out of this great victory? The same set of rules---spying, war, loss of jobs--only under a party with a "D" behind its name instead of an "R." That's what happens when there's no accountability.
On July 15, Glenn Greenwald wrote a column entitled "The Motivation for Blocking Investigations into Bush's Lawbreakin
http://www
Criminalizing of public service. Sounds a lot like Tom Delay's mantra a few years ago of criminalizing politics. It is disturbing that Cass Sunstein speaks for both Obama and Delay.
Time to raze the Democratic Party to the ground, or to abandon it altogether.
I'd rather keep it, and build elsewhere. I woud rather know who my enemies are.
"That" is indeed the scary part !!!!! Congress call it demo or repub, they are all crooked and they certainly are not doing their jobs nor taking care of this country !!!!!!! Vote them all out as their terms expire....
If Democrats do not hold this Republican administration accountable, they risk being destroyed by the Republicans in a Democratic administration. We all know that Republicans will not hesitate to attack Democrats for abuse of power for simply following in Republican footsteps. Remember the filibuster that Democrats were not allowed to use while in the minority? And how many filibusters have the Republicans used while THEY are the minority? Huh, merely a whiff of a filibuster, and the Democrats back off--way to show 'em who's in control...
Failure to uphold the rule of law is violation of the oath of office, regardless of party. Throw the bums out! For starters, each and every one of them who voted FOR the recent FISA legislation should be voted AGAINST in the next election. If these representatives of the people don't understand that they represent the PEOPLE and not the MONEY, then we need to get somebody to take their place who does.
The term is "Public Servant" not "Privatized Servant."
Have you never exceeded the speed limit? Think how much more comfortably you would speed with a bus full of lawyers. The laws should be intelligent and intelligent laws should be followed. (Neither is everybody fully qualified to say which laws are intelligent. But that's another issue.) The crux for democracy is that all the people have a right to assemble and speak or act out in their interests. A certain civility is necessary as the people labor together with concern for the interests of all.
Lighten up a little on the rage and enforcement thing! I can be as bitter and cynical as next guy. It yields a certain happiness as it submerges the senses of weakness and futility.. So, I really hate being the reasonable person, but you know this is right.
Actually, no I don't. When one considers that the cause of the "weakness and futility" we feel lies in a leadership which refuses to do their job and then rationalizes their consistent failures, I think it entirely appropriate to show some rage and require enforcement of the laws that we must live by, but that our leadership feels no need to respect themselves.
"Prosecuting government officials risks a "cycle" of criminalizing public service,"
Unh huh.
NOT PROSECUTING GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS WHO ARE KNOWN TO BE GUILTY RISKS PERMANENT TOTALITARIANISM.
For god's sake. Llewellyn would roll over in his grave to hear this crap from Sunstein pen or lips. Not to mention Lord Coke (...the knowne certaintie of the law is the safety of all). . Has Sunstein, after so much background and training, no respect for the Law and its plain importance to civilization?
its looks like we are going to shoot our self in the foot before we get in the white house and lose again and how are we going to change any thing if our only chance to get him in office we blow it and we have eight more years of bush by way of mccain and we have no one to blame but our self
Naw... this time we're going to shoot ourselves in the foot and WIN! Because, heaven forbid, we ever hold anyone accountable for anything ever, ever again!
"its looks like ... before we get in the white house "
You're not going.
Cass Sunstein has been a big supporter of the Bush regime's judicial nominations, so perhaps he perceives no foul in their actions. I disappointed beyond words that he is an adviser to the Obama campaign. His legal theories seem peculiar for someone who purports to be a Liberal and appear to be a superficially more palatable (to Liberals at least) version of the Conservative movement's general complaint about "judicial activism."
For those who wish to know more about Cass Sunstein, please check out his bio on wikipedia, especially the section on his legal theories:
http://en.
The real problem with the notion of bipartisan consensus in ignoring the Bush regime's numerous crimes is that it leaves the door wide open for future abuses of executive power and a further politicization of our justice system for partisan purposes.
Bipartisan consensus ultimately means the death of democracy which by definition requires competing ideologies and a diversity of opinions and interests. If our two major parties agree to agree, we are truly living in a totalitarian state in which elections are but for show
EXCELLENT POINTS!!!
We will truly be completely "ruled" by corporate America.
As a democracy there should be no rule but the rule of law.
The idea of post partisanship is peculiar and dangerous.
Yes, we want to get things done, of course... but post partisanship is not the way to do it.
undoing the corporate stranglehold is a start. Bi-partisan efforts is the way to go... the operative word is EFFORTS. The partisans wrangle and fight tooth and nail, no one is completely happy but we get something workable until the next time we wrangle.
This is how democracy works. it is incremental. As one idea that seemed radical to some, or not enough for others takes hold we move on to the next step.
To do away with the wrangling is dangerous and damaging.
We can barely recognize our country now, with post partisanship we are in big trouble!
I hope you post these ideas in other places, letters to editors etc.
I just went and looked at the entry on Suhstein.
I like some of his ideas, deplore othersw.
I have to say the new bill of rights- adding education, health etc into the original sounds like a good idea to me.
I haven't read the whole thing yet.
(on the bioll of rights)Seems if we are taking some out we ought to be putting others in, eh?
LOL
Let's say I hire a real estate broker to sell my house, and they receive an offer from someone to pay $100,000. But they also get an offer from someone else to only pay me $80,000, but to give my broker $10,000 "on the side" for pushing through their deal. My broker convinces me that $80,000 was the best offer. Not only would my broker be liable to me for the $20,000 I lost, but also for punitive damages for breach of fiduciary duty. The broker in that scenario is not just another party to a business transaction. They have undertaken a special and solemn obligation to represent only me, put my interests above their own and above the interests of anyone else.
All these politicians also have a fiduciary duty to put the interests of the citizens above their own, to act only on our behalf, and to forgo any personal profit that might come their way while they are representing us (while they are in office). They are mostly violating that. Bush and all his associates have done so in a criminal manner, in spades, way over the top. We need to charge them, try them, send them to prison, get enormous judgments and grab their assets. If we don't, the next crowd will just do the same thing. I want justice for me. When do I get justice?
Sending a strong message to future executive level leaders and congresspeople that the behavior during the last 8 years which caused our present (major) issues is unacceptable should not be trivialized. Our actions should include full investigations by independant groups funded with tax dollars, and prosecutions in a special court choosen by a bipartisan congressional commitee.
I don't buy that we were 'aching' for war with Iraq, I think we wanted Al Qaeda brought to justice.
The Iraq invasion orchestrated by the Bush administration caused innumerable offenses and crimes against humanity.
Public servants accepting bribes will never be 'OK'.
Bush and Greenspan were getting input from hundreds of state offices for years alerting them to the inappropriate use of risky loans in the mortgage industry, and they were ignored. Can this NOT be a crime? How can we have a justice system that doesn't protect us from abuses to one of the core industries of our nation's economy?
If there are no prosecutions the republic is stone cold dead. The rule of law means the law rules. Not the president. As matters stand, the president is above the law. That is where matters will continue to stand until George Bush is brought to justice. You can argue that it doesn't matter or just say you don't care but you cant prove me wrong.
Do you really think any future President is actually going to pull back on the reigns of power?
I see. The law should remain unenforced and lawbreaking remain unpunished because if we go after their lawbreakers they might go after our lawbreaker
This has been official Washington policy for years as evidenced by all of the Watergate and Iran/Contra veterans in the Bush Administration. I don't think such compromise is working to make our government any less contentious or honest. My vote goes to s/he who says they'll try 'em and fry 'em.
I live my life as honestly as I can, everyday, and I agree with you nipper. Justice must be brought to the politicians in office (and out) that we can produce hard facts and proof of crimes. This country is reduced to an anarchy of the wealthy if we can not enforce the rule of law against ALL prepetrators, regardless of their position in society. It is all truly a joke,and the joke is on 99.999 percent of the world's population.
WE can't punish criminals, Republican criminals, because the Republican Party is vindictive and vengeful. Have we seen Democrats trying to seek revenge for the Clinton impeachment or the mind boggling waste of time spent investigating things like the Clinton Christmas card list? The Republicans tried to destroy the Clinton's as pay back for Richard Nixon, who was a criminal and who was pardoned and did not serve time as a criminal. Maybe resigning was enough punishment, I don't think so. Now we have a traitor to the country being given a free pass because it would make the Republicans mad if he was held accountable and we don't want to make the Republicans mad because they hold Party above country and would seek revenge for decades.
The country we learned about in school and that people talk about now......i
Maybe with the Obama's help and guidance, we can take it back.
Those "guiding" Obama are advising against applying the rule of law to those lawbreakers responsible for our present position. Obama, it would appear, will not be the answer to our needs in this respect. His FISA vote was more than a foreshadowing of things to come, it was a policy statement.
I say let's just start doing citizen's arrests.
It would get the ball rolling.
http://www
Citizen's arrest? Can we arrest the whole damned government? Wouldn't that be called a revolution?
Yeah baby, revolution if we don't get any convictions! Why not, the country's laws and moral convictions are meaningless if the Bush team is given a free pass.
Yes, it would be a revolution. As I recall the founders of the USA were in a revolution against British rule in 1776. They won that revolution.
Letting W & Co off free is itself revolting. If a mass campaign of Citizen's Arrests leads to a revolution, so what? W & his crew are war criminals. W & crew have commited & are persisting in a pattern of treason incident to their campaign of war crimes, genocide & crimes against humanity. The pretext of fighting a 'war on terror' doesn't permit a war of terror by W & Co. The penalty for treason is death. Since the USA's gov't has damned itself & the Democrats won't do anything to end W's crimes, mass citizen's arrests of the culprits is a necessary step. That may lead to citizen's tribunals to try the culprits for treason, find them guilty, sentence them to death & to cause the guilty culprits to be executed at once.
W & Co might beg to be tried for their war crimes, etc by an Int'l tribunal since the Int'l Criminal Court doesn't do the death penalty & has stated that 30 years in prison is the max which the worst of war criminals will get. Spending 30 yrs confined in an European prison which recognizes a prisoner's human rights beats being killed by an angry mob.
Precisely.
Reagan’s slap on the wrist for running his private war out of the White House basement was allowed in the hope that publicity alone would be sufficient to warn off future tyranny. Instead, we got the GOP impeachment of Clinton.
I have no reason to believe that publicity alone is enough to restore law to administrative behavior in the nation’s capitol. Unless some specific safeguards are put in place. Unless those who have broken the law ask for pardon. Unless something is done about the terrible influence of wealth on electoral politics.
So, OK. Avoid the prosecution. But only if Administrative secrecy can effectively be exposed. (Administrative lies are what the Fourth Estate’s job is to reveal. That seems to be a lost cause.)
Do something. Not just anything. But something that demands it be clear that officialdom, whether Supreme Court or Vice President of the US, must obey the Constitution.
Anything short of jail time and heavy fines will mean nothing to these guys. Especially if they get to keep their loot in the end. Money and power is all that matters to them, and jail time would grab away most of their power. We have made the Bush administration into some sort of untouchable icon. No one is untouchable. We need to show these guys we mean business.
I cannot think of any administration that has committed more criminal acts than the current one. High crimes and misdemeanors is almost inadequate to describe this White House. Their congressional enablers are equally guilty.
To let these criminals go unpunished sends a message to all future governments that lying, cheating, etc. is OK and will not be challenged or punished.
This is unconscionable.
I agree that this administration is a criminal one and deserves to be punished, but would it really be effective in the long run? We will have a new President and a new Congress in January and do we really want to tie them up with investigations when there is so much work to be done to right the wrongs done by previous administrations? The Clinton impeachment scam squandered a great deal of time. Given, the horrible Republican Congress would not have done anything productive with the time anyway, but hopefully a new Congress, more Democratic, would be able to start the work of rehabilitation of the country immediately. I would prefer to concentrate on improving the welfare of the average American citizen rather than on punishment. Too, why give them the opportunity to appear as martyrs, even if it is only to a few people? History will not deal kindly with these people. Let history take care of it.
The welfare of the American people cannot be improved until the reasons which underly the criminality are brought to light. That cannot be done without investigations, prosecutions and serious penalties strictly enforced.
The scenario you describe was thought sufficient for the perpetrators of Watergate and Iran/Contra. The fact that the perpetrators of the crimes we are discussing presently are the same people should go a long way toward telling you how well that game plan has played out in the past. Americans clearly do not benefit from the lessons of history, this is why we are always repeating them with increasingly bad outcomes.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
