Attorney General designate Eric Holder raised eyebrows and a few howls when he told Utah Senator Orrin Hatch that he would not prosecute any Bush officials for authorizing dubious wiretapping. Holder has little choice in the matter. That would bog the Obama administration down in an all consuming ultimately no win factional fight with Congressional Republicans, the courts -- especially the Supreme Court which upheld Bush provisions authorizing torture, and legions of holdover Bush Justice Department and civil rights division-appointed attorneys. There were few squeals from Congressional leaders at Bush's borderline legal and constitutionally dubious executive orders that permitted the long checklist of civil liberties abuses, warrantless wiretaps of U.S. citizens, being one of the more glaring.
That's only part of the reason why Holder is seemingly willing to let bygones be bygones when it comes to prosecuting Bush's crew members for the blatant civil liberties abuses. The other part is that it would pry open again the Democrats dirty but hardly unknown secret. When word leaked out about the scope and complexity of the warrantless wiretap program before the 2006 midterm elections Congressional Democrats not only did nothing about it, they aided and abetted the Bush administration in the illegal spying.
The Democratic-controlled Congress passed the "Protect America Act." This put the Congressional stamp of approval on what Bush did and actually expanded his powers to snoop. The targets weren't just foreign terror suspects and known operatives but American citizens. Democrats knew this and approved it by inserting in the law open-ended wording that permitted legalized spying on anyone outside the U.S. who intelligence agencies "reasonably believed" to possess foreign intelligence information The law deliberately made no distinction about exactly who the target could be. Then there was the infamous clause that granted immunity from lawsuits to communications service providers that made Bush snooping possible. With no fear or threat of legal action against the companies, the wraps were legally off on who could be snooped on. As an added sweetener, the law also gave Bush emergency power to tap for up to a week anyone deemed a terror threat; all without a warrant. That didn't end matters.
In January 2008 then Democratic presidential contenders Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton flatly said that who were so troubled by the Foreign Services Intelligence Act which essentially slapped a cloak of immunity over the telecommunications companies that were the key to running the warrantless tapping. They said the Act was far too weak in providing protections against the rampant abuses in domestic intelligence gathering operations. The issue again was the virtual nonexistent controls on warrantless wiretapping and the provision that granted immunity to telecommunications companies who engaged in the reckless and borderline lawless surveillance of any and everyone tagged as a potential terrorist threat.
Clinton and Obama swore that they would not support the bill with the dangerous lack of civil liberties safeguards. Both initially voted no on cloture. Clinton kept her word and voted no in the vote on the final passage of the bill. Most of the top Democrats with few exceptions caved and backed it. Obama was one of them.
Holder told Hatch in his confirmation hearing that he didn't want to criminalize policy differences that may exist between the Bush administration and the Obama administration. He's right especially when more than a few top Democrats were knee deep in assuring that those differences were not differences at all.
Earl Ofari Hutchinson is an author and political analyst. His forthcoming book is How Obama Won (Middle Passage Press, January 2009).
Obama showed the American people the awesome power of the grass roots when unified for change. The next change needs to be a new political party with the ethics and commitment to the Constitution that neither party seems to have anymore. Maybe the Huffington post can get busy on that. Arianna, Darling, could we start a Third Party movement for fiscal responsibility, a civil and helpful foreign policy, economic justice and social tolerance? A party that makes sure workers are not exploited, jobs stay in America, foreign trade and aid are tied to countries with democratic values ONLY, and government spending gives us a strong, efficient infrastructure, energy independence, world class education and health care and protections of human and civil rights?
Neither the Democrats or Republicans seem interested in freedom or justice anymore. It would seem in the view of both parties some people are more "equal" than others, and no one in power is to held accountable for criminal activities.
I voted for change. All I seem to be getting is a horse of a different color.
America is the beacon of hope worldwide where anyone can do any thing and become anyone well when the field is level>> not prosecuting Bush isnt making the field level
America projects it self as a leader and having "better" morals than the rest of the world>we chastise for their human rights assaults >>>allowing BUSH to torture people in the name of "protecting America" is fallacy>>there was no other way to protect AMERICA without TORTURE?? We are lacking in IDEAS and other methods that we have to stoop to the level of the TERRORISTS???
Republicans say BUSH WAS PROTECTING THE COUNTRY when he tortured people>
Bush first order of business was to uphold the CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES and that was long before he had to protect AMERICA>
Bush was "smart" to get cover with having Democrats in the fold> He reasoned cant investigate him without also investigathing the DEMOCRATS> BUSH GOES DOWN>SOME democrats goes with him
Now will Obama do whats right or whats in his political interest????
The world still watches and cries bucket of tears
Bush and Guliani should be tried for their negligence in not providing adequate safeguards to recovery crews when they cleaned up the wreckage of the World Trade Center. Many of these workers now have lungs ravaged by asbestos and other contaminants they breathed in.
Some say investigating Bush and his cabal would divide the country>The country is already divided with those who say only the poor and the powerless gets investgated and go to jail while those who are rich and powerful gets PARDONS and FORGIVENESS>
Does anyone remember Nixon and WATERGATE BREAKIN>Reagan and IRAN CONTRA AFFAIR and now Bush and all his malfeasences >>What do all these have in common::a republican president and increasingly illegal deeds>>
IF Obama doesnt investigate and prosecute not only is he condoning what BUSH DID (saying the crimes are against the law and doing nothing more is worthless) but Obama is inviting the next republican president to go even further and do far worse than BUSH>
The world is watching and crying buckets of tears
President elect Obama campaign and won on CHANGE>SO what is CHANGE?
Bush disregarded rules and laws so will Obama?? Not to investigate and prosecute BUSH and his administration even if DEMOCRATS are involved is continuing the same philosophy of Bush: disregard rules and laws>
We cant regain our image or reputation or integrity if we dont investigate and prosecute our own who have broken rules and laws>> If I was another country I would wait to see what AMERICA justice system does to its former president who lied a country into war>tortured>politicized the Justice Department>caused the deaths of innocent people>hold people in jail without trial or evidence and the list goes on>
If the democrats are involved then they go down too>Considering our financial crisis the democrats had a hand in all the malfeasance for that they should go as well>
NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW THATS CHANGE I CAN BELIEVE IN
The world is watching and crying buckets of tears
Carol
One thing that is protecting the members of Congress is the Constitution, which also happens to be one of the instruments we will be using to turn things around. There is always Hope, only now Hope is being carried by action.
But the Congress was told the same lies that we were about the real likelihood of a "mushroom cloud", Muhammad Atta in Praque with Iraqi intelligence, and so on ad nauseam. I don't feel guilty for being the victim of Bush and Cheney's extortionist propaganda and I don't consider Congress guilty of it. What aspect of which law obscures these self-evident truths from lifetime "professionals" of law?
Obama will do the trick this time but there's always a next time.
Bush apologists always fall back on the old standby - "well, the intelligence was faulty - (and who's fault was that?) - and beside EVERYONE in every country believed Saddam had WMD - but who do you think was the main provider of THEIR intelligence?
The "Everyone believed it" defense is transparently disingenuous.
Huh?
Careful with the misstatements, there, Earl.
They'll never impeach because they were complicit.
THROW THEM ALL OUT!