President Elect Obama: Denounce and Renounce
I spent most of the weeks between the conventions and the election reading two essential books: Jane Mayer's The Dark Side and Barton Gellman's Angler. Both cast essential light, the first from a systemic perspective and the second from a personal one, on the degree to which Vice President Cheney created a secret cabal inside the Executive Branch. That cabal, co-headed by Cheney's ultra-pugnacious in-house lawyer David Addington, proceeded to eviscerate laws and treaties, paving them over with a series of (in some cases, still-secret) legal opinions binding on the Executive Branch, whose power Cheney (though publicly disavowing his membership in that branch) was determined to increase.
Those members of the government with legislative or constitutional responsibilities to weigh in on these matters, but whom the Cheney team didn't trust, simply weren't "read in" on the new policies. So State Department experts on the law of war, Defense Department JAGS, even Condi Rice and Colin Powell, all found out about these new policies--involving, at a minimum, detention, rendition, and interrogation methods that were designed to shock the conscience--in the press, as a fait accompli, if they found out about them at all.
It was an eerie experience, reading this material during an election campaign where such matters were rarely if ever mentioned. One benefit of keeping your most prized policies secret is that they don't get debated during an election, because they don't show up on polls of voters' concerns.
So, the question needs to be asked of the President-elect: do you plan to denounce and renounce these extra-Constitutional ways of doing business, and the illegal policies that resulted, before you take office? Because, one is entitled to fear that, if you don't, one day, when things get tough (as they will), you will look at this secret little tool chest, and it will appear all too tempting.
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
I personally cannot see how Obama can begin his managerial role to American recovery without pursuing a prosecution of the unconstitutional policies of the last eight years. The damage inflicted upon the Constitution has to be repaired, it is the litmus test of his pledges. It is not simply about revenge, but about maintaining the confidence and trust bestowed upon him by the people.
The last eight years were a bumbling 'act', not a bumbling 'innocence' of genuine mistakes. It hides the true and pernicious machinations. Bear in mind, the out-going administration was all about subterfuge, obsfucation, and deceit, for their own personal profit; everything was hidden inside the 'bumbling act' and presented as genuine misunderstandings.
The prosecution of the out-going administration is essential. A message has to be sent out to the American people and to future would-be presidents, that executive power cannot be used to garner personal and private profit.
By undoing unconstitutional policy brought in by Bush, Obama will have no choice but to seek prosecution. Anything less, would damn him to a loss of support.
Yes, we can't begin to rebuild without tearing down this house of corruption. This isn't retribution, this is justice to ensure Constitutional Checks & Balances.
Indeed. It doesn't have to be a "witch-hun
Give the man a chance.
He campaigned that it wasn't going to be the same old politics.
I believe he will do what's right.
" It's not that some people have willpower and some don't. It's that some people are ready to change and others are not."
I agree. Barack's first priority is affecting a smooth transition. Any public statement that might result in Bush's refusal to be 100% cooperative in this effort would be foolish. We have no choice but to wait until Jan 20.
Thanks for bringing this up. Obama has begun his classified briefings. It's going to be very interesting to see if he puts the genie of ill-gotten executive power back in the bottle.
It's a fair question, Harry, and thank you for asking it. I'm no more comfortable with President Obama having extraordinary presidential power than I am with President Bush having it.
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson, appointed by President Truman to be the Chief Prosecutor at the Nuremberg Tribunals following World War II, stated, “let me make clear that while this law is first applied against German aggressors, the law includes, and if it is to serve a useful purpose it must condemn aggression by any other nations, including those which sit here now in judgment.”
There is a well-established law in our jurisprudence which places an affirmative duty on all of us to expose any treasonous or criminal act which comes to our attention. Failure to do so is defined as “misprisio
Good post Harry. Not enough people here are prepared to hold Obama to his word. We need to pressure him to get started right away, before January. He needs to call out these handouts Paulson is giving to executives at these banks behind our backs. If he doesn't, he won't have any bailout money for himself!
By the way, Harry, you should make a post sometime about your "Bohemian Grove" experience.
People can't handle the "truth".
I kept waiting for somebody--a journalist, a voter, whomever--to ask McCain and Barack about the concept of the "unitary executive" that the Bushies (mainly Cheney & Addington) have been pushing, but nobody asked the question. To me, that issue has been the number one priority in changing the administration.
But of course, since as much as a THIRD of the electorate doesn't know, understand, or care about 3 equal and separate branches of government, I guess I shouldn't have expected the issue to come up.
Joe Biden mentioned it in the VP debate (I think, or maybe in a stump speech), and god bless him for it.
But the signing statements, the ignoring of congressional subpoenas, the sub-rosa torture, rendition, wiretapping, etc., directly violate the Constitution, and that's what really was important. Just think--these powers were in the hands of a semiliterate egomaniac with no background and a power-mad old man with no conscience.
I wonder if Barack would have gotten elected if he hadn't had the "perfect storm" of a totally incompetent President, an economy crashing, international support diminished, and a visibly angry demented little hothead being run by a completely inept campaign staff.
I just hope BHO doesn't have feet of clay. Maybe we'll get our Constitution back after all.
The constitution is irrelevant. It is largely ignored by both parties. They just focus on the areas they approve of, and ignore the rest.
Everybody's learning about Article II, Section 4. Even my dog knows that now! lol!
Harry - keep questioning the outgoing administration,
and we'll end up with martial law before the inauguration.
Fear didn't get this fine man elected. Why cower now?
"Learn the rules, so you know how to break them properly"
Dalai Lama' s Instructions for Life.
A great question is raised in this post. It's a question I am anxiously awaiting the answer to.
He better not stoop to same level - he has no reason to and would draw much criticism
He is a constitutional lawyer. His whole life has been teaching the document. He has also pledged to review what was done. I trust him. In fact, the background in constitutional law was why I voted for him.
Constitutional Lawyer?? hahaha, whew.... His whole life teaching the document?? chuckle...
MissKaren, I beg you to read the Constitution as well as the Dec. o' Independence before you cast your next ballot...
And your meaning is?
Amen Feevah-
No person has ever become POTUS with less experience, and more secrecy about his past. He still stands in the shadows, unwilling to come clean. He must though. Once he's asked questions directly about the myriad as shasy associations, he'll have to come clean.
Impeachment is in your Christmas stocking next year :-)
The enormous disparity in contributions raised, the huge Bush guilt by association albatross and the main stream media being fully in the tank for him should have produced a much bigger win. That it wasn't a blowout proves the weakness of his mandate.
Of what relevance is the Declaration of Independence?
I agree with the author of this article.
I, too, trust President-elect Obama, as far as I will trust a human being. Which drives the author's point home. Hard.
I also consider the timeless adage:
Power corrupts.
Absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Our new president is not immune.
We The People have a responsibility to make sure that doesn't happen.
Frank Herbert...
I don't know.
After all, this is the guy who proposed a "Civilian Security Force" as large as the military.
Anyway, his first battle will be his Comprehensive Climate Change bill.
Some battle with a Democratic congress.
I hope this is not his priority number one. His comments on capping carbon emmissions and raising costs on electricity will not be a good first step. There are more important issues.
Will,
I posted a reply to myself, not yet up, that may help you see how I see it.
To be precise, it's not just "capping." All pollutants are "capped" now, most not enough. Through the Clean Air Act, laws for catalytic converters, etc. etc.
It's the "trading" part that's the big problem. Most believers in C02 anthropogenic global warming want at carbon tax beyond a cap. The money goes to the government. But no money goes to the traders, like Goldman Sachs, and that's just the tip of the ice berg how to milk cap and trade, especially if it is international.
As for Obama's words about costs, I guess he was then too honest. If he believed the SF Chronicle would kibosh the most important and shocking statement ever given to them by a politician, he was right. Anyway, the campaign has made him a smoother operator. Up to the middle of the summer or so cap and trade was the first and largest part of his energy campaign issues web page. They scratched that part though, curious.
Let me explain further,
I earlier noted Obama's first leak was naming RFK Jr. as head of the EPA. This was an important signal within 24 hours of his election, a signal to players in the world the USA will enter the carbon credits trading game.
Obama's acceptance speech also hit the message. He said,
"For even as we celebrate tonight, we know the challenges that tomorrow will bring are the greatest of our lifetime -- two wars, a planet in peril, the worst financial crisis in a century"
Between the bailout and wars, at equal, even central position, is his climate change plans. Think I am off base? You won't after you read this article, within 48 hours of his words the players knew what Obama was messaging:
http://new
Obama sat at the birth of the CCX as a director of the Joyce Foundation in 2000. His biggest contributors are international carbon traders like Goldman Sachs.
The signals are strong from the Obama camp, 3 issues will chart the beginning - war, bailout, and cap and trade.
The bill will be framed as "Comprehensive" because cap and trade cannot pass alone and under bright light. Obama will talk about how the "world" won't like us if we question, Pelosi will claim it has something to do with energy independence, McCain will claim if he doesn't get cap and trade, the public won't get their solar panels.
At that moment when the Obama administration has moved from symbol to substance, the defining moment for this observer will be what, if anything, he does about repealing the Patriot Act renewed just two years ago and what action, if any, he will take to clarify the war making power of the Executive office.
The premise of the Patriot Act is that the U. S. is permanently at war with al Qaeda, the Taliban and other groups. Accordingly, it bestows wider authority to conduct warrantless wiretapping, NSA intercepts of calls made abroad, relaxation of habeas corpus protection and a broader definition of what constitutes torture.
In spirit, if not in subtance, this observer believes that the Obama administration has promised to turn away from the activities allowed by this legisation. Whether it does or not will be an early litmus test for this administration.
It is a mistaken belief that when an administration departs it takes all its toys with it. We could well imagine a private moment of satisfaction from the outgoing president at the knowledge that the Patriot Act will be an enduring legacy of his administration.
All the more reason to kill all bills passed with "Patriot" in them. And then prosecute their authors.
Gee I really hope someone remembers where they stuck the constitution.
How many people remember all the good will bestowed on Bill Clinton by the right-wing after he let the Iran-Contra stuff drop? I seem to recall that he did a pretty big favor to daddy Bush regarding the "what did he know and when did he know it" business. Letting the GOP have another "pass" in the interest of "promoting national unity" will only embolden them to come back in an even worse incarnation than we've already seen. Either the law is for everyone, or it isn't. Which is it?
Or maybe we should just render George over to the World Court?
It's a constant source of amazement that so many people don't remember or don't wish to remember how conservative Bill Clinton and Al Gore really are.
Given the opportunity, this probably would have been the single most important question that I would have asked of Barack. I would like to believe that it is his intention to do so, but I can't say that I've ever heard him speak on the matter. It's a well known axiom that once the Executive obtains a measure of power, they never give it back. George Bush usurped powers unto himself that the Founding Fathers are all rolling in their graves over. Obama can't make a statement and renounce the criminal disregard of the Constitution by the outgoing administration fast enough to suit me.
Of course he will...jus
promise until he does it.
Everyone misspells, and everyone's grammar could be improved, but we don't all lie to make even a shallow point. It's called ethics and it's been around since at least Socrates.
The Obama campaign WAS publicly funded - by me and millions of others...
Yeah I contributed and so did my husband and so did my neighbor. How suspicious. He NEVER PLEDGED any such thing. Sour grapes because you are so used to the welathy buying the elections. Get a grip Hannity and go away
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
