Don't press Obama for torture trials

[Moderate2008]

Hello,

I'm a Democrat, I voted for Obama and travelled outside of my state to campaign for him. I just wanted to drop off a very well-written article by Stuart Rothenberg, who is a non-partisan political analyst. Before I do, I want to say that I agree with what he says and I think that if Democrats continue to pursue these torture trials it will mainly hurt Democrats in elections and be a big stumbling block to Obama's major policy agenda. I really think that pressing Obama too hard for torture trials will make it hard for Obama to pass legislation on healthcare, the Employee Free Choice Act, and Cap & Trade. It will make it very hard to sustain the majorities we have worked so hard to build.

Recently we saw how the Club for Growth kneecapped the GOP by driving out Arlen Specter. Let us not do the same thing to our own party that they do to theirs.

Thank you. Here's the article.

http://rothenbergpoliticalreport.blogspot.com/2009/04/for-obama-deference-is-starting-to.html


In the case of Bush interrogation tactics, deferring to Congressional Democrats and to the party’s political left only drew Obama back into the very fray he was trying to avoid and put at risk his agenda for the next year and a half.

There are many compelling reasons to avoid a "truth commission" or Congressional show trial, but purely from a political point of view, a full-scale witch hunt into alleged Bush administration abuses, including the possibility of prosecution of some, is nothing short of nuts.

First, a truth commission such as the one called for by Pelosi and others would soon become the only story, making it all but impossible for Obama to accomplish his policy agenda. If you are looking for something comparable, think Monica Lewinsky plus the Clinton impeachment, and you’ll start to get a sense about the train wreck we’d be heading for.

Second, Democrats already are divided over how to handle the matter. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (Nev.) wants to go much more slowly on investigating Bush interrogation procedures, and you can be sure that there are plenty of Democrats from the South and from rural areas who think that a partisan Democratic show trial of Bush officials would amount to something close to political suicide.

A Democratic Party divided over something as explosive as this would be a party that looks less than completely appealing to all but the most liberal Democratic activists. Don’t Pelosi, Sen. Patrick Leahy (Vt.) and others on the left remember what happened to Republicans when they tried to take their pound of flesh from President Bill Clinton?

Third, Democratic efforts to publicly destroy former Bush officials surely would run counter to the mood that Obama has tried to create since his election. The president seems truly committed to trying to change the tone in Washington, and while Republicans haven’t been exactly rushing to embrace him, the president doesn’t seem interested in starting a partisan war with the GOP. Many on his party’s left have no such disinclination for bitter partisanship.

Fourth, Democrats could find along the way that there isn’t a bright line of responsibility, and some of them could end up being implicated. Democratic leaders were briefed about the interrogation tactics and failed to complain loudly, complicating the issue and making party leaders appear hypocritical.

Finally, ABC News polling director Gary Langer’s April 23 column, "Obama, Cheney and the Politics of Torture," points out that the public’s reaction to what Langer calls "types of coercion" and even to "torture" under certain circumstances is complicated. Democrats could unintentionally hand their political opponents an opportunity to paint them as insufficiently committed to take steps to prevent another terrorist attack.

[ClassWarrior]

1. Naw, let's let criminals run free to become "honored elder statesmen" like Reagan.

And I reject your premise that this is a Progressive/middling issue as your Arlen Specter comment suggests. This is a matter of bringing justice for crimes against our nation. I'd hope we all value that.

NGU.

[MarjorieG]

2. I agree. I'm more concerned the banks will not allow bankruptcy and foreclosure remedy. Where's the

outrage and calls to Congress.

[rpannier]

5. So...You're okay with ignoring and coddling some criminal behavior

that that does not directly affect you

but not behavior that does affect you?

[ixion]

3. what's "nuts" is NOT pursuing war crimes charges

and this author is full of sh*t, IMO, but then, rethug appeasers have never impressed me.

[rpannier]

4. Disagree

Criminal behavior requires investigations and prosecutions.
Witch hunts by definition are the attempt to go after people by creating issues that do not exist

1. We can multitask -- Believe it or not. It would not make it impossible to further his agenda.

2. Investigations that lead to proof of criminal behavior are NOT show trials. Because Harry Reid wants to go slow and there may be some opposition from some senators and congressmen is NOT an acceptable reason to avoid holding criminals accountable.

3. It does NOT run counter to the mood Obama tried to create. Changing the tone does not mean we should just let people who broke the law get away with it because someone might get all offended by it.
It is NOT an attempt tp DESTROY anyone. It's an attempt to get at the truth.

4. If there are Dems that are responsible, then they need to be held accountable to.

With all due respect, Rothenberg is exactly what is wrong with politics today. The lets all do nothing because it might offend someone mode is cowardly and idiotic.

This article is essentially foolish, craven, cowardly weak talking points that basically say we should absolve criminals because it might fluster some people.
By that logic, we should never prosecute anyone (of power or influence) who has committed a crime that might bring a negative backlash

[Dragonfli]

6. Of Course! we know the law is only meant for the little people.

We can't charge certain people with crimes because the are, let's face it, beyond rule of law.
The biggest mistake ever made was to try to make rule of law apply to our betters.
The constitution is a bad idea and is now a threat to the only people that really matter.

Of course I agree! that oath our lawmakers take was never meant to be taken seriously and was obviously just for show.

That god damned piece of paper should be burned in public to make all those jealous little people shut the fuck up and learn their place. It is disrespectful to punish our lords simply for exercising their god given right to torture anyone if it will give them pleasure.

Those bastards trying to impede their special rights should be tortured just for mentioning it.

[lala_rawraw]

7. wow,

so elections are more important than the Constitution. thanks for the info. i would rather lose an election than lose the Constitution.

[Revolution9]

8. moderate2008?

what tripe!
sounds to me like you have a dog in this fight (perhaps a blue one)
we are the shining city if we torture but a banana republic if we prosecute.
some name too "moderate" LULZ! no "moderate" person (even shep smith is a moderate) would be in favor of sweeping treasonous acts like this under the rug. You should be ashamed this reads like something david border would write.

2 thumbs down!

investigate,indict, prosecute, imprison.

THAT is the road to national healing.
NOT,
ignore,obfuscate, equate, confuse, forget, cannonize.

[Captain Hilts]

9. I know Stu Rothenberg. He leans right. nt

[rpannier]

12. It's just another attempt to portray this as an issue that only

those crazy leftists want.

Afterall, we all know that rule-of-law applies only to those who are NOT politically well-connected

[Dragonfli]

13. As per my post, our lords and betters have pleasures we can't understand

And their pleasure is the only thing of import, we the servants have an obligation to feed their various hungers and are only a success if our lords be happy.

[stillcool]

10. So we should legalize torture..

and be done with it. No investigation, no crime. No crime, torture is just fine. If this is what the American people want, I hope we reap what we have sown.

[Dragonfli]

11. Not only legalize it, but retroactively apparently. Un Fucking Believable!

[katandmoon]

14. What a total steaming pile of stinking shit

[IntravenousDemilo]

15. President Obama should learn how to multitask, and war criminals should be punished.

Failing to prosecute sets an awful precedent.

[stillcool]

17. I have some questions...

If half of the American people are just fine with torture, and want nothing more than to move on..as if we could...what is the rush? I mean, seeing as how half of the American people don't care, why should the Attorney General feel any pressure to act with any immediacy? It would be really nice if the other half of Americans who would like to see action taken contacted their Representatives, the media., etc., but we know that won't happen. But more importantly what have we done, and where? How much do we know? How much is out there that has not yet been released? What's coming? Does Congress have a responsibility to inform the American people about any of the facts, or does the Attorney General just investigate on the QT, so some of the facts don't get out? And..what I really want to know..is how does the Justice Department defend the actions of this country in a court of law, at the same time it prosecutes the past Administration? Thanks.

[IntravenousDemilo]

18. Let me put it this way.

If the Obama administration were ever to do the things that the Bush administration did, I would want them prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. It's not about politics, but about setting things right. There's altogether too much secrecy in government; when they do things on the QT, you can invariably assume that they're up to no good.

[stillcool]

19. that doesn't answer any..

of my questions, but thanks for replying. I don't know why it is that those advocating a certain action can not explain the risks and benefits, and the legal process involved.

[IntravenousDemilo]

20. I wouldn't know about the legal process in the US, because I'm a Canadian.

Up here, such activity would be the subject of an immediate Royal Commission, which would eventually go nowhere and have none of its recommendations acted upon.

The point is, governments don't necessarily want to proceed against former governments for their abuses of power, because they don't wish to be constrained themselves in their own abuse of power. They'd prefer to keep their options open. I have a strong cynicism about all politicians, and that includes your President. Politicians will invariably break your heart; they are not to be trusted.

[stillcool]

22. This has nothing to do with..

trusting the President. It has to do with our legislature, and the Judiciary.. the process of investigation and prosecution..and the different avenues that are available to produce results. I think that there will be fall guys, and that the number of patsies and severity of their sentencing will be in direct proportion to information that has not yet been revealed. But then...what do I know? There are so many experts here, that appear to be very certain of what they are advocating.

[TankLV]

16. Yeah - sure thing Georgie/Dicky...keep trying - FAIL!!!

GO back to try to revive your repuke party - and leave us SANE people alone...

TROLL ALERT!!!

[Bluenorthwest]

21. Right wing apologist dribble

this is lazy writing. I spent a few minutes on his website, and this guy is no friend to the President or any of those that support the President. I like the way he never calls gay people gay people, just 'gays'. No mention of transexual or bi-sexual people either. Just 'gays'. "Gays" say this and "Gays" say that, while promoting the utterly 90's notion that the Human Rights Campaign speaks for anyone but Joe and the money squad.
Hard to take such minds as anything but the narrow and agenda driven things that they are.

[FiveGoodMen]

23. This thread has been very helpful

in identifying which posters care about America and about basic human decency...


And the other group.


Goodbye.

[Martin Eden]

24. He lost me in the 2nd sentence

"purely from a political point of view, a full-scale witch hunt"

The entire OP is purely from a political viewpoint, and does not touch upon the overriding issues of the rule of law and what we need to do to reclaim our moral standing in the world.

A "witch hunt" is an unwarranted prosecution (or persecution) as a means of punishing political opponents, intimidation, or enhancing power (as in McCarthyism). The Bush torture scandal doesn't fall into this category because the evidence of crime is already very substantial. In regards to motive, most elected Democrats don't see this as poltically beneficial, which is why there is so much reluctance to do what should be their legal and moral duty.

Of course, it is nearly impossible to divorce partisan politics from any effort to hold the Bush administration accountable -- but if we refrained from enforcing laws on that basis, justice in this country would be an increasingly bad joke.

Rothenberg is not entirely off-base with his observations, but he makes the assumption that pursuing justice in this matter would necessarily be very partisan in character. He does not allow for the possibility of an independent non-partisan investigator whose findings and recommendations would have credibility and render the course of action a matter of justice, not politics.

[Jim Sagle]

25. Moderatist filth.

[Progressive dog]

26. torture trials

The prosecution of torturers is not a political choice. Torture is not an ends vs means choice. It is a felony, a violation of the basic laws of our land and of international treaties.

There is no reason that the investigation and prosecution of this crime should not go forward. Should we be intimidated by some of the most dangerous criminals in our history and their fellow travelers because they might be upset. Tough cookie.

[northernlights]

27. I disagree totally

We either are a nation of laws or we are a lawless nation.

I've been a victim of half a dozen crimes or more in the last 9 years, from harrassment by a sex offender, to having my identity stolen, to having my property trashed by a contractor, to being poisoned by my last employer, to being defrauded when I bought my home, to misrepresentation by a college advisor.

Never in my 50+ years have I witnessed or been subjected to so much crime. I have lost half my life savings and my living, all to crime.

And I believe the general attitude of lawlessness began at the top, back in 2000.

We either enforce our laws or we do not. The crimes the war criminals perpetrated were the worst of all -- war crimes are crimes against humanity. They weren't stealing to feed their families. They were torturing to cover their other crimes. They are where the law enforcement begins.

If we do NOT investigate and prosecute, then the message to the world -- and to our fellow citizens is -- do whatever, and we'll look the other way.

Nothing else will matter -- not health insurance, not "employee free choice, not cap & trade -- none of it will matter if our society continues on this path of criminality and violence.

There are certain things in life that you simply cannot sweep under the rug or pretend never happened. Torture and war crimes are at the top of the list.

[Overseas]

28. Disgusting editorial. Defending "interrogation tactics" a.k.a. TORTURE !!

Yes the Republicans would like us all to shrink away from holding criminals responsible for their crimes and never mind the unfortunate fact that we executed others for waterboarding in the past-- I guess apologists like this have a special pardon ritual to resurrect those criminals. Funny, I haven't heard them talk about how they will do that. They usually try to ignore the word TORTURE entirely.

Yes maybe we have too many fools in the US public who prefer to believe the FOX TV DRAMA 24, rather than the many interrogation experts who have assured us that torture does not produce useful information. It is horrifying to think that a FOX TV DRAMA, with its hero torturing people in a neatly structured "ticking time bomb" scenario, overriding what military and intelligence experts have told us. So much for respecting the military. In this case the TORTURE APOLOGISTS prefer to trust Fox scriptwriters.

President Obama is fully capable of getting on with other business while the criminals are investigated, indicted and convicted for their crimes.

Fox and other dutiful conservative pundits are all over the airwaves right now calling President Obama every scary name in the book. So they'll still be on the TV when prosecutions get under way calling him every name in the book.

Or Republicans may actually exhaust themselves as defenders of torture. Someone may dare say that they only pretended to support the troops. By authorizing TORTURE, they exposed our troops to similar treatment in the future.

[Vidar]

29. Prosecution of Bush's torture regime is the best way to restore our international credibility.