Here is what President Obama will do about the torture issue...

[kentuck]

He will hand it off to Eric Holder and the Justice Department. Holder will "hold" it until the House investigations are over and will then decide whether or not "laws were broken". They will argue that there is a statute of limitations, which is approximately one more year. Everyone involved will attempt to slow down any investigation or criminal proceeding.

Holder will be under a microscope for the next several months. He will either be a profile in courage or he will be a political wimp? But the issue of crimes committed will be where it belongs, in the Justice Department. Eric Holder has the potential to be an important figure in American history. Or he can be another Alberto Gonzalez?

[ShortnFiery]

1. I have faith that Eric Holder will do what's right. But it's true, we must keep active

and MAKE THEM DO IT.

If many of our status quo political leaders can "get by" with doing NOTHING, that's exactly what they will do.

[Teaser]

2. Oh good, Thinko the Psychic is back.

.

[kentuck]

Thank you.

I suppose you disagree with the post? Or you have a different opinion? Or you simply do not know and do not deem it worthy of discussion? So why talk about it?

[BlooInBloo]

6. Is he as funny as Bingo-the-Clown-O???

I think not.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TzeD0ibhkHA

[truth2power]

22. Oh my! What is the problem? I thought it was an interesting read...

People are allowed to speculate. I often wonder how this is all going to shake out and set up various possible scenarios for myself.

It gives me some hope to think someone will eventually be brought to justice.

[kentuck]

25. truth2power...

Thanks for being open-minded enough to think for yourself.

[annabanana]

3. We have to get Dawn Johnson confirmed.. . .n/t

[BlooInBloo]

4. There's a statute of limitations on torture?

[truth2power]

23. That troubles me...the statute of limitations, I mean...

I didn't think there was ANY statute of limitations on murder. :shrug:

[BlooInBloo]

24. On murder there isn't. Dunno about the others.

[placton]

5. Hey - this is on Obama

so nothing will be done by Holder - he will follow the boss's lead - count on it

[hlthe2b]

7. I don't buy the statute of limitations--given the international issues

Europe has already signaled that if we don't deal with these crimes, that they would... There certainly were no statutes of limitations on Pinochet and I've never seen anything suggesting there are within US statutes as well. I do know that there is no statute of limitation on murder...

[kentuck]

8. I agree but...

I believe they will argue the statute of limitations the closer we get to charges.

[Psychic Consortium]

9. This will not be Obama's call. It is going to be up to the will of the American people.

This is our call and Obama and Holder will
respond to what the American people want to do.
And yes justice will be served at the end of the day
from civil and/criminal legal actions.

[madokie]

11. As it should be

[flyarm]

10. well you also need to know what Obama will be doing for all of us..

and Those held in Afganistan..but it will also effect all of us ..and our rights..

Oh and Jeralyn is an attorney..that you have seen often as an Expert on many news programs.( for those that do not know )


Obama DOJ Seeks to Restrict Defendant's Right to Lawyer During Questioning

http://www.talkleft.com/story/2009/4/23/221528/555
Obama DOJ Seeks to Restrict Defendant's Right to Lawyer During Questioning
By Jeralyn, Section Crime Policy
Posted on Thu Apr 23, 2009 at 09:15:28 PM EST

More true colors?

The Justice Department is asking the Supreme Court to overrule Michigan v. Jackson, the 1986 Supreme Court decision that held that if police may not interrogate a defendant after the right to counsel has attached, if the defendant has a lawyer or has requested a lawyer.

he protection offered by the court in Stevens' 1986 opinion is especially important for vulnerable defendants, including the mentally and developmentally disabled, addicts, juveniles and the poor,

This isn't the first time the Justice Department, under President Obama, has sought to limit defendants' rights.


Since taking office, Obama has drawn criticism for backing the continued imprisonment of enemy combatants in Afghanistan without trial, invoking the "state secrets" privilege to avoid releasing information in lawsuits and limiting the rights of prisoners to test genetic evidence used to convict them.

The idea of overruling the decision originated with Justice Alito during oral arguments in the case of Jesse Montejo, a Louisiana death row inmate. Even some prominent former prosecutors and judges are not on board with changing the rule:


xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

SOOOOOOOOOOOO is this Change we can believe in???? That we all lose our rights to an attorney should we or any of our loved ones ever get arrested???????????

Hmmm..some change..i had to live to be almost a senior citizen to see this kind of change to my rights!! whippeeeeeeeeeeeee..some freaking rights !!..some freaking change!! Wow do i feel sorry for our kids..the change they are getting is the screwing of their lives!

[merh]

12. there can be no way that a statute of limitations will run

the fact that they were in office and concealed the crimes "tolled" the limitation period.

The conspiracy, the racketering and illegal enterprise was ongoing until Obama took office.

Also, there is no statute of limitations on war crimes or murder.

[zipplewrath]

13. Hear you but

I think a good set of lawyers could argue a potentially ground breaking case that office holders who can prevent charges from even being investigated, much less brought to court, can't particularly hide behind statute of limitations. At the very least, the "start date" can't be until they are out of their positions. Even that though could be problematic since some of the core folks were "gone" several years ago. Furthermore, the problem with all of that is these kinds of arguments will be settled, predominately upon appeal, and will take years to process through the system. I'm not sure that Obama, or anyone, has years to bring these cases to trial. There is barely the political will to bring them now. In 6 years, it could be all but gone.

And as "fun" as it is to think of international courts stepping in, I don't believe it will happen. Too many private negotiations that can occur at the diplomatic level that will make them "go away" for compromises on unrelated issues we'll never even hear about.

[merh]

15. That is what I am saying, The fact that they controlled the offices

that are responsible for prosecution as well as the evidence of the crime, they tolled the statute. The conspiracy continued until they left office and no longer had the control of the offices and the information.

It's a no brainer.

[zipplewrath]

26. Take too long

Yeah, I think you can make the case. But it would take so long to work its way through, I'm not sure you'd ever get the underlying convictions.

[merh]

28. I disagree

It wouldn't take too long, apparently you have had little dealings with Conspiracy or RICO cases.

[zipplewrath]

29. Political cases

Look at the cases that are currently before the SC now and see what their inception dates are. Look at the Coleman/Franken case, or the Tom Delay trial. Heck, go look at Terri Schiavo. These can be dragged out years. The political will and expediency of these cases could be gone in a year.

[merh]

30. I disagree

You are talking about civil actions, not criminal. May I suggest you go read the federal rules of criminal procedure and familiarize yourself with the Speedy Trial Act (US Code that requires timely prosecutions.)

[lunatica]

14. Some things, when let out of the bag are no longer controllable

This is one of them. Glasnost was one of them. Once started some things take on a life of their own.

[kentuck]

16. I agree to an extent....

that the WH is in sort of a damage-control mode, it seems? I wonder if President Obama regrets releasing these memos? My hunch is that he does not.

[lunatica]

17. I think he knows it's out of anyone's control now. That's why he took so long

He's always said he likes to think about things before acting on them. I'm sure he knew that once it was out there was no taking it back.

[kentuck]

18. How do you think he will handle it...?

going forward?

[lunatica]

20. I think he'll just do his job and let Holder handle it

As it should be. He isn't the prosecutor nor is he meant to be. Congress and the Attorney General are in charge of this sort of thing. He did his part by choosing to release the memos, which I think was partially a response to the pressure we put on him. I think this is going to be with us for years.

[kentuck]

21. I agree...

It is unfortunate that a lot of folks believe the President is the "decider" of all things since Dubya took that role upon himself and gave orders to Alberto and the Justice Dept whenever he needed them to do something and they followed...The Justice Dept is independent and should work for all of us.

[zipplewrath]

27. It's bigger than that

This will never be off Obama's plate. There will be a continuous series of decision that will find their way to his desk. More documents will have to be declassified, testimony may have to be provided by current or former members of the administration. Congress could get into the act and pass legislation which will have to be signed. The question is whether he will help move it forward, or attempt to hinder advancement. It still isn't clear which way he'll go. He keeps saying he doesn't want to politicize it, but it is already politicized. He wants to "protect" people who were "within the four corners" of policy, or "acting in good faith". But how will he "protect" them? Pardons? Government funded counsel? Limiting access to documents and personnel? He wants to "look forward", but these people are stil around, sitting on federal courts, and to some extent still buried inside the government. This could all quickly resurface after he's gone if we don't convict some people and make it clear that you will be tried and you will be convicted.

[Orwellian_Ghost]

19. Uh

Fitzmas redux?

I think you are pretty much correct here. People have short memories and are easily manipulated.

Especially the traumatized.

Empire didn't begin with the Bushies and is grinding on despite obvious signs of decay.