Obama: Charges For Bush Officials Possible

President Leaves Door Open To Prosecution Of Strategists Behind Harsh Interrogations Of Terror Suspects

(CBS/AP)  President Barack Obama left the door open Tuesday to prosecuting Bush administration officials who devised the legal authority for gruesome terror-suspect interrogations, saying the United States lost "our moral bearings" with use of the tactics.

The question of whether to bring charges against those who devised justification for the methods "is going to be more of a decision for the attorney general within the parameters of various laws and I don't want to prejudge that," Mr. Obama said. The president discussed the continuing issue of terrorism-era interrogation tactics with reporters as he finished an Oval Office meeting with visiting King Abdullah II of Jordan.

Mr. Obama also said he could support a congressional investigation into the Bush-era terrorist detainee program, but only under certain conditions, such as if it were done on a bipartisan basis. He said he worries about the impact that high-intensity, politicized hearings in Congress could have on the government's efforts to cope with terrorism.

The president had said earlier that he didn't want to see prosecutions of the CIA agents and interrogators who took part in waterboarding and other harsh interrogation tactics, so long as they acted within parameters spelled out by government superiors who held that such practices were legal at the time.

The vexing issue of how terrorism-era detainees held by the United States were interrogated has presented Mr. Obama with a quandary, both political and pragmatic. He harshly criticized these practices as the campaigning Democratic presidential candidate, and still feels pressure from his party's liberal wing to come down hard on it, even after the fact. But he also is being criticized by Republicans, including people as high-ranking as former Vice President Dick Cheney, who say the Bush administration doesn't get enough credit for keeping the country from a second 9/11-style attack.

CBS News legal analyst Andrew Cohen says prosecutions are unlikely.

"I just don't see that as a viable option," Cohen said. "Remember, the president, even as he's not ruling it out, is urging people to reflect but not have any retribution. Retribution is criminal prosecution." (Read more from Andrew Cohen here.).

CBS News correspondent Bob Orr reports the legal opinions of Bush Justice Department lawyers Jay Bybee, John Yoo and Steven Bradbury were drafted to support the policies of more senior officials - Attorneys General John Ashcroft and Alberto Gonzales, CIA Director George Tenet, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and ultimately President Bush and Vice President Cheney.

For his part Cheney is unapologetic for pushing the interrogations that some have labeled torture.

"They didn't put out the memos that show the success of the effort," Cheney told Fox News. "And there are reports that show specifically what we gained as a result of this activity."

Worsening Mr. Obama's dilemma: Now that he is president, he has to worry even more about the fallout of a release of government interrogation memoranda since he now oversees the entire national security establishment, including the entire spy apparatus.

Conservatives roundly criticized Mr. Obama for releasing the internal Bush administration memos, saying that action was not in the U.S. national security interests.

The new administration's stance on Bush administration lawyers who actually wrote the memos approving these tactics has been somewhat murky. "There are a host of very complicated issues involved," Mr. Obama said Tuesday.

White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel said in a television interview over the weekend that the administration does not support prosecutions for "those who devised policy." Later, White House aides said that he was referring to CIA superiors who ordered the interrogations, not the Justice Department officials who wrote the legal memos allowing them.

The president took a question on the volatile subject for the first time since he ordered the Justice Department to release top-secret Bush-era memos that gave the government's first full accounting of the CIA's use of waterboarding - a form of simulated drowning - and other harsh methods criticized as torture. The previously classified memos were released Thursday, over the objections of many in the intelligence community. CIA Director Leon Panetta had pressed for heavier censorship when they were released, but the memos were put out with only light redactions. (You can read the memos here).

Far from putting the matter in the past, the move has resulted in Mr. Obama being buffeted by increased pressure from both sides.

Republican lawmakers and former CIA chiefs have criticized Mr. Obama's decision, contending that revealing the limits of interrogation techniques will hamper the effectiveness of interrogators and critical U.S. relationships with foreign intelligence services.

The release also has appeared to intensify calls for further investigations of the Bush-era terrorist treatment program and for prosecutions of those responsible for any techniques that crossed the line into torture.

Mr. Obama banned all such techniques days after taking office. But members of Congress have continued to seek the release of information about the early stages of the U.S. response to the Sept. 11, 2001, terror under former President George W. Bush. Lawsuits have been brought, seeking the same information.

Mr. Obama said an investigation might be acceptable "outside of the typical hearing process" and with the participation of "independent participants who are above reproach." This, he said, could help ensure that any investigation would be a tool to learn, not to provide partisan advantage to one side or another.

"That would probably be a more sensible approach to take," Mr. Obama said. "I'm not saying that it should be done, I'm saying that if you've got a choice."

The president made clear that his preference would be not to revisit the era extensively.

"As a general view, I do think we should be looking forward, not back," Mr. Obama said. "I do worry about this getting so politicized that we cannot function effectively and it hampers our ability to carry out critical national security operations."

[sayfud-deen]

hey godhelpus 1,since the president is a traitor, and you obvious don't like him or his policies? i will tell you what, don't take the stimulus check! be a man or woman and send the money to some needy children or the elderly! if you don't like what is being done,go all the way! don't half-step!

[godhelpus1]

Obama is a Traitor. Kisses up to the scum Chavez and Castrp. He should be on trial and impeached. He is a Socialist Pig and taking Americas money and putting several generations in DEBT. He needs to be removed.

[godhelpus1]

What ever happened in the Bush administration is none of Obamas business. The thugs just want to start some ****. Also, if Pres. Clinton would have taken out Bin Laden, we wouldn't have this crap. He had Bin Laden head on a silver platter several times. That F#$king pansy.

[ReallyMeanIt]

Still trying to fan all this smoke into a fire LOL I guess you missed the Oliver North investigation where an overwhelming majority of Americans saw him as a hero.

This will be the same.
Posted by louiville2
-----------------------------------
Think again. The majority of Americans saw Oliver North as a criminal. He's better now, he's just an overpaid rightwing talking head.
Posted by raflin
-----------------------------------
raflin, enlight us with your source on where Americans think Oliver North is a criminal.

[ReallyMeanIt]

When the Nazis did it they were criminals
When the Vietnamese did it they were criminals
When the Chinese did it they were criminals
When the USSR did it they were criminals
When the Poles did it they were criminals
When we do it it is ok?

What makes us better than them if we are doing the same things they did?
Posted by johndevinejr
-------------------------------------------------------
When the Nazis did it they were criminals
- I don't recall we gassed any terrorist.
When the Vietnamese did it they were criminals
- I don't recall we sticking bamboo under any of the scumbag fingernails.
When the Chinese did it they were criminals
- I don't recall we executed anyone and make their family pay for the bullett.
When the USSR did it they were criminals
- I don't recall we poisoned any of them.
When the Poles did it they were criminals.
- I don't recall we had any of the terrorist in front of the firing squad.
When we do it it is ok?
- We don't torture, we interogate these scumbags. How about telling nancy, harry, barney, barrack, etc to shut their yaps and stop torturing us with their nonsense.

[johndevinejr]

Still trying to fan all this smoke into a fire LOL I guess you missed the Oliver North investigation where an overwhelming majority of Americans saw him as a hero.

This will be the same.
Posted by louiville2 at 9:51 AM : Apr 22, 2009


Obviously you don't know the difference between right and wrong.

Clearly you have no moral foundation.

[louiville2]

incidents in which detainees DIED while these torture techniques were being administered.

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/04/levins_torture_report_a_round-up.php?ref=fp1
Posted by mcthreeteeth at 9:09 AM

Still trying to fan all this smoke into a fire LOL I guess you missed the Oliver North investigation where an overwhelming majority of Americans saw him as a hero.

This will be the same.

[johndevinejr]

Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.-Benjamin Franklin
Posted by chitown639 at 8:11 AM

And your point is?
Posted by louiville2 at 8:14 AM : Apr 22, 2009


If you do not understand this quote, you are a republican

[johndevinejr]

When the Nazis did it they were criminals
When the Vietnamese did it they were criminals
When the Chinese did it they were criminals
When the USSR did it they were criminals
When the Poles did it they were criminals

When we do it it is ok?


What makes us better than them if we are doing the same things they did?

[johndevinejr]

The Obama administration and liberals abhor what our CIA did to terrorists, then turn around and buddy up with Chavez and Castro/Cuba. Very weird, and two-faced.
Posted by promaclaura at 7:15 AM : Apr 22, 2009

Keep your friends close and your enemies closer. Just because George Bush was too stupid to be able to talk to these people doesn't mean Obama shouldn't.

[louiville2]

NO AMNESTY ! What part of ILLEGAL don't you understand?
Posted by truth-b-toll at 8:41 AM


"At a time like this, scorching iron, not convincing argument, is needed."-Frederick Douglass

"I am a Republican, a black, dyed in the wool Republican, and I never intend to belong to any other party than the party of freedom and progress."- Frederick Douglass

[truth-b-toll]

NO AMNESTY ! What part of ILLEGAL don't you understand?

[louiville2]

Right, right! Security wasn't really the point. It's looking more and more like is was really just about a bunch of Limbaughricans getting their gollies torturing Muslims.

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/04/levins_torture_report_a_round-up.php?ref=fp1
Posted by mcthreeteeth at 8:24 AM

So how does it feel, torturing others? Since your posts seem to fit that description.

"Every obnoxious act is a cry for help. "-Zig Ziglar


You must need lots of help.

[promaclaura]

Of course I believe Obama would not release "ongoing" operations, but we are talking about something else now (plots already foiled), aren't we?

ps If we gained "nothing", then what is there to protect? Is Obama putting our CIA on "nothing" operations?
Posted by promaclaura at 7:46 AM .............

Because he isn't stupid, unlike his predecessors who used information such as that to keep their ratings up. Who made things public that shouldn't have been in order to look like they had it all under control. To say "see, look at us America, we are keeping you safe". All the while, whittling away at our core values in the name of safety.
Posted by IrishWench01 at 7:52 AM : Apr 22, 2009

It is Obama releasing information to keep his ratings up! Remember, these were "secret" memos that didn't need to be released and former/current CIA directors argued against it. Obama released tidbits for his fawning public to support HIS agenda and gain browny points with his voters pure and simple, and I think that is stupid. Obama should have known better, did he really think no one would call his bluff, and ask for the release of the results from the interrogations. Questioning one half of a policy, but not protraying the "full" perspective is downright devisive and begs for further arguement.

Some believe Obama is stringing along his followers as long as possible by keeping "Bush hate" in the picture, he wants the attention on Bush policies, not his own (what tea party? oh, my response to that is Bush, Cheney, and Rush says Barack. Hey Rahm, is there anything else I can use to disract the public with?).

[louiville2]

Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.-Benjamin Franklin
Posted by chitown639 at 8:11 AM

And your point is?

[chitown639]

"Those who ?abjure? violence can only do so because others are committing violence on their behalf" was a "grossly obvious" fact.- George Orwell

It's nice to be smug while others keep you safe.
Posted by louiville2

Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.-Benjamin Franklin

[promaclaura]

If Obama wants to "appear" genuine in his beliefs, he should hold them across the board, meaning condemn the CIA interrogations AND CONDEMN abusive leaders (not shake their hands). It makes his abhorrence moot and appear purely political to do otherwise.
Posted by promaclaura at 7:30 AM ..............

Like I said, You don't get it.
Posted by IrishWench01 at 7:33 AM : Apr 22, 2009

If your arguement is that we have no room to talk if we do it ourselves or it brings us down with the rest of them, I understand where you are coming from. "Waterboarding" someone from the Afghan army or Iraqi army would be wrong as they represent their country, but that's not who we waterboarded is it? I'm not upholding using these techniques on opposing armies of other countries, but I do support it for terrorists who wear no countries "uniform" and act out of religious zeal. The guys that were waterboarded attacked the U.S., not in the name of another country, but out of extremist beliefs/jihad. There is no "ongoing communication" with terrorist groups, we must abtain information on them any way we can.

This stance should "blanket" everyone though, so Obama's shaking hands with Chavez and buddying up with Cuba doesn't make sense does it?

[louiville2]

The CIA is what it is and what it has always been and what it will always be.

The difference is that The United States should never, ever condone torture for any reason at any time! Not to look tough, not to show off, not to anything.... We as a nation Do Not Condone torture.

The CIA and other covert groups have worked to keep this country safe for a very long time. When the President or his cronies make it public knowledge, then they better expect repercussions. Its not rocket science. Cripes, its not even lego science. You blatantly go against the innate values of this country, no matter what the justification and you pay the piper, one way or another.
Posted by IrishWench01 at 7:31 AM

"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." -George Orwell

"Those who ?abjure? violence can only do so because others are committing violence on their behalf" was a "grossly obvious" fact.- George Orwell

It's nice to be smug while others keep you safe.

[chitown639]

Of course I believe Obama would not release "ongoing" operations, but we are talking about something else now (plots already foiled), aren't we?

ps If we gained "nothing", then what is there to protect? Is Obama putting our CIA on "nothing" operations?
Posted by promaclaura

There is no proof of any plots foiled or the Cheney Administration would have made it public....why didn't Cheney release the memos three months ago when he had the power to do so??? Answer: BECAUSE THERE REALLY AREN'T TORTURE MEMOS OF PLOTS BEING FOIDED!!!!

[2Bfair]

No one should be charged with anything. The people at the time making these decisions were doing so for what's best concerning the safety and security of the American people. Otherwise what's going to happen is critical, time sensitive decisions in the future may be delayed or even not occur if people think later they could be held criminally liable. That's just what the terrorists are hoping for! More time to complete and execute their plans to bring down this country even further. AND, Mr. Obama, if you are willing to bring charges upon these people, then how about against Pelosi and other members of Congress who knew and allowed such actions to occur? Transparency and fairness across the board regardless of political affliation...