White House: No independent interrogations probe

[BlueJessamine]

Source: Google AP News

WASHINGTON (AP) — The White House on Thursday said it did not support creation of an independent panel to investigate the Bush administration's harsh interrogations of terror suspects.

"The last few days might well be evidence of why something like this would likely just become a political back-and-forth," presidential spokesman Robert Gibbs told reporters. "We're all best suited looking forward."

Gibbs said the idea of an independent commission to look into the treatment of detainees in the early stages of the anti-terror war was discussed "in earnest" inside the White House about two weeks ago, as President Barack Obama and his aides were deciding whether to release a key set of Bush-era memos detailing brutal interrogation techniques used on some terror suspects and the legal justification behind them. The memos were declassified and made public by the Obama administration last week.

"The president determined that the concept didn't seem altogether that workable in this case," the spokesman said.

With the Senate Intelligence Committee conducting its own probe of the Bush program, the Obama White House seems to have determined it is best to let that process play out on Capitol Hill and not endorse any other forum for examining the era more deeply. Gibbs noted that it is up to Congress — not the White House — to decide whether to pass legislation creating a commission.

The Senate panel is investigating the legal underpinnings for the interrogations as well as the value of the information they produced. Republicans fear the creation of a bipartisan commission would be mostly an effort to vilify former President George W. Bush and top Bush officials.



Read more: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5ig-Lt4l7OBj1pzq-eKRjKqthYdLgD97OF6TO1

[babylonsister]

1. Special prosecutor when the time is right and all pertinent

info has been examined. Sounds good to me.

[tigereye]

3. I really admire him for getting the truth out there

It's about time that someone did.

[mzmolly]

15. Indeed.

:hi:

[No Elephants]

25. When Clinton was in office, they appointed Special Prosecutor Starr and let him

gather the info.

[angstlessk]

2. fucking great....I much prefer a special prosecutor commissioned by DOJ

those bipartisan commissions are little more than white washes anyway...see the 9/11 commission!

[Demeter]

4. I Know What I'm "Looking Forward" to

prosecution and conviction of the BushCo principals.

[Optical.Catalyst]

5. It does not look like a "political back-and-forth" to me.

It is straight forward: Go after the criminals in the former Bush Administration and put them in jail.

[swilton]

6. So the only one we haven't heard from is Condi?!

Two guesses as to why we haven't heard from her:
a. She's out buying shoes
b. Her lawyer has told her to plead the fifth :wtf:

[glitch]

14. Did we hear from Bush? What did I miss.

Not that I want to hear from him, but he's been notably silent on all this.

[Lint Head]

7. Obama is very intelligently staying out of the debate and letting

the light shine on the truth. I understand that DU is a mix of Atheists, Agnostics, Muslims, Christians, Wiccans, Hindus and Satanists. (I apologize if I left out anyone out.) That's what I love about DU. America is a true mix of beliefs.
We need to understand that Obama is a truly dedicated Christian that lives his beliefs without forcing his beliefs on everyone else.
One of the tenants of his belief is that the truth will set you free. To shine a light on true evil (which is a spiritual concept)
will make that evil wilt and eventually die. He is demonstrating this with his actions. He is turning the other cheek as it relates to the past but letting what should be rendered unto Caesar (the federal government) be rendered unto Caesar which is the law being upheld by the enforcers, which is the DOJ.
:dem:

[No Elephants]

26. Obama's religion should have nothing to do with this and reverence for

truth is by no means limited to those who describe themselves as "Christian."

[chill_wind]

8. The Republicans don't seem too worried about DiFi's Senate panel.

No wonder:

U.S. Senate panel sets goals for CIA probe
Thu Mar 5, 2009 6:27pm EST

* Inquiry to evaluate intelligence from interrogations

* It will take about one year, and be in secret

* No decision on whether to make findings public

* CIA pledges to cooperate (Adds inquiry to start "soon," aide comments)

By Randall Mikkelsen

WASHINGTON, March 5 (Reuters) - A U.S. Senate inquiry on the CIA's treatment of terrorism suspects will probe the usefulness of intelligence gained through harsh interrogations and whether the agency complied with official legal guidance.

Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Dianne Feinstein, a Democrat, and Republican Vice Chairman Kit Bond announced on Thursday the scope of the inquiry into the CIA's controversial detention and interrogation program. They said it would take about a year.

more: http://www.reuters.com/article/leonPanetta/idUSN05357930

It's all very closed door discreet and Feinstein is running it. Her staff described it as a "study".

That's all we're going to get from the Senate. Reid won't rock the boat and will resist other Dems:

"Republicans fear the creation of a bipartisan commission would be mostly an effort to vilify former President George W. Bush and top Bush officials."

April 23, 2009, 3:23 pm
Senate Leaders Opposes Interrogation Inquiry Panel
By David M. Herszenhorn AND Carl Hulse

Senate Democratic leaders, joining forces with the Obama White House, said they would resist efforts by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other prominent Democrats to create a special commission to investigate the harsh interrogation methods that the Bush administration approved for terrorism suspects.

At a meeting of top Democrats at the White House Wednesday night, President Obama told Congressional leaders that he did not want a special inquiry, which he said would potentially steal time and energy from his ambitious policy priorities, and could mushroom into a wider distraction by looking back at other aspects of the Bush years.

The Senate majority leader, Harry Reid of Nevada, and other top Senate Democrats endorsed Mr. Obama’s view on Thursday, telling reporters that they preferred to wait for the results of an investigation by the Senate intelligence committee expected sometime “late this year.” But Ms. Pelosi renewed her call for an independent panel.

Mr. Reid, who repeatedly denounced the use of harsh interrogation techniques when Mr. Bush was president, suggested that naming a special panel would signal an intent to exact “retribution” and he sought to paper over the disagreement with members of his own caucus, like Senator Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont, who want a commission.

more:

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/04/23/senate-leaders-opposes-interrogation-inquiry-panel/

Why, there's that "retribution" talking point again...

[bottomtheweaver]

9. The only way they'll do it is if we make them do it.

That's just the way the game is rigged. But at least all the pieces are on the damn board this time. :mad:

[robinlynne]

16. one year, in secret, headed by Difi. Boy will I trust those results!!!!!

[chill_wind]

17. I've since seen more like 6-8 months from now but still no

definitive statement that any of this will be publicly released. And 8 months (*IF* it really got done that fast) really pushes up against some of the running statutes for prosecutions. Big IF. This is Congress and closed door governmental committees we are talking about.

[lovuian]

10. excuse me when does a President make a decision if

there will a special prosecutor or not

thats up to the Attorney Generals office

or the Congress

Obama needs to just keep quiet here

[TankLV]

11. Sorry , but an INDEPENDANT INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNAL is the only way to go...

WE - the American People - politely and STRONGLY disagree with you...

and WE will continue to push for JUSTICE...

[glitch]

12. What an ambiguous headline, intentional I am sure. Commission NO, Prosecutor YES

:applause:

[jillan]

13. Am I the only one that thinks Obama is playing it smart?

It seems to me that he is giving Capitol Hill everything they need to move forward, releasing all the docs....

but at the same time is keeping himself out of it, acting like he doesn't want this to be happening - so nobody can be pointing fingers at him. That way he can continue to get his agenda passed...continue to talk about healthcare, green jobs, etc...instead of having all the repugs blaming him for the shitstorm that is coming their way.



:shrug:

[lbrtbell]

23. Unfortunately, they'll blame Obama, anyway

And there's no way they're going to cooperate with him on health care or anything else. To them, it's all "SOCIALISM!!!!"

[Senator]

18. What exactly is wrong with the

... when compared with the lawless secrecy of the last few years?

Sorry that there's been so much uneasiness at DC social events, but some of us would like to the see the Redemption of Our National Soul begin.

Please come up with a "concept {that DOES} seem altogether that workable in this case" or hold your peace about the "concepts" of others who might not be impotent to DO some damn thing.

(At least he didn't whine about "divisiveness." Sigh.)

---

[natrat]

19. i wish a tanker truck would drop a big load of shit on hary reid, he should be tortured

[ShortnFiery]

20. What does it take to pry both Reid and Pelosi out of their leadership positions? They suck!

:shrug:

[No Elephants]

28. I've emailed my Senators (both Democrats), begging them to replace Reid as Majority Leader. Maybe

if enough Democrats do the same.....dare we hope?

[defendandprotect]

21. "Yes, yes, yes!" . . . "No, no, no!" . . . ?????

[Dogmudgeon]

22. Sounds like political "Rope-A-Dope"

Let the case develop fully and naturally, like a rare and prized wine.

Then, when the time is right, sharpen the blade, grease the track, assemble the convicts, and commence the beheadings.

--d!
How many metaphors can YOU twist into submission?

[OneBlueSky]

24. "We're all best suited looking forward." . . .

in that case, why not let everyone accused of a crime off, since by definition their crimes were committed in the past, and "we're all best suited looking forward?" . . .

[alarimer]

27. I really am disappointed in this guy.

Sorry I even voted for him.

And I never will again.

When will Democrats stop voting for the "lesser of the evils" and starting voting for people with real principles, unlike Obama who appears to have no principles whatsoever. Except for protecting the criminals of the previous administration.

My guess is he is probably already guilty of allowing torture. He is definitely already guilty of war crimes himself (allowing or ordering Predator drones to kill civilians in Afghanistan). But we should know this already: politician = lying scumbag, no matter who it is.

[EFerrari]

29. Imho, there are two different things going on here.

Obama says he's not for prosecutions.

Obama is allowing the release of material that has to result in some kind of investigatin -- memos, torture images from the Pentagon.

I'm watching what he does, fwiw.