If he's not going to prosecute, why release the memos???

[cliffordu]

[Demi_Babe]

1. a game of Chess

[cliffordu]

4. I know. (Don't tell anyone)

[HereSince1628]

9. Oh, I hate that. "We are all simple minded checkers players"

And Rahm Emmanuel and his blue crew are the great chess masters of the nation.

I am so sick of that facile line of shit.

The politicians don't want prosecution because prosecution doesn't serve their interests. Just what are their interests?

Oh, that's right, the goal of winning checkers is so different from the goal of winning chess that we could never understand.

[debbierlus]

27. Obama is protecting his fellows, the dems who knew, you investigate this seriously, it all falls

They seem to be laboring under the delusion that we actually have a two party system.

Yeah, right.

[RaleighNCDUer]

34. But I notice you did not answer the question.

If the intent is to shield the guilty - why release the memos? Wouldn't it make more sense to keep them classified and out of sight, to be forgotten about?

If they are NOT going to prosecute, what is gained by releasing the memos?

ON EDIT:
Re: checkers - the point is not that checkers is simple and chess complex. The point is they are two DIFFERENT games. Some people are so used to one game that they don't even recognize that Obama is playing an entirely different game.

[Life Long Dem]

True...

And the timing is everything.

[HereSince1628]

47. Why not assume they were released just so that they are released?

There is cover for the argument of openness.
There remains cover for the CIA and the DOD.
There remains cover for the Cheney Administration.

The People have their damned documents and no mechanism to do anything but pout.

Everything is covered. Mission Accomplished. Move-on.

[LooseWilly]

59. I'm not sure I buy your metaphor, Re: checkers.

The decision not to prosecute feels, to me, like more of the same old game. He's not playing chess to other politicians' checkers... he's playing a new strategy of chess against politicians who are playing the old tried-and-true strategies. What he's really doing is protecting his king by making sure to allow a variant rule to carry on, whereby the king doesn't have to actually follow the rules. Only pawns have to follow rules...

Actually proceeding with investigations, and giving the voters the benefit of the doubt to believe that they could still support him afterward... now that would be playing a whole new game.

[RaleighNCDUer]

63. And that's what I'm saying - you are NOT seeing the game because

YOU are still playing the other game.

There is NO rational explanation, under the old game, of his releasing the memos. By your interpretation it only hurts him, and he is astute enough a politician to know that. So, what, then, is the reason for releasing the memos?

1) He lets those on the lowest rung of the ladder escape prosecution. This enables them to testify against the higher ups - and, by the way his statement read, even those are not free of prosecution if they exceeded the mandate they were given. The nature of torture being what it is, I would expect nearly all those involved to have exceeded their mandate. Therefore, nearly all are eligible for prosecution.

2) He releases the memos to make certain the American public is aware that what was being done WAS torture, not fraternity hazing. The result is the further discrediting of those torture apologists who say otherwise - meaning, the republicans are being cut off from their base. That means that once prosecutions begin, the republicans will face a public that is saying "And you are DEFENDING this?" instead of "Of course, it's all just partisan politics."

Proceeding with investigations (and who says they are NOT investigating?) and prosecutions now, when the right is still smarting from their spanking at the polls, only gives the right the opportunity to make light of the issue and call it partisan payback. When sufficient public knowledge of what really happened is out there, such claims will fall flat.

You DO know that ALL the media conglomerates are against Obama? That if it was up to them the reality would NEVER come to light? That he has to move with very measured steps to get hard information before the public?

A year ago, the story was "We don't torture". Today it is "yes, there was torture, but it was justified". A year from now it will be "No torture is EVER justified", and that will be validated in the courts.

A whole different game.

[LooseWilly]

65. Or.

He releases the memos and at the same time makes a pledge not to prosecute.

And then he doesn't prosecute.
He claims that to prosecute would undermine a unity in the intelligence community that will be necessary in the face of escalations of hostilities in Afghanistan. He claims that the perception of partisanship would cost political capital that should not be wasted "looking back" but instead should be invested in "looking forward" (potentially true, but far less vicerally satisfying).
And then he talks about how, by releasing the memos, he's "brought the taint of past abuses into the light"... and then theorizes that "Now that these misdeeds have been exposed for what they were, no one will fail to be vigilant for the signs in the future".
Then he wipes his hands clean and moves on to pressing current problems.

Hmm, that would not only explain the release of the memos, but it would also explain the statements that there are no plans to move forward with prosecutions.

And that, in my opinion, would be the same old game. Call it checkers or chess, as you like it... that would indicate that the game is just the game, and Obama's just another player... perhaps one with some serious skills, and a brilliant new strategy... but his strategic skills do not "another game" make.

It would be nice though, if it turned out that he was just lying about the not prosecuting... hell, I'd even settle for complete cooperation from the DoJ with any proceeding Congressional investigations.

Until the administration puts the lie to its own statements though... I'm not buying this "You're not seeing the real game." crapola. Not unless everyone's also willing to affirm that they believe that Jesus was a Space Alien who exported pyramid technology to the Mayans in order to facilitate future landings by the Space Alien cattle-mutilation industry....

[RaleighNCDUer]

69. But HE never said there would be no prosecutions.

Emanuel might have said something to that effect, but he is not the president, he is not the AG - he's just a hack DLCer who lives by triangulating DC politics. HE DOES NOT MAKE POLICY.

And you don't even know what the game is.

[vaberella]

36. I wouldn't say that...new article suggest something different going on with AG Holder. n/t

[Cha]

66. Obama team have been playing chess

whether it makes you sick or not.

[gblady]

20. that was my exact reaction....

we have no idea what this man has up his sleeve...
and I truly think he plans his moves way in advance.

[kestrel91316]

2. Beats hell out of me. If I didn't like Obama so much I'd think he was rubbing our noses in it.

Makes me ill.

[zipplewrath]

3. Only thing I can guess

I don't know, and I've been asking the same question. My only guess is that he wants someone, some where else to do it. Maybe congress, I dunno. But he seems to be making his own life hard by releasing them and then announcing he's going to ignore them.

[ProSense]

8. Good OP question and good point here.

Does anyone believe that Obama thinks the content of the memos qualify as an episode we as a country should simply acknowledge and put behind us?

War crimes?

If Obama truly believes that we can move on from this episode without prosecuting these criminals, then there is something truly wrong with his thinking.

[cliffordu]

16. Yep - AND I don't think his thinking is that off track.

[cliffordu]

11. He can order the AG to do something, or he can let the AG do something or

he can wait for the congresscritters do something or he could be waiting for the rest of the documents come to the public's awareness and after the murders and rapes at Abu Graihb (sp) come to light, maybe then.

I think he wants full illumination before moving.

[tigereye]

58. thank you.

[RaleighNCDUer]

35. Has he showed, at any time in the last two years since he exploded on the scene,

that he is that incompetent a politician?

Taking on the entrenched Bushies at a deeper level than simply trading places for a few years will require the support of the American public. I think he's just setting up the board, and when the time is right, and he knows the move will not cost him the game, he'll make his play.

[HereSince1628]

5. Threading the needle, maybe.

But then "We" are but stupid checkers players; "He" is the grand master of chess. How dare we question him at all?

Frankly, a functional democracy DEMANDS that the people cry out from time to time. If that means exposing the intrigues of members of our own party waddling in the muck, that's what it means.

[C_U_L8R]

6. I believe it's a bit of a chessgame

Including this Harmon business.
My suspicion is that there's a group of blackmailed Dems (and Pukes for that matter)
who have been stonewalling... and the Obama admin is making wise moves to bust this thing apart.
There are many ways to achieve the same result... some with more political advantage and gain.
Whatever, the backroom wrestling must be fascinating.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

12. An independent prosecutor solves all problems

It's the correct thing to do, legally.

It's the vanilla thing to do politically.

There is no need for Machiavellian intrigue (aka Chess) when the most normal, straight-forward and proper thing to do solves all your legal AND political problems

[RaleighNCDUer]

37. In a justice department still stuffed to the gills with Bushco

stay behinds. We've seen the damage a "independent prosecutor" can do if they are in fact beholden to a partisan faction. Or have you forgotten Ken Starr?

I sure the fuck haven't.

[HamdenRice]

25. That's how I see it.

They certainly seem to be taking the steps that, when the dots are connected, lead to an outcome most of us want.

I guess some people would rather he snap his fingers and make things happen while pretending there is not this massive, adverse system in place, left over from the Bush years.

[LooseWilly]

62. Maybe you're right.

Maybe his statements to the effect that he has no intentions of prosecution are all lies. Dissimulations. Prevarications. And assorted other varieties of un-verity.

If so, then the master plan obviously includes dumbshits such as myself becoming disillusioned with what appears to be a betrayal of the Constitution, the Rule of Law, the Geneva Convention, etc... Obviously, the master plan then means to use our collective dumbshit reactions to further their... master plan.
So if I feel so betrayed that I decide I no longer feel like giving money or time... that's also obviously part of the master plan!!

I'm sure impatient though, for the denouement... in which he makes lies into truth, and War Crimes into a prosecutable offense.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

7. It's the centrist thing to do

Some candy corn and circus peanuts for the left.

An assortment of Godiva Chocolates for the right.

Everybody's happy.

[empyreanisles]

13. Ummm. the right is NOT happy. At all.

The only people breathing a sigh of relief are the CIA front line workers who were given immunity.

[RaleighNCDUer]

38. Who now are free to talk with impunity. nt

[Jennicut]

33. The right is pissed. Or did you miss the neo cons mouthing off on faux news?

He allowed the memos out there because they are supposed to out there. Its a bad episode in American history and we need to know.
As far as prosecutions go that is a whole different topic. Who knows if we ever will get them? I would say not right now for sure.

[tekisui]

10. To give the interrogators cover?

A way of saying, "see, they were acting within the law."

I've not given up that something more is coming and that Holder is working on a strong case behind the scenes, but I hate to see a group of torturers protected. Prosecutions for the rag holders are off the table.

[RaleighNCDUer]

41. Who do you want to see convicted? Lynddie England or Donald Rumsfeld?

Focus on the street dealer, or the cartel importer?

Think of it as using the little fish as bait for the big ones. In the end, it doesn't work out too well for the bait, either.

[tekisui]

60. I am willing to practice patience, but hope we don't get screwed on this.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

14. compromise? maybe to see if the public is outraged enough to warrant

the upheaval it would cause to appoint a special prosecutor

[tekisui]

18. I've been impressed with the reaction so far.

It has gotten a lot of attention and play.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

19. What upheaval would there be?

Press conference announcing the appointment of an Independent Counsel (There are no SPs anymore)

Then what? Nothing. Story largely forgotten for years.

Occasional NYT articles about who was called to be deposed or testify to a grand jury. (All in secret.)

Independent prosecutors calm political waters, not roil them. (Until such time they do something public, which is a matter of years.)

[vaberella]

39. Transparency wouldn't allow for the "all in secret" aspect. n/t

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

50. That doesn't follow. All Grand Juries are secret, for instance.

[CJCRANE]

15. Maybe he believes in the court of public opinion.

If the public don't know, how can they have an opinion?

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

17. Public opinion was incorporated when the laws were written by elected representatives

Elections are supposed to be the end of the role of public opinion in criminal law.

[Imagevision]

21. Obama seems to have an answer for everything but solutions to transparency doesn't fit in?

[OwnedByFerrets]

22. They were going to be released regardless of what the president did.

The ACLU had the right to release them.

[vaberella]

40. These looked to be "classified" papers who did the ACLU get their hands on them.

Shoot, the President was even told by the CIA NOT to release them, so how can you say the ACLU had the right or even access to them to release them. Can you provide some links to support your statement?

[OwnedByFerrets]

56. The information came from

Thom Hartman originally..whom I trust, but upon some digging, it seems that this might substantiate it...


ACLU Agrees To Extension Of Torture Memo Deadline Based On DOJ Pledge To Consider Releasing Bybee Memo

WASHINGTON - April 2 - The Justice Department has sought an extension of the government's deadline to decide whether to disclose three legal memoranda authored in May 2005 by Steven Bradbury, then a lawyer in the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel (OLC). The memos authorized the CIA to subject prisoners to torture methods including waterboarding. In ongoing Freedom of Information Act litigation brought by the American Civil Liberties Union, a federal judge had given the Justice Department until today to disclose the memos or explain its refusal to do so. The ACLU has consented to extend the production deadline to April 16 in return for the government's representation that high-level officials will consider the release not only of the Bradbury memos but also a memo authored in August 2002 by Jay S. Bybee, who was then the head of the OLC. The Bush administration had previously withheld the Bybee memo.

The following can be attributed to Jameel Jaffer, Director of the ACLU National Security Project:

"We reluctantly consented to this extension based on the government's representation that within two weeks it will re-review not only the May 2005 Bradbury memos included in today's deadline but also the August 2002 Bybee memo that was one of the cornerstones of the CIA's torture program. Collectively, these memos supplied the framework for an interrogation program that permitted the most barbaric forms of abuse, violated domestic and international law, alienated America's allies and yielded information that was both unreliable and unusable in court. Using national security as a pretext, the Bush administration managed to suppress these memos for years, denying the public crucial information about government policy and shielding government officials from accountability. While we are disappointed that the Bradbury memos were not released today, we are optimistic that the extension will result in the release of information that would not otherwise have been available to the public."


I believe the Freedom of Information Act is what the ACLU was using in their suit. Hell, I could be wrong.

[vaberella]

64. So then why did the CIA basically warn the President not to release them?

Basically information points that it was going to be released anyway. The President wouldn't even be able to stop it, for the CIA to even warn him if this was already in their hands. The warning was coming from everywhere as well...that the information was classified. This stuff just doesn't jive at this point there's way too many mixed information and all of it coming from every where.

[OwnedByFerrets]

70. My cynical answer would be....

they think they are all-powerful...the CIA, that is.

[harun]

23. Because it provides proof to the argument that we were ruled by a bunch of fascist assholes

for 8 years. And to send the message "don't elect more fascist assholes".

[Perky]

24. It is the only way to de-politicize this and protect the CIA as useful organization

[debbierlus]

26. Oh, it is a super secret super duper plan for Obama to set the stage for prosecution

Didn't you know...

:sarcasm:

[cliffordu]

30. I dunno -

Maybe after the new Abu Grahib kiddie rape and murder photos show up the outrage will build to the point something HAS to be done, like a special prosecutor.....

There has to be more to this than meets the eye.


He isn't ignorant, lazy or a sociopath, so my guess is there is a strategy at work here.

[DevonRex]

42. 1. Get the info out there. 2. Give Congress the info it needs to start hearings.

3. Put other governments on notice. This is key, I believe. 4. Enable the Justice Department to espond to pressure for a special prosecutor, thereby avoiding looking like it's political payback.

[cliffordu]

48. Yep, yep, yep, and yep.

[nod factor]

28. I like transparency

so I'll give you the phone logs of joe the prisoner who escaped last week, but unfortunately you have to leave him be, cuz I'm the warden, and I'm up for reelection soon, and in our system the prisoners get half the vote, and even some of the staff may have been in on it too, who knows, but it would just be too messy.

[Orsino]

29. "Make me do it."

He doesn't have the political capital to make it happen yet. He's daring us to do our part by forcing him and Congress to do their part.

And if we let it slide, of course Congress and the Administration will, too.

[cliffordu]

31. Yep.

[DevonRex]

43. Exactly. nt

[vaberella]

45. I'd ahave to agree to some extent with this.

We are a complacent society who doesn't give a crap cause we live on incentives. O has always said this is about us and he can't do it alone. As you said he doesn't have the political capital and we know from experience that most Presidents never had the full political capital to do much of anything...check out the obstructionist in the Senate---some of whom are now Dems. He's in enemy territory and he has to find ways to force the issue. He does the little he can, while making us be the police to keep the Senate and Congress in reigns. without enough of a backlash by the public nothing will get done and he needs that support to back him. So far without the release of the notes...only the far left would support this move fully. Now that it's made public it will reach the media like a firestorm and even repubs are going to have to look at it and see that people were completely sadistic and inhumane. At which point that allows him the cover he needs to be able to make some moves.

Most people don't like to think O is having some master plan or something and most of the time I don't think he does...I think he's just a logical thinker (ie lawyer) and realizes he has to use what he has at his disposal to the best of his abilities and that means getting his his footmen (which is us) to bring up the helm then the congressmen and women and house reps and senate will have to take notice and take action....

[AtomicKitten]

32. He was very specific about who he wasn't going to prosecute.

He made no mention of those that crafted the policy and those that ordered its implementation.

Maybe you missed it. Maybe you like wallowing in hyperbole for the drama.

[cliffordu]

49. maybe I need to be more specific in my non-question questions for the thicker

people here.

:eyes:

[AtomicKitten]

51. Laying out bait for the kneejerk responses you say you hate is a bizarre tactic even for DU.

The kneejerk assertion that "It's official: Obama is not going to prosecute" is a tactical maneuver by those determined to make this president the enemy.

Others know this issue is far from over.

I don't understand why people even bother to bust heads on this stuff around here anymore. It has devolved into ridiculous posturing between the sane and the hysterical.

[cliffordu]

52. Nope.

I'm sick of the haters throwing up all over my shoes with the "He ain't going to do ANYTHING, ever, forever, forever forever!!!!!!!111!!!1111nn 1 1 1 ! ! !SERIES!!!11111


Go jerk your knees on another thread if you don't like it.

[islandgirl808]

44. i thought he HAD to release it

'cause it was court ordered?

:shrug:

[vaberella]

46. Where? Can you provide a link to support your statement?

I never heard of that and never saw an article that stated that. From what I gathered those were classified information and the CIA even told O not to release them. So I was wondering if you could provide a link as to where it says it was a court order.

[TexasObserver]

53. It's a strategem. Let the info out. Let the outrage build.

Obama knows he has to have the public screaming for action before he goes after the perps.

[cwcwmack]

54. shedding light on the dark? n/t

[karynnj]

55. Because they are complete proof of what happened that can not be rewritten by Bush apologists

now of in the future. It is, in a sense, the government admitting the truth.

[polichick]

57. Beats me - but I've written my Congresscritter and Senators to let them know...

...I support prosecution for those who ordered and legalized torture.

[Disturbed]

61. Waterboarded 183 times in one month?

Did not the CIA state that they only did this three times when the issue first came to light?

[sampsonblk]

67. ...because it was the right thing to do.

There is such a thing as right and wrong. I think Obama gets it - for the most part.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

68. So that he could have it BOTH ways.

:puke::puke:

I am so disgusted right now with this administration.

Remember there were reports that the Senate Republicans would confirm Holder in exchange for NOT prosecuting Bush officials? I'm beginning to wonder if a deal wasn't made.

[Cha]

71. I

wonder..hmmmm:think: