Nadler: Obama’s Torture Comments Prove Probe Is Required By Law

[babylonsister]

http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/probes-of-bush-administration/nadler-obamas-torture-comments-prove-probe-is-required-by-law/

The Plum Line
Greg Sargent's blog


Nadler: Obama’s Torture Comments Prove Probe Is Required By Law

I noted below that Obama’s acknowledgment at his presser last night that the Bush administration authorized torture will prove powerful ammo for those calling for a probe into Bush’s torture program.

First up: Dem Rep Jerrold Nadler, who just told me in an interview that Obama’s comments leave the administration only one legal option: Investigate, and if necessary, prosecute.

“President Obama said, `They used torture, I believe waterboarding is torture,’” Nadler said, speaking of Obama’s comments about his predecessors. “Once you concede that torture was committed, the law requires that there be an investigation, and if warranted, a prosecution.”

Nadler and other House Dems have already called on the Attorney General to appoint a special prosecutor to look into potential torture crimes. Yesterday’s comments from Obama, Nadler says, make it clearer still that this is the only legal path open to the administration — in part because Obama seemed to acknowledge that his predecessors had violated “international law.”

“The president stated in so many words: Waterboarding is torture, the previous administration has admitted that it waterboarded, and torture is a violation of international law,” Nadler said. “Once this is admitted, there must be an investigation. It forces the Justice Department on this path.”

Expect more like this.

[LakeSamish706]

1. Somehow I think that Eric Holder is deep into an investigation on this. President Obama...

seemed to have a hard time spitting "Water boarding is torture" out at the presser last night, but he did. I think patience will be rewarded by indictments. Just a guess.

[babylonsister]

2. I'm right there with you. nt

[MannyGoldstein]

3. Don't Hold Your Breath

There's confessed criminals, yet there will be no prosecution: half of Americans think torture is appropriate and useful, so a prosecution would split the nation.

The only question is if the Administration will just blow off their constitutional responsibilities, or do the constitutional thing and (ugh) issue pardons.

[babylonsister]

4. So what makes you think they're going to disappoint the half of the

nation that thinks torture is criminal?

[MannyGoldstein]

5. Of Our Half, Probably 20% Care Enough To Make It An Issue

The rest will get pretty upset at seeing Bush et al in custody.

[babylonsister]

6. Why would people who oppose torture get upset if

idiot son et al are punished for that crime?

[MannyGoldstein]

10. Because Most Of Us Don't ppose It *That* Much

Most people will give it a pass if the alternative seems worse. For most people (not you or I), an ex-president in handcuffs smells like partisan retribution.

For another example, look at DU's own general take on extraordinary rendition. Outsourced torture is less awful to us if one of our own is behind it: we know that torture's wrong, but the idea of a Democratic President doing bad things overrides that wrong.

[Echo In Light]

7. I fear that focusing on waterboarding alone plays a strategic role in overall downplaying

[EmeraldCityGrl]

8. Either we prosecute or the matter will be taken out of our

hands and prosecuted by other countries.

The last thing I can imagine Obama doing is shirking his constitutional responsibilities.
The Administration is approaching this very carefully and I have complete faith the rule of law
will be upheld regardless of public opinion on torture.

[babylonsister]

9. And I agree with you.

:fistbump: