1
1
1
With the Bush 43 crowd, everything revolves around the GWOT lie and the constant threat from our enemies and the associated need for expansion of US military and security powers to facilitate fear and war mongering, which the GOP thinks will get them extra seats in Congress. Obama is currently trying to bring the US back into the community of nations by adapting Bush 43's policies so that the President is accountable to Congress--the separation of powers, and that the US adheres to existing international treaties.
What happens to US credibility if Spain finds Bush 43 guilty? Bush 43 will just blow them off. What if Spain uncovers something new that the Holder investigation run by Durham uses against Bush 43 and is incriminating? Remember how Ken Starr got information from the Paula Jones trial to use against Clinton?
This is another test for Obama. He has failed progressives so far with his "looking forward not backward" focus on "EIT", also with his slow process of eliminating renditions from the US' practices. If Spain finds Bush 43 guilty then Obama must have Holder widen the focus of Durham's investigation. There will be no excuses if he doesn't.
Jonathan Turley makes this point strongly in the article "Turley: Americans Who Authorized Torture Should Be Prosecuted for War Crimes"
http://www.usnews.com/articles/opinion/2009/05/18/war-crimes-must-be-prosecuted-at-home-or-abroad_print.htm
as he states "Ultimately, we all become accessories after-the-fact if we stand silent in the face of these war crimes. Bush ordered these war crimes because he believed that he was above the law, and others like Rice have claimed that, if the president orders such actions, they are by definition legal. They were both wrong. The law is clear. The only remaining question is whether we have the national character and commitment to the rule of law to hold even our leaders to account for crimes committed in our name."
Obama is in a sticky situation. He has allowed the Bush 43 initiative of unmanned drones attacking al Queda in the Afghanistan/Pakistan area to continue even after civilian casualties have occurred---which the GOP could claim is a war crime. He has allowed rendition to continue. GOP operatives have already stated that they would support an investigation of rendition including those done by Clinton and Obama. How much does Obama want to support future presidents investigating their predecessors?
Obama has to be concerned with the degree of hostility that the GOP has exhibited against him. The GOP just got Van Jones fired. South Carolina Republican Rep. Joe Wilson committed an extraordinary breach of decorum when he shouted "You lie" at President Barack Obama during Obama's speech to Congress, and no one was surprised. They have vilified Obama so completely that he can't give a harmless speech to students without being challenged.
The red state dolts' lives are so bereft of hope that they believe any lie, such as Obama being a Muslim, Socialist, Communist. They believe in death panels. The perfect example of how completely passive Obama has been is the "birthers" or "tenthers" showing up at town hall meetings with automatic weapons with no response from the federal government.
When he spoke with a child during his presentation to school children Obama was quoted as saying he admired Mahatma Gandhi. Well, passive resistance isn't going to get 47 million US citizens health care, nor is it going to bring Bush 43 to justice.
I can see this happening. Someone needs to explain to Obama the atrocious hatred the GOP has for him and Democrats. Someone needs to explain that the best defense is a good offense and Obama lets Durham's investigation go where the facts lead them and they end up in the "Oval Office Cabal". Bush 43 will offer up all of his minions, but when the buck stops it is squarely in Bush 43's desk. He was "The Decider". The lawyers for Bush 43 will stipulate that the documents do prove that Bush 43 and his crew authorized torture, but that the President in times of war has "unitary executive powers". In 43's distorted view these powers allow the president to do anything. This is reminiscent to "Tricky Dick's assertion that "If the president does it, it's not illegal" --which Obama doesn't agree with, and is combating - even as he worries if his successor will follow his lead.
1 | 2
