One of the little reported details from the latest batch of Wikileaks material are cables showing that the Obama Administration worked hard behind the scenes not only to prevent any investigation of torture in the United States but shutdown efforts abroad to enforce the Geneva Conventions and the Convention Against Torture. This includes threatening the Spanish that, if they did not derail a judicial investigation, it would have serious consequences in bilateral relations. I discussed these cables on Countdown.
For two years, President Obama has worked to block the investigation of torture under the Bush Administration — even as both Dick Cheney and George Bush publicly admit to ordering waterboarding of suspects.
David Corn in Mother Jones has an interesting posting today on the issue.
A “confidential” April 17, 2009, cable sent from the US embassy in Madrid to the State Department discloses how the Administration discarded any respect for the independence of the judiciary in Spain and pressured the government to derail the prosecution of Bush officials. Human rights groups around the world had called for such enforcement in light of Obama promise that no torturers would be prosecuted and Holder’s blocking of any investigation into war crimes.
The Association for the Dignity of Spanish Prisoners had filed a demand for prosecution with Spain’s National Court to indict former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales; David Addington, former chief of staff and legal adviser to Vice President Dick Cheney; William Haynes, the Pentagon’s former general counsel; Douglas Feith, former undersecretary of defense for policy; Jay Bybee, former head of the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel; and John Yoo, a former official in the Office of Legal Counsel. It had a compelled factual basis that these men ordered or facilitated war crimes — a record that has only become stronger since this confrontation.
American officials pressured government officials, including prosecutors and judges, not to enforce international law and that this was “a very serious matter for the USG.” It was Obama’s own effort at creating a “Coalition of the Unwilling” — nations unwilling to enforce treaties on torture and war crimes when the alleged culprits are American officials.
Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.) joined the embassy’s charge d’affaires in the secret campaign to block the prosection of Judge Baltasar Garzón.
Corn notes that, during an April 14, 2009 White House briefing, he asked press secretary Robert Gibbs if the Obama administration would cooperate with any request from Spain on the investigation and prosecution. Gibbs insisted that this was nothing but “hypotheticals” and did not disclose that in fact the Obama Administration was working diligently to block the Spanish case.
Just as many conservatives abandoned their principles in following George Bush blindly, many liberals have chosen to ignore Obama’s concerted efforts to protect individuals accused of war crimes. Under our treaty obligations, the United States has the primary responsibility to prosecute torture by U.S. citizens. That responsibility rests with the Executive Branch – the prosecuting authority of the United States. What is particularly disgraceful is that Obama would refuse to fulfill this responsibility under our treaties and international law and then demand the same hypocrisy from our allies.
FLOG THE BLOG: Have you voted yet for the top legal opinion blog? WE NEED YOUR VOTE! You can vote at HERE by clicking on the “opinion” category. Voting ends December 31, 2011.
Eniobob thanks for the link.
“ignores the fact that he is in a precarious political box”
He was damned from the beginning.
He was damned if you do, damned if you don’t. And speaking of Pardons like any past president understands, and now Obama he just might need a pardon himself when it’s all said and done. He just better hope it’s not Palin.
I am done with this man. I will actively work to defeat him in the primary, if there is one, and/or in the general election. He has lied over and over about who he is.
As a liberal, I have no representation in Washington anyway.
I guess I have never thought this country was just. We owned slaves and massacred Indians.
Oh please,
Someone regale me again with the tales of how Obama gets a free pass on this, and all the other tyrannical Bush policies he’s embraced, because of “the economy.”
Elaine M.: “Our country is beginning to rot from the inside. Maybe it’s time to rip it open and cut out the decaying matter. ..”
***
It’s been doing so for a long time. I was thinking about Nixon being sent to jail, indicted and put under house arrest at least a while back but I was thinking about that again a couple of days ago and I started trying to fix the date the rot actually began, or close anyway, and a crazy as it sounded I put the blame on President Lincon.
Jefferson Davis and his Generals should have been shot as traitors. In a Constitutional Democracy it just does not matter who you are, equality under the law is the only standard that matters. Lincon set a very bad precedent.
millsapian87, I wonder if the Bush administration would have felt quite as confident in their lawlessness if Nixon had been brought up on charges?
BIL: “Too big to prosecute is a poli-sci myth just as much as too big to fail is an economic myth regarding banks.”
****
Exactly. if that’s the way the rules are going to be applied then why bother with even calling the top guy a President? Just crown him on inauguration day and start calling him Your Highness because that’s essentially what you are installing, serial Monarchs.
Rafflaw, I respectfully disagree with The Wife on this issue too, and she’s more liberal than I am. And I should have been more concise when I wrote that she compared it to Nixon’s pardon. I should have said that she compared it to Ford’s justification for pardoning Nixon. I lived through it too and was pissed then (at 10 years old) and am still somewhat irked to this day.
Here’s the thing about pardons: accepting a pardon is implicit acknowledgment (by the recipient) of committing the crime. I’d almost rather Obama pre-emptively pardon the torturers; then at least they’d be tainted by accepting. Too bad that seems to be a moot point now.
Jill: I have never seen you criticize Palin, Bachmann, Boehner or McConnell. You seems to only criticize Obama and some unidentified liberals.
He could have let Spain handle it and Obama would not have taken as much heat.
Obama did exactly what he had to do. When I first came here I was intrigued with the birth certificate issue. For a person who ran on Hope and Change, Openness and Transparency there was absolutely no reason for him not to open his records up. He was already elected, but thats o.k. we’ve already had that argument.
One of my first post here I made a comment to the effect that the office of the presidency is an office. The president is bound to protect that office and any past members after all it’s the highest in the land. It’s always done. It’s a club, the Hall of Fame. I made the comment that Bush would never be prosecuted for torture that it was Obama’s job to protect him. No need to tell you what I got from the peanut gallery but one of the first words in response was troll. Mike Spindell let me have it. I wish I could find the post.
Think about this for a moment, could you imagine Bush being found guilty either here or anywhere and Obama being forced to pardon him or defend him with bullets. Obama was never gonna take the chance of that ever happening. He did what he had to do. But, if it wasn’t for Wiki Leaks, who would have known.
Our country is beginning to rot from the inside. Maybe it’s time to rip it open and cut out the decaying matter. Things will not get better unless we address the terrible wrongs our country has committed and begin to punish leaders who approved of the torture of human beings.
“She compares it to Ford’s pardon of Nixon in that regard.”
Also a huge politically driven mistake. Ford later regretted his actions.
Two wrongs do not make a right and actions are supposed to have costs. If the cost of enforcing the rule of law is that some people get pissed off that it’s their guy being punished? Too bad. That’s the cost of backing villains. The only way to stop the ever widening division is to address the primary cause and prosecute the internal enemies of the Constitution. Cruel to be kind, medicine can have unpleasant side effects, etc.
Double standards are what got us into this mess in the first place. More double standards will only exacerbate the problem. Eventually to the point of political violence. So which is better? Discomfort and bitching now or blood in the streets later?
The Constitution and the Declaration don’t provide for “justice for some”, but rather “justice for all”.
Too big to prosecute is a poli-sci myth just as much as too big to fail is an economic myth regarding banks.
Not only was William Gladstone right when he said, “Justice delayed is justice denied”, Martin Luther King drove the point home when he said, “Justice denied anywhere diminishes justice everywhere.”
The administration came in with a feeling that they could do no wrong,now its like they can’t do anything right.
Here is a little side story which may be of interest:
Why Obama has been so stingy with pardons
By Earl Ofari Hutchinson
8:20 AM on 11/30/2010
http://www.thegrio.com/politics/politics-not-insensitivity-explain-obamas-pardon-drought.php
oops going
Statements that Obama would not prosecute Bush or Cheney for torture and other war crimes were showing up even before the election. There has been complete continuity of criminality (aka, govt.) between Bush and Obama. When people claim Obama was left a mess and doesn’t have time to clean everything up, they must reconsider this excuse for his wrongdoing. Obama has found the time to thwart justice for torture victims on multiple counts from the beginning of his administration. He found time to cut deals with financial criminals, appointing them to run US economic policy. He found time to cut secret deals with Big Pharma and corrupt insurance lobbyists. He has found time to prosecute any whistle blower he can get his hands on. Look carefully at who he can find time to help and who he can find time to hurt. Look carefully at the alliances in Congress with the Executive. There you will find truth. Oppose wrongdoing because it is wrong.
Elaine,
I do not think it is accurate to call Obama’s decisions simply poor/bad. They need to be called for what they are– criminal, depraved, illegal and immoral. Calling them poor/bad is like saying Bush ordering torture and instigating war under false pretense was just a poor/bad decision. It was bad, but it was much more than that. It was an impeachable offense. It was evil, it was illegal and it has caused great harm. It’s easy to see when the “other” side is wrong and to condemn it. I’ve seen you write poems about Republicans many times. I haven’t seen you write a poem about Obama’s wars– those on civilians, those on our young men and women in harm’s way, those on the poor of this nation. Are the suffering of civilians, soldiers, the poor, the tortured less under Obama than Bush?
I agree millsapian 87. I don’t know any liberals that are not disappointed. Republicans, some independents and some blue dog democrats if there are any left after the election might be content but not liberals. We are stuck with Obama because Palin and her crew are extremely scary. Should someone challenge Obama in the primary some might be interested. No one has stepped up so far. The republicans are probably ooing to redistrict Kucinich out of existence so he might, but then again he said he won’t. Some of the advice on this blog in the last election was either to stay home or vote third party. It was not very constructive advice because the house committees are now being taken over by extreme right wing republicans. The next cycle will be beginning soon, and I am sure the advice from the same people will be stay home or vote third party n order to ensure Palin’s victory.
milsapian,
I must respectfully disagree with your wife and affirm your thoughts on the matter. I lived through the Nixon pardon and it would not have ripped the country in two. It would have shown everyone in the country that noone was above the law, not even a President.
Culheath, The Wife (BA, MA Political Science) informs me that this is Too Big To Prosecute, and that doing so would rip the country in two–more so than it is already, I suppose. She compares it to Ford’s pardon of Nixon in that regard.
Intellectually I know she’s probably right, but this is still a god-damn travesty. It lays bare our hypocrisy and national moral turpitude. We are no longer a democratic republic and a nation of laws, but a plutocratic oligarchy.
If you’re rich or powerful enough in this country, you can do anything you want, including treason, torture, murder. That’s America in the twenty-first century.
>many liberals have chosen to ignore Obama’s concerted efforts to protect individuals accused of war crimes.
Prof, who are these “many liberals”? Just give me two names. Every one that I’ve talked to on this issue is rightly pissed. I’m certainly not ignoring it. I am furious about it.
This is sickening. I cannot fathom why Obama would pursue such a course. He has now lost all credibility for me.
Prof,
I saw this news story and I was stunned. This would have been politically the best way for Obama to handle the torture problem. He could have let Spain handle it and Obama would not have taken as much heat from the Right. It is sad to think that people who authorize and approve and order torture are immune to the law, but if someone falls behind on their home payments due to job loss, sickness, etc, the law will come crashing down on their heads! Something is backwards here.