Share

Obama and the Bush Years

by: Doyle McManus  |  The Los Angeles Times

photo
President Barack Obama has been reluctant to confront the possible misconduct of the Bush Administration's war on terror. (Photo: Getty Images)

    Despite Obama's reluctance to confront possible misconduct in the Bush administration's war on terror, the outrage just won't go away.

    Whenever he's asked about the scandals of America's war on terror -- the torture, the wrongful detentions, the legal corners cut -- President Obama has responded with some version of this statement: "We have to focus on getting things right in the future as opposed to looking at what we got wrong in the past."

    But that approach can't work. The unanswered questions are too many, the lawsuits too numerous, the fundamental questions of accountability too nagging. We need a public reckoning -- and, much as they might like to avoid the distraction, Obama and his people must know it.

    The latest controversy was the disclosure last week that the CIA had launched a program to track down and kill Al Qaeda leaders without informing Congress. The CIA withheld the information, according to Director Leon Panetta, on orders from then-Vice President Dick Cheney.

    Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee were outraged: The controversy served to bolster Speaker Nancy Pelosi's contention that the CIA had chronically lied to Congress.

    The dust-up over what Congress wasn't told came just as Atty. Gen. Eric H. Holder Jr. announced that he will take a new look at old cases in which CIA personnel were accused of abusing detainees, to see if any of them merit prosecution.

    Obama has said that CIA officers who used "enhanced interrogation techniques" will not be punished if they followed regulations in force at the time. But he has also said that those who employed torture beyond the rules should answer to the law.

    And such cases do exist. The CIA's inspector general reportedly sent as many as a dozen "crimes reports" on detainee abuse to the Bush administration Justice Department. Several of the cases concerned detainees who died in custody.

    Bush Justice Department lawyers examined every case, officials said, but decided to prosecute only one, a contract interrogator from North Carolina named David Passaro who beat an Afghan detainee to death with a flashlight in 2003. Passaro was convicted of assault and sentenced to eight years in prison.

    When Holder reviewed the inspector general's 2004 report on the detainee program, he was taken aback by the cases that weren't prosecuted. And he wasn't the first. When the tough report was delivered five years ago, it caused then-CIA Director George Tenet to suspend the program until new rules could be devised. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), who also read the report, said it was "chilling."

    Holder told Newsweek that he is leaning toward launching a criminal investigation into the old cases, and his words sent a shock wave through the CIA's clandestine service, which had hoped it was out of the woods. (A former official who spoke to me asked for his identity to be concealed because he expects to be questioned if the cases are reopened.)

    Panetta, defending his CIA troops, authorized an unusual on-the-record statement telling the attorney general to back off. "This has all been reviewed and dealt with before," CIA spokesman Paul Gimigliano said in a statement. "The Department of Justice knows -- and has known for years -- the details of past interrogation practices. ... Justice decided when to prosecute and when not to prosecute. In some cases, when the department chose not to prosecute, CIA took administrative steps of its own."

    At the end of last week, Holder had made no decision. White House officials said publicly that they were leaving the issue to the attorney general -- but in private, some of them winced at the prospect of prosecuting CIA officers and the political firestorms that could ensue.

    Obama may prefer to soar above painful questions about what his predecessor's CIA did, but he is unlikely to have that luxury, even if Holder backs off. A series of looming disclosures are likely to keep the debate over accountability alive.

    The inspector general's 2004 report is due to be released (with secrets blacked out) by Aug. 31 in response to a lawsuit by the American Civil Liberties Union. The Justice Department's own ethics office is about to release a report judging the department lawyers who drew up the so-called torture memos that offered legal justification for detainee abuse. A federal prosecutor is investigating the CIA's decision in 2005 to destroy 92 videotapes of detainee interrogations, including the repeated waterboarding of Al Qaeda figure Abu Zubaydah. And Feinstein's Senate Intelligence Committee staff is grinding away at a comprehensive report on interrogations that may not be complete before the end of the year.

    "All of these strands are converging to create what could be an ugly summer," noted Jeffrey H. Smith, a former CIA general counsel who has informally advised Obama aides on intelligence issues. "The CIA feels once again that they are the ham in the sandwich."

    There are two ways to resolve these nagging problems. One is the long and bumpy process of responding passively, letting Congress and the courts do what they will. That's the path Obama has taken until now. Far better, though, for the president to grasp the nettle, deal with problems quickly and put safeguards in place to prevent their recurrence. Only then can he focus fully on "getting things right in the future."

  

»


Comments

This is a moderated forum. Β It may take a little while for comments to go live. Be civil and on-topic, don't threaten or advocate violence, please keep it under 300 words. Thanks for participating.

Maybe someday Americans will

Maybe someday Americans will wake up to this tow party circus. I will not be manipulated by these silly games of power. Mr. Obama can not prosecute someone who he himself forwards in his own policies. The only conclusion available to me is that Mr. Obama is implicated in this himself. "When the love of power is replaced with the power of love, we will be free" - Jimmy Hendrix

I'm sorry if I can't feel

I'm sorry if I can't feel sorry for the "poor" CIA. They put themselves in this position by knowingly breaking the law. We must hold them, and their Bush masters, responsible for their actions or we are no better than a tin pot third world country.

You just do not get it Obama

You just do not get it Obama is faced with having to do the same types of things every President does. He no longer is on the outside yelling threats he now is in position of not setting precedent for fear of what could happen to him when we find out what happened to detainees under his administration.

President Obama should start

President Obama should start doing what he believes in and forget about running in 2012. He has 3.5 years to get something done. If he continues to preside over this country with one eye on his next election he will be unable to bring about any change at all. Example: health care. He knows that single payer is the only way to revamp our broken system yet he plays politics instead of getting the job done. He's got to swing for the fences but he is missing his opportunity to do so.

POSSIBLE MISCONDUCT???

POSSIBLE MISCONDUCT???

I think it would be easy for

I think it would be easy for one to assume that President Obama could add "right now" to that statement. "Right now" he is working on bringing health care to us. That appears to be his first priority. He needs to do it while he has good approval ratings. Should he move on this issue "right now," it could blow ALL of his political capitol with Republicans he is going to need to get some kind of health care reform. It's shaky anyway. GOPers are going to come out swords flashing if or when this becomes a priority for the President. Keep in mind that Rove and Cheney ARE being questioned at this time by the Congress. This could become an issue for the President at a later time, but I agree with him that "at"this time" he needs to work on health care and energy first.

"Several died..." Several is

"Several died..." Several is three to seven individuals. Reports are that at least 100 died in custody. It is disingenuous to diminish that number by suggesting only several died. The entire policy is fraught with war crimes that must be prosecuted lest we choose to acknowledge the hypocrites we are to the world. It's that simple: we either are or are not hypocrites. Our prosecution of war crimes, or lack of it, will be our statement to the world and history of who and what we choose to be. The wise choice is diligent prosecution wherever it leads.

I had a dream last night. I

I had a dream last night. I was arrested for selling heroin to middle school students. I told the judge that I thought that "We have to focus on getting things right in the future as opposed to looking at what we got wrong in the past." Unfortunately, I wasn't or ever had been the Vice President of the United States, so the judge gave me 10 years in the Big House. Darn, if only my name had been Cheney.

This is so stupid. This

This is so stupid. This "torture issue" is a blip on the radar of the past--and the "focus" on it is designed to absorb our attention and fury. The BigGovCorp coup d'etat is very nearly complete, and ALL of the crimes need to be investigated and exposed and punished. What's this crap suggesting that We the People are not capable of multi-tasking? OF COURSE we can "fix" the past (investigate and prosecute traitors and lesser felons) AND "fix" the future (revamp domestic and foreign policies) at the same time-- Especially if so many of our elected officials would stop spending SO much of their time figuring out ways to swindle, extort, bribe, and embezzle the People's Money from the People and figuring out the smoothest ways to lie about it. It really is that simple!

Above I saw the following

Above I saw the following message: I had a dream last night. I was arrested for selling heroin to middle school students. I told the judge that I thought that "We have to focus on getting things right in the future as opposed to looking at what we got wrong in the past." Unfortunately, I wasn't or ever had been the Vice President of the United States, so the judge gave me 10 years in the Big House. Darn, if only my name had been Cheney. Quite.