Thomas Veil
Jul 11, 2009, 04:59 PM
Despite the fact that Obama has said he is inclined to move on, his Attorney General, Eric Holder, is talking seriously about the possibility of investigating George Bush's torture policies.
Holder, 58, may be on the verge of asserting his independence in a profound way. Four knowledgeable sources tell NEWSWEEK that he is now leaning toward appointing a prosecutor to investigate the Bush administration's brutal interrogation practices, something the president has been reluctant to do. While no final decision has been made, an announcement could come in a matter of weeks, say these sources, who decline to be identified discussing a sensitive law-enforcement matter. Such a decision would roil the country, would likely plunge Washington into a new round of partisan warfare, and could even imperil Obama's domestic priorities, including health care and energy reform. Holder knows all this, and he has been wrestling with the question for months. "I hope that whatever decision I make would not have a negative impact on the president's agenda," he says. "But that can't be a part of my decision."Link. (http://www.newsweek.com/id/206300) Emphasis mine.
"But that can't be a part of my decision." Omigod, a man with actual come-hell-or-high-water principles.
And this comes only a day or two after confirmation that it was George Bush himself that authorized the illegal secret surveillance program.
Crimes have been committed, and for the first time there is an actual chance that they may be prosecuted. Yes, this could be explosive. But I think Holder's right: that shouldn't enter into it. What kind of nation would we be if we allowed the leader of the free world to commit crimes and then ignored it out of political expediency?
Holder, 58, may be on the verge of asserting his independence in a profound way. Four knowledgeable sources tell NEWSWEEK that he is now leaning toward appointing a prosecutor to investigate the Bush administration's brutal interrogation practices, something the president has been reluctant to do. While no final decision has been made, an announcement could come in a matter of weeks, say these sources, who decline to be identified discussing a sensitive law-enforcement matter. Such a decision would roil the country, would likely plunge Washington into a new round of partisan warfare, and could even imperil Obama's domestic priorities, including health care and energy reform. Holder knows all this, and he has been wrestling with the question for months. "I hope that whatever decision I make would not have a negative impact on the president's agenda," he says. "But that can't be a part of my decision."Link. (http://www.newsweek.com/id/206300) Emphasis mine.
"But that can't be a part of my decision." Omigod, a man with actual come-hell-or-high-water principles.
And this comes only a day or two after confirmation that it was George Bush himself that authorized the illegal secret surveillance program.
Crimes have been committed, and for the first time there is an actual chance that they may be prosecuted. Yes, this could be explosive. But I think Holder's right: that shouldn't enter into it. What kind of nation would we be if we allowed the leader of the free world to commit crimes and then ignored it out of political expediency?
