Posted by
Always To The Right on Tuesday, November 18, 2008 2:42:10 PM
Strike another hope of the Left
from the incoming Barack Obama administration. Associated Press
reports that Obama will not pursue criminal investigations into the
interrogations of terrorist detainees once in office. He plans instead
a forward-looking panel to return recommendations for future policy
rather than pursue a potentially divisive prosecutorial policy
As the AP points out, Bush could pre-empt any investigation simply
by issuing pardons to those involved in interrogations. In fact, Bush
is likely to do just that, and he may start soon. Now that the
elections have concluded (except in Georgia), the political risk is
nil, and it would protect the people on whom he relied to keep the
nation safe. The only person Bush couldn’t pardon would be himself,
and the spectacle of a President prosecuting his predecessor would
explode partisan passions in Washington, bringing the capital to a halt
for years.
As Patrick Leahy bluntly put it, that’s simply not going to happen.
Obama needs to demonstrate that he can move forward with his own
agenda. He’ll be satisfied to generate a finding that gives Bush a
historical black mark, if even that much. The latest signals seem to
indicate that Obama may not have that much interest in the issue and
could relegate it to a low-profile, pro forma effort.
How would that play politically? The MoveOn/Code Pink wing of his
support will be outraged, but they live in perpetual outrage, and
they’ll get over it … eventually. Putting aside a divisive effort
targeting the outgoing administration might win Obama some good will
from the Republicans, at least in the initial months of his
administration. When George Bush leaves office, a great deal of the
focus on him will also depart, which will make any attempt to prosecute
intel agents who relied on Justice findings of legality both unwelcome
and unwise.
I think a careful review of interrogation policy, with a
non-partisan and credible panel using an open mind cognizant of the
dangers we face, wouldn’t necessarily be a bad idea. We do have a
responsibility to set rational policies for national security, and that
should involve periodic oversight of how those policies get implemented
in the field. I’m not certain that we can actually get a non-partisan panel with an open mind, but at the least we should support an attempt to do so.