Politics with Marc Ambinder

« The Obama Speech Newt and Rove (And America) Could Love | Main | What Was That Secret CIA Operation? Targeted Assassinations? »

Jul 11 2009, 4:41 pm

Holder Considers A Torture Prosecutor

A Justice Department official confirms Newsweek's report that Attorney General Eric Holder is leaning towards appointing a special prosecutor to investigate Bush administration-era torture and interrogation policies. Newsweek's Dan Klaidman cites four departmental sources, and Holder himself, as admitting that, after a review of the programs, Holder began to consider an investigation, even though President Obama and Obama's top aides oppose any sanctioned look back at the policies of his predecessor. When Obama asked Holder, a longtime friend, to become attorney general, Holder extracted a promise -- perhaps extracted is too tough of a term because Obama readily agreed -- that the White House would not interfere with the Department's decisions about whether to launch investigations, according to two people with knowledge of the encounter. When it comes to setting and refining judicial policy, the White House counsel's office plays the lead role. But Holder and his deputies get to decide whom to prosecute.

The Newsweek article flatteringly portrays Holder as a "renegade" whose decision-making process is influenced by his pursuit of justice, Obama's agenda be damned. It reveals some tension between the Justice Department and the White House, although my sense is that the tension is less acute than the article portrays and more institutional than personal (One sore point: the White House counsel's office was notified about the Obama administration's first assertion of the state secrets privilege, but somebody forgot to inform the president. Such confusion in the first few weeks of an administration would be news if evidence for it were absent.)

Perhaps the article will ratchet up the tensions, since it creates a Holder v. Obama dynamic that White House press secretary Robert Gibbs will be forced to respond to on Monday, probably with a folksy quip. The White House doesn't like process stories like this one, although, on one level, the portrayal of a Justice Department independent from White House political considerations is, on balance, positive for Obama's conception of the rule of law.

Appointing a special prosecutor to investigate Bush-era policies of any sort is fraught with risk, even exempting the public and political ramifications. Investigations like these have a way of snowballing. The intelligence community will strenuously reject and resist; there are very legitimate concerns about the integrity of classified information.

If Holder decides to go ahead, he may not entirely satisfy critics of the Bush-era policies; a special prosecutor might not be given a mandate to investigate more than a handful of compartmented programs.

On the one hand, it is tough to see a prosecutor being given a mandate to determine whether former Vice President Dick Cheney ordered CIA officials to not brief Congress on a highly sensitive, classified intelligence collection program given the very real chance that the national security damage resulting from the disclosure of information about the program might be significant.

Nonetheless, it's doubtful that Holder would lean into a decision in such a public way unless he was ready to consider an option that may well have significant ramifications for the country and lay a strong precedent for future administrations.

Since the beginning of his presidential transition, Obama has been counseled by his attorneys that any such investigation is likely to be incomplete, resulting in people being charged with sins they participated it but did not originate. Even senior Justice Department officials admit that the possibility of an elected White House decision-maker like the Vice President being charged with a crime is remote. Obama would rather not see middle managers prosecuted for decisions, or crimes, of elected officials or senior political appointees. And he is very concerned with precedent. But this will not be his decision to make.

Aside from this momentous decision Holder will soon reveal, and be forced to defend, the administration's position on the state secrets privilege. Additionally, the Justice Department will release a long-awaited report on Bush administration legal policy.

Comments (4)

Just a coincidence, Sri Lanka at present has senior Defence officials, who are legal residents of US. One Senior official is a citizen.

These officials have been committing war crimes, and several human rights organizations, including Physicians for Human Rights have been calling for War Crimes investigations on these officials.

...whether Vice President Dick Cheney ordered CIA officials to not brief Congress on a highly sensitive, classified intelligence collection program given the very real chance that the national security damage resulting from the disclosure of information about the program might be significant.

I'm sorry Mark, but it is simply a load of bull. In plain English: you are saying that obviously nobody is going to give a special prosecutor license to look at whether Cheney had the CIA lie to Congress about the fact that they were torturing prisoners. Neutralizing that with obsfucating rhetoric doesn't make you "impartial" on the issue, it makes you a tool.

There wouldn't have been any danger of national security damage from briefing Congress on interrogation if there hadn't been any torture. You are stating that the Executive has a right, or even an obligation, to lie to the people and to Congress if it is taking unethical actions that would reflect badly on America.

Yes, most administrations have done this, but it's a new and deeply irresponsible idea to suggest there's nothing objectionable about it.

Your coverage was well done and accurate within that framework.

When this subject matter is discussed within two framing factors, politics and justice, one type sausage will emerge.

However, when a third factor, a declining empire is also thrown in, the type of sausage that emerges is quite a different flavor.

According to some civics and political science scholars, accountability is the foundation of any healthy democracy.

Thus, it can be premised that to the extent accountability is dying out or drying up, is the extent to which the U.S. Democracy is dying out or drying up.

This man is a joke. To say he has no idea if he will prosecute any one is a lie! domain names

He knows that is part of the Obama agenda. Keep rehashing the past to cover up what Obama and his party are doing right now.

We have seen this movie before when Bill was in hot water and had to bomb a few buildings in Iraq to get the press off his case.

The problem is no matter if there was any wrong doing or not they will keep this going so no one gets on Obama and how bad he is doing his job. business opportunity