Balz: Obama ‘quashed’ 9/11 Commission-style torture panel.
Balz: Obama ‘quashed’ 9/11 Commission-style torture panel.
Yesterday, President Obama said he would support a “bipartisan” congressional commission examining the Bush administration’s torture program. The Washington Post’s Dan Balz reports that this development followed weeks of “vigorous” debate inside the White House. Obama reportedly rejected a 9/11-style national commission because he thought it would “ratchet the whole thing up”:
There was, according to a senior official, considerable support among Obama’s advisers for the creation of a 9-11 Commission-style investigation as an alternative to releasing the Justice Department memos. But Obama quashed it. “His concern was that would ratchet the whole thing up,” the official said. “His whole thing is, I banned all this. This chapter is over. What we don’t need now is to become a sort of feeding frenzy where we go back and re-litigate all this.”
According to Balz, Obama was “reluctant to give a presidential imprimatur to a national commission that would keep the controversy alive for months and months and months.” Instead, Obama chose to release the OLC torture memos. Multiple members of Congress have signaled they will try to move forward on a commission.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
The law should take care of the torturers from here.
April 22nd, 2009 at 6:05 pmI’ll be happy with just litigating it the first time.
April 22nd, 2009 at 6:08 pmdamn.
ok. i can see rejecting “a 9/11-style national commission”…
but not ‘because he thought it would “ratchet the whole thing up”
a special prosecuter would be better… ratchet away… we can take it.
this is america… we can multi-task…
there are so many messes – just clean ‘em all up good…
April 22nd, 2009 at 6:10 pmWe don’t want a commission. We want a Special Prosecutor instead.
April 22nd, 2009 at 6:11 pmWe don’t need no stinking commision. We need prosecutors working overtime.
April 22nd, 2009 at 6:11 pmA 9/11 style commission is what?
April 22nd, 2009 at 6:13 pmI’m mystified why Obama, a very intelligent person, would think that a 911-style commission would keep the controversy alive for months, and months and months. Certainly, the release of the torture memos will do exactly the same thing, but I believe, increase pressure for investigations and prosecutions. Perhaps he’s much more wily than any of us ever gave him credit for. Hmmmmm….
April 22nd, 2009 at 6:14 pmInstead, Obama chose to release the OLC torture memos.
that implies that he thought those memos would pacify the need to rectify the controversy… i find that hard to believe…
April 22nd, 2009 at 6:15 pmI was just watching “The Patricia Hearst Story”. Some thirty years later they prosecuted a housewife and a man who had tried to live their lives. They were Bill and Emily Harris. They are now in jail for crimes committed some thirty years ago, yet Obama thinks that we shouldn’t dwell on past deeds? I smell hypocrisy and deal making here. Too bad, I’m a Democrat.
April 22nd, 2009 at 6:16 pmPresident Obama’s reported statement makes no sense. A 9/11-type commission might have been the only way to keep the Bush administration torture regime from exploding all over the place. Now it’s no longer containable, and I hope our President can deal.
April 22nd, 2009 at 6:21 pmObama reportedly rejected a 9/11-style national commission…
– - Well, Obama and Bush do have something in common.
April 22nd, 2009 at 6:23 pmWho wants a “9/11-style commission”?
April 22nd, 2009 at 6:24 pmIt’s not like it came out with the entire truth of the matter, now did it?
Congratulations to President Obama for sticking to the high road on this.
It is the judiciary’s responsibility to follow through.
And they will.
wiley Says:
——————————————————————————–
A 9/11 style commission is what?
April 22nd, 2009 at 6:13 pm
Like the entire Republican party ………..Completely useless
April 22nd, 2009 at 6:30 pmIt’s time to send all of the REpubliCAN’TS down to Gitmo for a little fun in the Cuban sun and a little “regrooving.”
April 22nd, 2009 at 6:36 pmI begin to suspect the reason we don’t have investigations and prosecutions is because of the people involved, both Republican and Democrat. If the truth becomes known the higher ups in Congress just might be up for a tour of Danbury Minimum Security.
The administration might be afraid of this. Most Americans would probably enjoy the idea of electing new representatives.
April 22nd, 2009 at 6:37 pmI don’t really agree with the reported reason Obama was against the notion of a 9/11 commission, but to my mind he’s right — it’s a big frickin’ waste of time. This should be Congress’ responsibility and they should deal with it by reinstating the Independent Counsel Act. And then get out of the way.
April 22nd, 2009 at 6:38 pmObama wants it to go away. He thinks the world will just forget if the issue gets no attention.
April 22nd, 2009 at 6:40 pmWell I know I won’t forget! Ever!
I am rather distrustful of “senior officials” who won’t be named as sources. If I didn’t hear Obama say it, I don’t believe it.
April 22nd, 2009 at 6:41 pmNone of us will. I think this is just a bullsh!t story – and really, they had no intention of having a commission, when they have such a good case for prosecution. Really the only reason they can’t start the prosecutions now, is that the Reslugs are still blocking appointments. It’s a waiting game.
April 22nd, 2009 at 6:43 pmA commission is not the answer. A commission is a whitewash.
A special prosecutor is what is called for.
If Obama or Holder doesn’t appoint one, I’m done with this guy.
April 22nd, 2009 at 6:46 pmForever and ever? Never to happen again? Is Obama immortal? Is Obama planning on remaining in office forever?
April 22nd, 2009 at 6:48 pmThere are a lot of clued-in people here. Anything short of a special prosecutor armed with subpoena power and a top secret clearance is tantamount to a whitewash operation.
April 22nd, 2009 at 6:48 pmThe 9/11 Commission was a farce.
Only those people who would agree to report on only that which they could all agree were allowed on the commission.
It was a pure political exercise and didn’t get anywhere close to the truth.
Had it been a legitimate inquiry, held in a timely manner, we might not even have to deal with torture now, and the war on Iraq might never have happened.
There has to be a special prosecutor, and the longer that Obama stalls this out, the worse it’s going to be for his presidency.
April 22nd, 2009 at 6:53 pmPresident Obama says he would have a “Bipartisan” panel. Noble aim. But see the more recent TP item where the repubs are claiming that the Armed Services Committee report a partisan document.
April 22nd, 2009 at 7:00 pmSlightly tangential but it demonstrates the need for us to come clean.
While driving this AM, heard a report on a person studying the Turkish Holocost, killing around 1 to 1.5 million Aremenians in 1915.
Even today, it is illegal in Turkey to mention it.
In the report, it was said that Hitler justified much of his program by asking if anyone still mentioned the Armenian massacre.
April 22nd, 2009 at 7:03 pmi don’t think obama is scared of anything – i DO think he believes that healthcare and other initiatives demand the most attention and energy at this time…
and that any investigation/prosecution will dash any hopes of “bipartisanship” to those ends…
so, as much as we must demand the proper retribution for these torture lies (and, gawd, will we stop there??? bushco damn near destroyed the whole world, not just our USA!), we must also work to make sure that obama’s campaign promises will be fulfilled.
doncha think?
April 22nd, 2009 at 7:06 pm9/11: Distinguishing The Propaganda From The Smoking Guns
April 22nd, 2009 at 7:07 pmYeah, energy weapons and computer graphics that EVERY network used? The truth about 9/11 has not been revealed, but if such energy weapons existed (and work well apparently)the military would use them all the time. Holograms and energy weapons are way more detremental to the truth. Holograms, get f#cking real!
April 22nd, 2009 at 7:34 pmThat’s all we need. Another farce of a feigned investigation that intentionally overlooks serious evidence (WTC 7), and provides the public with a cooked up account, while hoping propagandists are able to blackball a ridicule real investigations, hoping the crimes quietly go away.
According to how they are portraying Obama’s attitude towards this issue, it seems like he would actually want a fraudulent account of what really happened.
April 22nd, 2009 at 7:52 pmWe’re not going to have a bipartisan committee. Not with the GOP being the Grand Old Party of NO! Waste of time!
April 22nd, 2009 at 8:45 pmI’m watching Keith Olbermann and former Federal Prosecutor Elizabeth De La Vega is saying that an independent prosecutor may not guarantee indictments. If I’m understanding correctly, it may take public pressure in order to get BushCO prosecuted. I’m willing to keep the pressure on if that’s what it takes.
RE-litigate? Did I miss something? When was the original litigation?
April 22nd, 2009 at 8:48 pmI don’t believe that is correct.. how was it Pres. Obama’s CHOICE to release the memos when they were released as a result of the ACLU lawsuit??
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:21 pmIndeed there have obviously been deals. Were any of them directly between Obama and Bush/Cheney? The president has opened himself up for that accusation, and as a constitutional expert and legal scholar he should recognize that perceptions and secrecy lead to that very speculation.
While the torture issue should be the top reason to investigate the previous administration, due to the classified nature of much of the evidence in any such case, it may be far easier for congress and the DOJ to appoint prosecutors to investigate fraud involving contractors in Iraq. (Cheney did it.)
Both roads could lead to conviction, but, after all the feds got Al Capone on tax evasion. What has so far come out publicly concerning no bid contracts, nonperformance, and willful negligence (Google: electrocutions Iraq), this can of worms would certainly lead to prosecutions and convictions, without CIA and NSA involvement. Just a thought. Are you there, Mr. Attorney General, Sir. Are you there Mr. Conyers?
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:22 pmIt is my sincere hope that Obama will let other entities within the government,(eg. the Justice department!) go after these felons and he is merely trying not to get personally bogged down in the partisan blood bath. Let us not forget that the government was so preoccupied with the Clinton impeachment that they were asleep at the wheel when al-Quadea was planning to strike the U.S
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:22 pmObama’s just hoping there will be enough Republicans and Blue Dog Democrats on it to make it a whitewash and spare him from having to take a stand. There are clues in his numerous “present” votes and support for many of Bush’s evils while protesting that they were better than the alternatives. He’s spineless and unprincipled, a politician and not a statesman.
April 22nd, 2009 at 10:42 pmbuzzbomb: you’re not looking at the evidence.
April 22nd, 2009 at 10:55 pmrepublicans hate facts Says:
How about a Kenneth Starr independent counsel style investigation.
Actually, that’s the only appropriate way to handle an investigation that may affect a Presidential administration, including any White House staff.
.
AnnetteS Says:
I don’t believe that is correct.. how was it Pres. Obama’s CHOICE to release the memos when they were released as a result of the ACLU lawsuit??
He’s choosing not to use the same dodges Bush did. The problem is that all of Bush’s stonewalling and lying was necessary to cover up everything else. If you let one of them drop, then the whole thing unravels. So if Obama declines to go out of his way to block this information, then it leads to something else that he’d have to go out of his way to cover up, and if he doesn’t, it leads to something else, etc. etc. The whole house of cards falls down without a Presidential administration actively maintaining it.
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:17 pmI like the fact that Obama debated this in public and we all debated on this issue: Obama wanted it his way, the republicant’s wanted it their way, and the public wanted it their way?
What a great public debate that questioned our morals?
Obama was a Constitutional lawyer, he knew all along that this would be a big issue. But I have to give Obama kudos on this issue he wasn’t so self-centered, he listened to everyone’s gripe and made a decision that will forever have one of the greatest impacts on our Constitutional Moral Values and what it means to be an American both internally and abroad. He went with the public as a leader, the people who entrusted him to lead America out of this nightmare.
Obama played his cards right on this, I always knew he would listen to the public, otherwise, I would have never worked in his campaign? I also supported Hillary as well.
I have a puzzling question, how can Cheney write a formal request now to release more memos when he is not a public official any longer?
April 23rd, 2009 at 1:28 amShame on you President Obama.
April 23rd, 2009 at 2:12 amStop trying to protect war criminals.
There is still time for you to do the right thing.
You either stand for justice and American ideals of freedom and human rights, or you don’t.
Peru just sentenced their ex-President Fujimori to 25 yrs for human rights crimes.
Does Peru care more for justice than the United States of America?
SHAME!
Varanus komodoensis Says:
Obama was a Constitutional lawyer, he knew all along that this would be a big issue.
I think it’s just that he has enough faith in the American system of government that he realizes as long as the sitting President doesn’t commit illegal acts to prevent it, the truth will come out and justice will prevail. It’s that “hope” thing.
.
Varanus komodoensis Says:
I have a puzzling question, how can Cheney write a formal request now to release more memos when he is not a public official any longer?
I don’t think it was a formal request, I think it was just griping in an interview.
.
PFWoody488 Says:
Shame on you President Obama.
Stop trying to protect war criminals.
There is still time for you to do the right thing.
Does a President-appointed commission bring justice? Does it have a negative impact on other venues which are more likely to bring justice? Either a Congressional committee or a DoJ investigation would do better, I think. And either could have their energy sapped by an extralegal “commission” issuing its own opinions and report.
April 23rd, 2009 at 2:17 amWhatever you say about the 911 Commission report, it was not a a “whitewash.”
The authors of a whitewash want everyone’s doubts to be soothed, so the incident will be forgotten and everyone will move on. They absolutely don’t want a report full of holes which would raise more questions.
By definition, a “whitewash” gives false but reassuring answers to niggling questions. A well-done whitewash gives the appearance of being very complete and comprehensive, which the 911 Commission’s report does not do.
If the 911 Commission Report had been a true whitewash, it would have left nothing out. It would have discussed the fall of WTC7 at some length–and given a nice, convincing explanation for what happened. That’s what a whitewash does.
April 23rd, 2009 at 5:48 amFREE BERNIE MADOFF !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Look forward, not back !!!!!!!!!!!! No retribution !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
April 23rd, 2009 at 7:49 amI’m a loyal Obama supporter, but based on Dan Balz’s reporting, I’m surprised that nobody at ThinkProgress has called out Obama on his blatant flip flop on a Congressional investigation into Bush’s torture program. [Me thinks if he were a republican TP would have, but I'll move on] It makes him look weak. What made him change his mind on a bipartisan panel to look into this? It couldn’t have been the OLC memos, based on what Balz is reporting. I just don’t get it. Either he wants to hold accountable the Bush policymakers of torture or he doesn’t and wants to move “forward” without punishing anybody for violating the law.
April 23rd, 2009 at 12:29 pmThere must be an independent special prosecutor, period.
Otherwise, these events will be primed for Reightwing spin, which is already happening.
Investigate and prosecute and let those responsible for it answer for their war crimes, because that is what these events are. War crimes.
We shouldn’t move forward and forget about war crimes.
April 23rd, 2009 at 2:52 pmchucko33 Says:
I’m a loyal Obama supporter, but based on Dan Balz’s reporting, I’m surprised that nobody at ThinkProgress has called out Obama on his blatant flip flop on a Congressional investigation into Bush’s torture program.
TP has plenty of reporting on it, and many people commenting here are angry at Obama over it. In fact, if you page up and read most of the words on this very webpage, you’ll see lots and lots of what you’re complaining you don’t see.
.
chucko33 Says:
It makes him look weak. What made him change his mind on a bipartisan panel to look into this?
I’m starting to think that they’ve had to reposition themselves on the best way to handle it. There are basically three approaches
1. A Presidential commission, similar to the 9/11 commission or the JFK one.
2. Congressional hearings.
3. A DoJ investigation leading to the appointment of a special prosecutor.
So far, all we know is that Obama has given a thumbs-down to #1. Which is fine, since nobody ever believes them anyway, and they have no force of law whatsoever.
April 23rd, 2009 at 3:19 pmThanks SitesSesli Sohbet
April 30th, 2009 at 8:51 amSesli Chat
SesliSohbet
SesliChat