By Adam Fogle | April 22nd, 2009 | 4 comments

lograham

SENATORS SEND LETTER TO PRESIDENT ENCOURAGING HIM TO LOOK FORWARD

As President Obama weighs the decision over whether or not to prosecute former Bush Administration officials who were involved in harsh interrogation tactics, one of South Carolina’s most prominent lawmakers has spoken up.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, who serves on the Judiciary Committee, Wednesday joined with Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.) in sending a letter to Obama strongly urging him not to prosecute government officials who provided legal advice related to detainee interrogations.

“Pursuing such prosecutions would, we believe, have serious negative effects on the candor with which officials in any administration provide their best advice,” the letter said. “Providing poor legal advice is always undesirable, and the Department of Justice is currently conducting an internal ethics review of the OLC memos, but that is a quite a different matter from making legal advice with which we may disagree into a crime.”

The Justice Department released four memos last week that revealed some Bush administration officials authorized interrogation techniques that some have classified as torture.

The letter from Graham, McCain and Lieberman encouraged the president to move forward in a constructive fashion to address America’s significant challenges the issue of detainees.

“Given the great challenges that face our country in dealing with detainees currently held at Guantanamo Bay, Bagram Airfield, and elsewhere, along with detainees that will undoubtedly fall into U.S. custody as the result of future operations, we have every interest in looking forward to solutions, not backward to recriminations,” wrote the senators. “That is why we do not support the idea of a commission that would focus on the mistakes of the past.”

“We agree with your position that CIA interrogators, carrying out operations that had been deemed lawful by the Attorney General, should not be the subject of prosecution. Indeed, we addressed such a possibility in the 2005 Detainee Treatment Act, which holds that “good faith reliance on advice of counsel should be an important factor, among others,” when considering whether CIA interrogators had good reason to believe that their activities were legal.”

Obama at first said he was opposed to the idea, but yesterday backed off and said he was considering it.

Said the senators in their letter to the president, “As you have made clear, we are a nation at war. Appreciating that reality, we look forward to working with you on the panoply of detainee issues, ranging from interrogation standards to the disposition of detainee cases, which will engage our country going forward. In the interest of national security, it is the future, rather than the past, on which we believe America’s gaze must be fixed.”


4 Responses to “Graham to Obama: No prosecutions”

  1. 1.
    Posted by Bill A on 04/22/09 at 7:05 pm

    “As you have made clear, we are a nation at war.”

    Mr. Graham should check the constitution to see what is nessecary to declare war.

  2. 2.
    Posted by Guero on 04/23/09 at 8:11 am

    “Harsh tactics”? I don’t think so. The Mississippi Supreme Court, a noted commie court, declared water boarding torture in the 1930s. The Allies prosecuted and executed Japanese war criminals for waterboarding.

    The Bushies need to be afraid because they should be prosoecuted for war crimes. Lying to the American public is bad enough but these proud Repugnant Party members need to know the majesty of the law.

  3. 3.
    Posted by Charles on 04/23/09 at 10:26 am

    Absolutly no one in government, including Obama, wants to prosecute these lawyers. As a result everyone is intentionally misstating the facts of this case.

    Graham, says the issue is do we want to prosecute lawyers for giving bad legal advice. If that were the issue, this would be over. Its not a crime for a lawyer to misinterpret the law and no prosecutor is going to prosecute another lawyer for doing so.

    The legal question here is, did these lawyers know what was occurring or about to occur was illegal, but on the instruction of others provide legal memorandum they knew to be flawed in order to shield from prosecution those who were going to or had committed the illegal acts. If so this becomes a criminal conspiracy.

    To put this in terms that are less politically inflamatory. Assume I run ABC Corp. ABC has an offshore subsidary which has lost 50 million dollars, and I do not want to tell my shareholders about that loss. I ask my lawyer and he says I am legally obligated to tell my shareholders. I tell him that is not the answer I want, and he comes up with a legal opinion for my files, which he knows is flawed, but which says I do not have to report the loss to the shareholders. We would have both committed a crime.

    I’m not saying that happened, I’m just saying we need to get the allegations correct here, and stop mistating the case.

  4. 4.
    Posted by lou on 04/23/09 at 12:51 pm

    Someone should stand behind their stupid decisions to torture. The American people don’t particularly care who, as long as someone takes some responsibility and blame.
    We do torture. There is proof.
    Lindsey is an idiot and has total disrespect for the rule of law.

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>