What I haven't heard discussed yet on the topic of "what to do next" about torture is this: How can the Obama Administration even consider immunizing people involved in approving of or committing acts of torture without first conducting a full investigation into this matter which would include taking depositions of everyone involved under oath and sworn statements and then presenting the evidence to a Grand Jury? What Obama has effectively done is try to circumvent the order of how this should logically unfold. How can anyone even know if these torture participants were just following orders unless they offer that defense themselves under oath? How do we find out everyone's role in approving of or not doing anything to stop this program without a full investigation? Right now I would have to claim that Obama is actively involved in obstruction of justice - a very serious crime - considering our laws and treaty obligations which require him to investigate war crimes and the crime of torture. He can't immunize anyone without that becoming a crime in and of itself.

While I am not at all shocked that Obama would behave this way, I am terribly disappointed and completely disgusted that he has chosen this path. Not only isn't this change it is allowing for a future president to fully know they can break the law and get away with it. It appears the only thing that offends the pols in Washington anymore but barely is when they get caught with their pants down in an airport bathroom or with an intern.

What Obama has accomplished is to make more people distrust their government. An outcome that was never represented in his campaign. That's what happens when you cloak things in secrecy. We all know those photos have absolutely nothing to do with government secrets that we all would agree shouldn't be shared. But to claim no one should see these photos because they might inflame "our enemies" or "embarrass us" should be an insult to everyone. I feel as If Obama has morphed into Jack Nicholson in "A Few Good Men" shouting at Tom Cruise [the defense attorney] on the witness stand: "You can't handle the truth!"

More troubling is the fact that Obama too seems to want to put the onus on torture on "a few bad apples" like BushCo did when everyone now knows that Bush signed off on this program and lots of high level officials were involved in it.

Obama is now very close to treading on water that includes Obstruction of Justice of war crimes. Why he would be willing to put himself in this precarious position to protect the Bush crime family is a question we must ask. And the answer could well be that he thinks he can get away with just like Bush did. And with the GOP in shambles who's to say he won't?

What's also troubling is many of the legal decisions Obama has been making, a first year law student from an LA diploma mill shouldn't make. What we really have is a President who thinks he is above the law and one who has been defending some of the absolute worst abuses of Bush's claims of executive authority using really bad legal arguments to do so. It's really the Harvard Law Grad who was head of Law Review that is the one who should be embarrassed.

It is clear that we can't trust Obama anymore. Someone who could be so easily pressured by the likes of Lindsay Graham and Joe Lieberman and others to go back on his word to the ACLU can't be trusted. Deals and promises like this made between attorneys working on a case should not be broken for the lame reasons Obama gave.

Glenn,

I don't know if this will shed more light on many of these very disturbing Obama decisions or not and I agree with you that one shouldn't have to search for reasons or explanations but I thought John Dean presented the best explanation so far even if he didn't make a case for why trust has to work both ways.

The Politics of Excusing Torture In The Name of National Security

By JOHN W. DEAN

http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20090515.html

What disturbs me is why we haven't yet seen Obama try and sell why we as a country need to defend the rule of law and prosecute serious crimes. Why we can trust our own legal system to do this. Instead, most of his energy has been spent trying to sell us why we need to look forward and concocting legal gimmicks like the Military Commission. We are talking about an articulate very likable person who took the country by storm, who now appears inept at selling the rule of law and the strengths of our judicial system.

The problem the Military Commission tribunal poses as do all of the cases that involve torture, illegal detentions, denying rights to detainees to contest their detainment and serious executive abuses of power, all progressives and civil libertarians have to root for Obama to lose. We cannot hope he wins any of these cases or prevails on any of these issues if we believe in a free open and democratic society where no one is above the law.

If Obama knows better, which one must assume from a Harvard Law grad, than he needs to start acting like it. RJ