Obama Signals His Reluctance to Look Into Bush Policies

January 12th, 2009

The same regime has been getting away with the same types of crimes for nearly 50 years. Obama is complicit in the latest iterations of it. What do the dumbshit “liberals” think he’s going to do, throw himself in jail?

Via: New York Times:

President-elect Barack Obama signaled in an interview broadcast Sunday that he was unlikely to authorize a broad inquiry into Bush administration programs like domestic eavesdropping or the treatment of terrorism suspects.

But Mr. Obama also said prosecutions would proceed if the Justice Department found evidence that laws had been broken.

As a candidate, Mr. Obama broadly condemned some counterterrorism tactics of the Bush administration and its claim that the measures were justified under executive powers. But his administration will face competing demands: pressure from liberals who want wide-ranging criminal investigations, and the need to establish trust among the country’s intelligence agencies. At the Central Intelligence Agency, in particular, many officers flatly oppose any further review and may protest the prospect of a broad inquiry into their past conduct.

In the clearest indication so far of his thinking on the issue, Mr. Obama said on the ABC News program “This Week With George Stephanopoulos” that there should be prosecutions if “somebody has blatantly broken the law” but that his legal team was still evaluating interrogation and detention issues and would examine “past practices.”

Mr. Obama added that he also had “a belief that we need to look forward as opposed to looking backwards.”

4 Responses to “Obama Signals His Reluctance to Look Into Bush Policies”

  1. anothernut says:

    What do the dumbshit “liberals” think he’s going to do, throw himself in jail?

    But, I think, even if Obama himself were complicit, his culpability wouldn’t be anything like BushCo’s, and the case against him would be a much, much harder one to make. Other Democrats, that’s another story — even their publicly-known complicity would be enough to damage their careers, let alone what would be revealed if the People could perform a real investigation. I bring this up because if Obama were truly willing to do the right thing, (which millions of Americans believed he would), letting the chips fall where they may (i.e., screwing many high-ranking Dems, if that’s what it took), I believe he could pursue criminal charges against BushCo with little direct danger to himself. But he clearly won’t, because he is one with the Machine, as everything he’s said since securing the Presidency has indicated.

    And (if I may drone on) what’s really criminal about this is: it further promotes the idea that our “rulers” are indeed part of an elite class, and that they are not subject to the same rule of law as the rest of us.

  2. Bigelow says:

    We “voted”, choosing either the good cop or bad cop. To put it in television terms we are all brainwashed with: they are the perps and citizens are the victims.

  3. tm says:

    Speak for yourself Bigelow. I, and about 1% of other Americans, “voted” for Ralph Nader, who refused to play either good cop or bad cop. And I wonder how many of those useful fools for the state who criticized 3rd party voters for “wasting their vote” now wish they had wasted their vote too.

  4. messianicdruid says:

    “…his culpability wouldn’t be anything like BushCo’s, and the case against him would be a much, much harder one to make.”

    Well, he is just getting started, after all.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.