# Did Obama just reverse himself on prosecution of ex-Administration officials? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [April 22, 2009, 12:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-obama-just-reverse-himself-on-prosecution-of-ex-administration-officials/493918 "2009-04-22T00:07:48Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![MovieMogul](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f08c70/32.png) [@MovieMogul](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MovieMogul)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2009, 4:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-obama-just-reverse-himself-on-prosecution-of-ex-administration-officials/493918/21 "2009-04-22T16:27:15Z")
> [@Gyrate](#): > > That’s my reading of it as well - Obama’s statement left room to prosecute those who went below and beyond the parameters set out by the Bush administration’s lawyers (which, for example, waterboarding one person 183 times in a month did). It also leaves open the possibility of prosecuting those CIA officials who were torturing detainees before the POTUS legal team created the CYA memos in the first place. ---
**Author:** ![Cliffy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/59ef9b/32.png) [@Cliffy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cliffy)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2009, 6:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-obama-just-reverse-himself-on-prosecution-of-ex-administration-officials/493918/22 "2009-04-22T18:08:57Z")
> [@ArchiveGuy](#): > > It also leaves open the possibility of prosecuting those CIA officials who were torturing detainees before the POTUS legal team created the CYA memos in the first place. Yes, or who were more aggressive or otherwise outside the ambit of what had been approved in the memos. Sen. Whitehouse discussed this briefly on the Rachel Maddow Show a few nights ago. I for one have no objection to prosecuting the people who did the torture so long as we also prosecute those who ordered it. –Cliffy ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2009, 6:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-obama-just-reverse-himself-on-prosecution-of-ex-administration-officials/493918/23 "2009-04-22T18:20:13Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > But **Archive Guy** ’s point is well taken - it’s not his call alone and shouldn’t be. I don’t get this part. Isn’t the President the highest executive officer in the land? Doesn’t the Attorney General work for him? The President can fire the AG, but he can’t tell him what to do? ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2009, 6:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-obama-just-reverse-himself-on-prosecution-of-ex-administration-officials/493918/24 "2009-04-22T18:24:10Z")
The president is not supposed to interfere in the Justice Department’s decisions regarding criminal prosecutions and investigations. That’s a non-political function of the Justice Department. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2009, 6:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-obama-just-reverse-himself-on-prosecution-of-ex-administration-officials/493918/25 "2009-04-22T18:30:23Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > I don’t get this part. Isn’t the President the highest executive officer in the land? Doesn’t the Attorney General work for him? > > The President can fire the AG, but he can’t tell him what to do? What **acsenray** said. The President does not get to tell the Attorney General who to prosecute. I guess we can thank the previous administration for the idea that the AG is the President’s employee and legal hatchet man. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2009, 6:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-obama-just-reverse-himself-on-prosecution-of-ex-administration-officials/493918/26 "2009-04-22T18:40:52Z")
> [@acsenray](#): > > The president is not supposed to interfere in the Justice Department’s decisions regarding criminal prosecutions and investigations. That’s a non-political function of the Justice Department. This seems to implicitly assume that the president is inherently political & that the Justice Department is not. I would question that. In addition, once you take that approach, maybe the president shouldn’t be involved in anything at all, and the entire government should be run by apolitical bureaucrats. Do you want Defense Ministry decisions to be political? Education decisions? ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2009, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-obama-just-reverse-himself-on-prosecution-of-ex-administration-officials/493918/27 "2009-04-22T18:50:10Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > In addition, once you take that approach, maybe the president shouldn’t be involved in anything at all, and the entire government should be run by apolitical bureaucrats. Do you want Defense Ministry decisions to be political? Education decisions? Most of these departments are headed by political appointees and staffed by career civil servants. There’s a reason for that. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2009, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-obama-just-reverse-himself-on-prosecution-of-ex-administration-officials/493918/28 "2009-04-22T18:50:30Z")
It’s a pretty well-established principle of American government, at least, that decisions regarding criminal prosecutions should not be influenced by other elected officials and political officers. ---
**Author:** ![Beadalin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/3be4f8/32.png) [@Beadalin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Beadalin)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2009, 6:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-obama-just-reverse-himself-on-prosecution-of-ex-administration-officials/493918/29 "2009-04-22T18:52:11Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > This seems to implicitly assume that the president is inherently political & that the Justice Department is not. I would question that. Well, there are three branches of government, see… ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2009, 6:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-obama-just-reverse-himself-on-prosecution-of-ex-administration-officials/493918/30 "2009-04-22T18:52:55Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Most of these departments are headed by political appointees and staffed by career civil servants. There’s a reason for that. That doesn’t address the question. > [@acsenray](#): > > It’s a pretty well-established principle of American government, at least, that decisions regarding criminal prosecutions should not be influenced by other elected officials and political officers. Cite? ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2009, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-obama-just-reverse-himself-on-prosecution-of-ex-administration-officials/493918/31 "2009-04-22T18:57:19Z")
Did it escape you that the outrage over the Bush administration firings of U.S. attorneys was about attempts by the administration to influence decisions by federal prosecutors on when and if to bring criminal indictments? It is generally not accepted as legitimate for the executive to manage criminal prosecution. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2009, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-obama-just-reverse-himself-on-prosecution-of-ex-administration-officials/493918/32 "2009-04-22T18:59:44Z")
Trying to follow this. So, if I understand correctly, there was no reversal here. Obama is merely reverting things to the way they were wrt prosecutions to the pre-Bush stance of the President…yes? -XT ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2009, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-obama-just-reverse-himself-on-prosecution-of-ex-administration-officials/493918/33 "2009-04-22T18:59:50Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > That doesn’t address the question. It does addresse your argument ad absurdum. Generally speaking the philosophies at these departments come from elected officials at the top, and they’re staffed by trained civil servants who are supposed to know the nuts and bolts of how the job is done and by somewhat immune to political pressure since they bureaucrats and not political appointees. I think it’s a fairly good principle, although I recognize that esteemed people like Monica Goodling don’t agree. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2009, 7:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-obama-just-reverse-himself-on-prosecution-of-ex-administration-officials/493918/34 "2009-04-22T19:03:07Z")
Acsenray, People get outraged about a lot of things especially when it comes to Bush. Plus, the accusation in that case was that the firings were made for specifically political reasons, i.e. failure to prosecute Democrats (or something of the sort) not because they were made by a political person. People arguing your position in this thread seem to be arguing that it’s Eric Holder’s decision, while Alberto Gonzalez (who ocupied the same office) was the guy criticized back then. Because it was the rationale, not the position. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2009, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-obama-just-reverse-himself-on-prosecution-of-ex-administration-officials/493918/35 "2009-04-22T19:04:26Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > It does addresse your argument ad absurdum. Generally speaking the philosophies at these departments come from elected officials at the top, and they’re staffed by trained civil servants who are supposed to know the nuts and bolts of how the job is done and by somewhat immune to political pressure since they bureaucrats and not political appointees. Let me try this again. Do you think the president should not be involved in decisions about the Defense or Education departments? ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2009, 7:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-obama-just-reverse-himself-on-prosecution-of-ex-administration-officials/493918/36 "2009-04-22T19:10:57Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > Let me try this again. That’s okay, I don’t think we need to try it again. You’ve successfully proved that if taken to absurd extremes, it would be a bad idea. Unfortunately that was obvious at the beginning and nobody said otherwise. The AG reflects the president’s judicial philosophy and the head of (for example) the department of education reflects his views on education. But I wouldn’t want the president telling the AG who to prosecute and I wouldn’t want him making up questions for a standardized test for fourth graders either. I’m not sure how the education or defense departments could be politicized quite the same way prosecutions can - you can’t go after your political enemies with frivolous education, as far as I know - but that’s the best comparison I can think of at the moment. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2009, 7:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-obama-just-reverse-himself-on-prosecution-of-ex-administration-officials/493918/37 "2009-04-22T19:19:21Z")
> [@](#): > > The AG reflects the president’s judicial philosophy and the head of (for example) the department of education reflects his views on education. But I wouldn’t want the president telling the AG who to prosecute and I wouldn’t want him making up questions for a standardized test for fourth graders either. Whether to prosecute former CIA or legal people involved in torture is the type of major policy decision that presidents routinely involve themselves in at Defense, Education and other departments. It’s not remotely comparable to making up questions for a test. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2009, 7:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-obama-just-reverse-himself-on-prosecution-of-ex-administration-officials/493918/38 "2009-04-22T19:33:12Z")
Mary Jo White was a U.S. attorney in the Clinton administration. In [this interview](http://www.newsweek.com/id/36208/page/2) with _Newsweek_, she says – > [@](#): > > **Is there any official protocol to prevent politicians from trying to influence prosecutors?** > > Essentially, the protocol is if you get a call from someone in Congress or the White House, you refer them to the Department of Justice, the Office of Legislative Affairs, and they are actually a buffer between the U.S. attorneys and politicians. _So, basically, [the] protocol is you’re not to call the U.S. attorney, and that is known to members of Congress and the White House._ If you have a question, you call the Office of Legislative Affairs. There can be, obviously, legitimate inquiries about certain things. But you need that filter or buffer so you don’t get that kind of outside pressures on U.S. attorneys. We need to be sure that tradition is maintained. The protocol is that the White House and the Congress _are not supposed to have direct contact_ with federal prosecutors regarding specific cases. What does that mean? The implication is that the White House is not supposed to communicate to prosecutors its wishes regarding when or if charges are laid in any particular case. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2009, 7:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-obama-just-reverse-himself-on-prosecution-of-ex-administration-officials/493918/39 "2009-04-22T19:39:54Z")
> [@acsenray](#): > > The protocol is that the White House and the Congress _are not supposed to have direct contact_ with federal prosecutors regarding specific cases. What does that mean? The implication is that the White House is not supposed to communicate to prosecutors its wishes regarding when or if charges are laid in any particular case. 1. There is a difference between “someone in the White House” and the POTUS. The POTUS is the direct boss of the AG. “Someone in the WH” is just a connected guy. 2. You yourself say “specific cases”. We are not at the point of “specific cases” at this time. The decision here is a policy one, about a broader category of prosecutions. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2009, 8:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-obama-just-reverse-himself-on-prosecution-of-ex-administration-officials/493918/40 "2009-04-22T20:00:31Z")
“The White House” pretty clearly includes the president or someone acting on his or her instructions. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-obama-just-reverse-himself-on-prosecution-of-ex-administration-officials/493918.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-obama-just-reverse-himself-on-prosecution-of-ex-administration-officials/493918.md?page=3)