If this witch hunt goes ahead, congress should also look into the many unanswered questions surrounding the Clinton presidency.

Al, Bill's involvement in the Johnstown Flood has been throughly covered. Deal with it.

But, the shame of our constitutional provision that only citizens born in the US can become presidents, precludes McCain from asking General Dostum to come to the US, become a citizen and run as his VP mate in 2012. John has such "heroes" in his limited vision.

Hey! Who gives a shit what federal law enforcement feels "obligated" to do?

President John McCain says back off, so, god damn it, back the hell off!

We don't need to go into any stuff that shouldn't (legally) have happened. We deal that way with the corporations, so that's what we ought to do with BushCo.

I was disappointed that Obama had initially decided to avoid looking into this. It seems that this isn't just a bunch of isolated incidents that could be ignored.

As for John McCain, is he for real? I realize that history is littered with failed laws and bans on the horrible things that humanity does to humanity, but it shouldn't stop anyone from trying. As well, sorry you old fart, but American prestige is already battered.

I'm thinking that Repub reluctance has more to do with their complicity in this whole mess.

Sweeping under the rug and only looking forward seemed to work for a senior officer in the Americal Division. "My Lai, oh my, oh my, move on, move on, nothing to see here" - Hmmm, yeah, it really stopped him from becoming Secretary of State, eh? Ah, the revered General Powell.

I think this current circumstance provides a perfect chance for the administration to begin delving into the misdeeds of the Bush administration. Obama has said that looking backwards may not be in the best interests of the country, and doing so has helped established his validity as a leader, period, as opposed to just a rampant partisan elected to counteract eight years of tomfoolery.

But having established his validity, and being confronted with new evidence as to the misdeeds of the Bush administration, I think he can justify an investigation.

The question remains, though, as to how those of us who support such an investigation will answer the claims of the rightwing, which will surely squawk about how by establishing an investigation when initially he wanted to move onward, Obama is being a liar and a hypocrite.

My larger beef these says deals with leftists/liberals who have become fairly harsh critics of the Obama administration, complaining about the President's inability to enact their favorite policy even though, overall, he has done a fine job. The criticisms he has received from the left do little more than establish a failure meme in the media, which gets amplified by the rightwing when it chirps about the fact that the stimulus has "failed," etc.

Yes, berththeclock, but I believe it DID prevent him from running for president-nobody was paying attention to his my Lai role during the Vietnam era when he was nominated for Sec State.

We will all be better off when meandering New Speak from the likes of John McCain are not part of--much less the center of--'responsible' political discourse.

Why the MSM continues to spotlight this man and his tired worldview is beyond me.

I just watched Chuck Tool try to spin this to justify Cheney's secrecy and try to claim that it was just an idea in the earliest stages of popping into Hayden and Cheney's heads. Therefore, there is no oblication to report to the select committees on every little inkling of an idea. Fortunately, a Rep. Eshoo was there to rebutt Chuck the Schmuck's obfuscation.

castanea: the media and the Republicans will shriek to the heavens that Obama is culpable for all sorts of heinous mis-deeds regardless of whatever criticism comes from the left.

I'm critical of Obama because I think he's done nothing like the job he should be doing (& yes, I'm well aware of the ghastly mess he took on when he became president). First of all, that stimulus bill, with all those unhelpful tax cuts so that he could have bipartisan bonafides & get 80 votes when anybody could see that the Republicans wouldn't vote for a law stating that "America is the Bestest Evah Country" if it was sponsored by Dems. It was silly politics that turned out to be exceedingly costly. I think his economic team is a joke. They're only interested in protecting and shoring up their pals on Wall Street. I do not like the numerous ways he's following in Bush's footsteps regarding secrecy and executive power and unlawful and indefinite detention. I do not like the way he is dragging his feet regarding gay rights. There are other things as well, but what really gets me going is the knowledge that Obama is a very smart man. He should know better. I've read that I & others like me should be patient, but, honestly. Democrats have a small window of time in which to work and the largest majorities I've ever seen since I started paying attention. They should be working together to get a whole bunch of things done that are vitally necessary for Americans -- real folks, not just rich folks -- and for the world. Instead we get tepid insipid lawmaking at the expense of the future.

Bush got just about everything he wanted -- to our collective shame as a country -- with nothing like the majorities Obama enjoys. It's time for all Dems to step up and remember they represent the people. That was, after all, the original intent of our government.

And finally, I absolutely refuse to be like our brethren on the right, who blindly & enthusiastically accepted every asinine idea from the Bush "braintrust" with very few exceptions.

Whether there is an investigation or not, it's refreshing to me just to see Holder publicly considering the a possibility that is contrary to Obama's stated desires. The very idea of an attorney general exercising that kind of independence must be confusing the shit out of Bush and Gonzales.

The question remains, though, as to how those of us who support such an investigation will answer the claims of the rightwing, which will surely squawk about how by establishing an investigation when initially he wanted to move onward, Obama is being a liar and a hypocrite.

"My fellow Americans, when I entered office, I felt that the demands of the present crisis required us to look forward, not dwell on policy disagreements from the past eight years. In my worst nightmares I did not imagine that a President of the United States, directly or through his cronies, would seek to undermine the rule of law, bypass the duly elected representatives of the people, or engage in heinous and unjustifiable affronts such as illegal domestic surveillance, torture, or even the institution of assassinations squads. Recent revelations have generated widespread concern that my predecessor did in fact commit such offenses. If President Bush is innocent of such actions, then these accusations mar his good name and only a thorough investigation can dispel such slander. If he is not, then his actions mar the good name of this great country and its law-abiding citizens, and constitute a direct assault on the basic principles of advanced democracy. In such a case, only a thorough investigation can root out this cancer and restore civic virtue. Since both possibilities demand investigation, I am hereby announcing my full support for whatever actions Attorney General Holden feels are demanded by the nature of his office; and I hereby direct all Administration officials to offer their full and unconditional support as well. A great nation does not hide from its flaws, and we will get to the truth."

What continues to blow my mind is the regular reminder that there are people who still speak of Bill Clinton and George W. Bush in the same sentence, implying that their actions and the damage they did to their country's image abroad were more or less the same.

Clinton did things he hadn't ought to have done, and maybe it's true the nation and the world doesn't know the details and extent of the Clinton pardons. But his sexual escapades, however embarrassing, did nothing whatever to damage the country's reputation or lower its standard in the world. Nobody got hurt, except perhaps the women involved; while not suggesting that is inconsequential, I'd point out that all of them are alive today.

By way of comparison, George W. Bush set relations between America and the rest of the world back to revolutionary times. Those who did not actively oppose America's goals did not wish her success in her objectives. Each day makes it clearer that he actively took part in the formulation of policies that directed America's representatives to torture helpless prisoners in order to extract intelligence information they did not possess, despite the advice of experts in the field that it was ineffective. When confronted with international dislike, even through the bubble of approval his supporters threw up around him, he mugged and smirked and conveyed the impression that America didn't care what anyone else thought, because it was big and powerful enough that it didn't need friendships. Well, how's that working out for you?

Closer inspection has not even begun to reveal or remind Americans of the extent to which their leader knowingly misled them into war with fabricated connections and threats, because he was well aware his countrymen would never support an invasion based solely upon bringing democracy to Iraq. Similarly, his initiatives to pry deeply into the private lives and communications of ordinary Americans, so as to sample such things as national will and the success of propaganda offerings should make you squirm with humiliation.

Please stop speaking of Bush and any other western leader as if they were equally abhorrent and loathsome in their words and deeds.

John McCain needs a serious punch in the mouth, says this normally pacifistic poster. Really, contradicting everything this administration does is not a coherent political philosophy, but it does illustrate that this useless old goat's time is way past over.

John McCain: "And we are committed to making sure it never happens again."

really? committed? is that all it takes, is saying that you're 'committed' to making sure that torture, violation of constitutional rights, indiscriminant slaughter, war crimes, etc. 'never happens again'.

Maybe that's all it takes, what you'd call an 'act of faith'. Sure, John, if that's what you want. In spanish, it's 'auto de fe', and perhaps that's exactly what's needed.

I think that investigation, prosecution, conviction and imprisonment would be an act of grandmotherly kindness by comparison. Worth a try.

Mature, credible, transparent democracies don't ignore official wrongdoing for fear of public embarrassment.

Maybe, but Republicans do.

I always thought that investigations in whatever form by whatever name, would be easier if information about the program(s) and actions was released. So many people believe the Bush administration, congressional Republicans, and the sympathetic/compliant media that this was a no-big-deal kind of thing. Sure many will still believe that even if more information is out there, but more and more information may make it impossible to do nothing.

"Looking forward" includes looking at presidents down the road - number 5, 6, 7 - from now. And if the Constitution isn't protected NOW from the abuses of a president, the one down the road may become more of a Constitutional horror than the one who just was. And then looking forward from then, as a democracy, will simply cease.

Forgotten--

"And finally, I absolutely refuse to be like our brethren on the right, who blindly & enthusiastically accepted every asinine idea from the Bush "braintrust" with very few exceptions."

I could not agree with this statement any more than I already do, but it proves my point with regard to critcism. I am willing to allow for a diversity of opinions and outcomes from the administration because I feel that the trends of the Obama administration are headed in the proper direction.

I'm not trying to pick a fight by any means, but from what you wrote, you seem to have little tolerance for any outcomes that aren't tied directly to what you want, resulting in your criticisms. You want Obama to do everything you want him to do, in other words, and are unsatisfied if he doesn't.

And whereas the media and rightwingers will always whine, there is a huge swath of moderates who voted for Obama. I've been wrong before, of course, but I'd wager that the more it seems that not only does the rightwing hate Obama, but that the leftwing also has harsh criticisms, the more that the administration will lose favor with the middle.

Measured, rational criticisms are fine, and I'm not advocating selling out liberal ideals just to curry favor with the middle of the political spectrum. All I'm saying is that the more we hear "I'm a liberal who voted for Obama but I'm sooooo disappointed that he ...." the more we devalue the administration, and the more we risk losing enactment of those liberal ideals.

What a great idea!!- let's prosecute those who have kept us safe since 9/11. If Ogabe's clique goes ahead with this leftist wet dream witch hunt then he knows that his many transgressions will be subject to the same "investigations" -

Bill Clinton was the most investigated president in US history. Well over $50 million was spent To repeatedly discover he was an unfaithful husband who wasn't honest about his affairs.

A pittance of that's been spent investigating Bush's actions. Under Bush, more American civilians died than under any president in modern times and possibly, than any president ever. More foreign civilians died because of his decisions than any president in the past 35 years. And a staggering amount of evidence already exists that Bush's decisions were 'justified' via false presentations, faked data, deliberately distorted data and outright lies, all under cloaks of secrecy historically utilized by the most crooked of leaders.

The political ramifications are and should be a side issue without relevance to the average citizen or our democracy's health. What's critical is gaining an accurate view of one of our deadliest presidents. More than anything, we have to design methods to prevent future abuses and death dealing decisions by crooked leaders.

That'll be impossible if we remain timid about gaining knowledge of yesterday's leaders.

Only cowards fear to know the truth. Cowards who'd let their political fears abandon the important ongoing effort of restoring and maintaining a healthy democracy.

"What a great idea!!- let's prosecute those who have kept us safe since 9/11."

Too bad those same people didn't give a shit about keeping us safe before 9/11.

Well Manchu you are correct- but I thought you leftists didn't want to hear anymore about Clinton.

BTW- While we are having investigations about the past what about Mark Rich?????

So tell me, t, what were all the great improvements to America's strategy concerning battling terrorism pre-9/11 did the Bush administration implement, in comparison to Clinton's strategy?

And Mark Rich? Seriously?

It might be best to look at any reluctance on the part of the administration in its more positive aspect:
The MSM and other Republican enablers will attempt to paint ANY investigation into the Bush administration's egregious crimes as a partisan "witch-hunt"; it's their only hope. Otherwise the Republicans face political defeat, personal disgrace and, quite possibly, prison.
Our aim should be to ensure that a large and growing group of citizens, hopefully reaching to a majority and greater, view the Obama administration's actions as being directed by the LAW and NOT partisanship. Having not jumped head-first into investigations in January 2009 has already helped form that impression. And as a bonus: the laws are already there, they simply need following; there is no need to pass any new legislation on what most assuredly would have been party lines.
We need to continually emphasize that the rule of law for EVERYONE is all that we as progressives, liberals, Democrats, independents, or whatever, want.