Paybacks for the Last Eight Years

It seemed to me that the whole next to last page of The New York Times "Week in Review" Section was devoted to the question of trying the guilty from the Bush Administration. This is page 11 and is called "Transitions."

Charles Fried, "History's Verdict."
Dahlia Lithwick, "Forgive Not."
Jack M Balkin, "A Body of Inquiries,"
And, of course, Maureen Dowd, "An Extremist Makeover?"

My personal opinion is that we are better off not trying people if we don't have to. I believe the Impeachment of President Nixon helped put people in a frame of mind that allowed for the Impeachment of President Clinton 20 years later. Didn't someone once say revenge was a dish best served cold? (Wikipedia tells us the phrase came to us via the British, from Afghanistan.)

However, the real question, in my mind, is why we didn't try and convict the totality of the US Congress for the crimes we believe happened during the eight years of the Bush Administration?

I think Charles Fried gets at this in his concluding paragraph:

Our veneration of the rule of law makes us believe that courts and procedures and judges can put right every wrong. But we must remember: our leaders, ultimately, were chosen by us; their actions were often ratified by our representatives; we chose them again in 2004. Their repudiation this Nov. 4 and the public, historical memory of them is the aptest response to what they did.

Dahlia Lithwick makes the same point about our responsibilities in her opening sentence: "INSTEAD of looking closely at what high-level officeholders in the Bush administration have done over the past eight years, and recognizing what we have tacitly permitted..."

The fact is, the US Congress has not only the right, but the duty to investigate what is happening, both inside and outside the Government. The Congressional Research Service spoke to this in 2007. It stated, on page CRS-2:

The power of Congress to punish for contempt is inextricably related to the power of Congress to investigate. Generally speaking, Congress’s authority to investigate and obtain information, including but not limited to confidential information, is extremely broad. While there is no express provision of the Constitution or specific statute authorizing the conduct of congressional oversight or investigations, the Supreme Court has firmly established that such power is essential to the legislative function as to be implied from the general vesting of legislative powers in Congress. The broad legislative authority to seek and enforce informational demands was unequivocally established in two Supreme Court rulings arising out of the 1920’s Teapot Dome scandal.

The US Congress, whether in the hands of the Republicans (2001 to 2006) or the Democrats (2007-2008) has been responsible:

• To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;
  
• To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
  
• To provide and maintain a Navy;
  
• To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
  
• To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
  
• To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

And they did not properly and faithfully execute their duties and yet we did not throw them out, each and every last one of them. They were in a symbiotic relationship with the Administration. They were enablers of the Administration. Lets start there, where our votes mattered the most.

Then we can ask if the would-be Jack Bauers should be tried for crimes against the Law of Armed Conflict and other offenses. After we have sorted out Congress, then it will be time to see who went beyond the established parameters and decide if those individuals should be punished as the law allows.

Regards -- Cliff