Barack Obama and Eric Holder filled their Justice Department with radical attorneys including 9 appointees who worked to defend Islamic terrorists during the Bush years. All of the 9 lawyers, according to Holder, are eligible to work on general detainee matters, even if there are specific parts of some cases they cannot be involved in.
Yesterday it was reported that this radical pool of attorneys cleared the two Bush attorneys who wrote memos that paved the way for waterboarding of terrorism suspects. Waterboarding was banned by the Obama administration despite the fact that it was a great success and saved thousands of American lives after 9-11.
Jennifer Rubin has more on this decision by the Obama Justice Department:
The Justice Department has finally closed a sorry chapter in its history — the attempt to criminalize the work of Department lawyers who rendered legal judgment on the use of enhanced interrogation techniques in the wake of the worst terrorist attack in American history. The Office of Professional Responsibility, as the Washington Post report notes, had doggedly pursued John Yoo and Jay Bybee, who as Justice Department lawyers authored memos providing advice and direction on enhanced interrrogation methods including waterboarding. In a Friday information dump (which tells you it does not aid the cause of the administration and those seeking Yoo’s and Bybee’s punishment), we got a glimpse at two drafts of OPR’s report, its final report, and then the recommendation of David Margolis, a career lawyer and Associate Deputy Attorney General.
Advertisement - story continues below
Margolis’s report is 69 pages long. Margolis essentially shreds the work of OPR, finding no basis for a referral of professional misconduct for either lawyer. It is noteworthy that all throughout, Margolis adopts many of the criticisms of OPR’s work that outgoing Attorney General Michael Mukasey and his deputy Mark Filip rendered before leaving office at the end of the Bush administration.
At times the work of OPR itself seems to have violated the professional standards it was charged with enforcing. Sloppiness abounds…
The bottom line: Margolis finds the work of Yoo and Bybee “contained some significant flaws,” but that “the number and significance of them can now be debated.” (p. 68) What is clear is that there is no basis — and never was — for stripping these lawyers of their professional licenses, let alone criminally prosecuting them as many on the Left demanded.