The latest news is that Holder is getting closer to a torture probe, but
reportedly only considering cases where CIA interrogators went beyond the rules established by the Bush administration’s lawyers, rather than investigating the legality of those rules themselves.
So it's a good time for the ACLU's latest effort, Tortured Logic, a public campaign to encourage Holder to broaden the scope of the probe by focusing on the horrific contents of the memos that authorized torture. Watch it:
At Huffington Post, ACLU President Anthony Romero writes:
There is ample evidence already in the public domain that the widespread and systemic torture of detainees was authorized at the highest levels of the Bush administration. This evidence comes from congressional reports, the torture memos themselves and even the boastful admissions of officials including former vice president Dick Cheney, who has been aggressively forthright in his defense of waterboarding. But notwithstanding all this evidence, there are still those who would reduce the authorization of these crimes by government officials to discretionary policy decisions. This cannot be the case in a nation where the rule of law means anything.
It is a core premise of our democracy that in America, no one is above the law, regardless of rank or position. Going after those who carried out illegal orders while shielding those who actually gave the orders goes against the most fundamental American ideals of fairness. To date, the highest-ranking officer to be prosecuted for detainee abuse is a lieutenant colonel who was acquitted. Yet there is simply too much evidence of high-level orders to justify limiting criminal investigations to the field. In this country, we investigate crimes — no matter how powerful the suspected perpetrators — and, when appropriate, we prosecute those who broke the law. The American system of justice would be rendered meaningless if we were to start compromising our principles and laws simply because enforcing them might be politically messy, inconvenient or even painful.
We cannot move forward confidently knowing that the abuses of the past will not be repeated by future administrations as long as everyone knows that crimes were committed and that the powerful who perpetrated and enabled those crimes get off scot-free. A failure to prosecute those responsible for torture — those who authorized it, those who legally sanctioned it and those who carried it out — would essentially serve to ratify illegal behavior by government officials. The attorney general should appoint a special prosecutor who will follow the facts where they lead, whether it be to prisons overseas or to the halls of power at home.
It's possible, as Daphne Eviatar asserts that a narrow probe will have to broaden, as it could very well involve reopening cases that the Bush administration dismissed, and "would ultimately require looking into the orders [CIA functionaries low on the totem pole] received from their superiors." Which is all the more reason Holder shouldn't place any limitations on the scope of a torture probe.