Does this argument have merit?
This point has been made in dribs and drabs already, but it really needs to be driven home: In his statement yesterday, Obama didn’t really rule out any and all prosecution of officials involved in the torture programs.
That’s the claim being made by the lead lawyer for the ACLU — which brought the case resulting in the release of the torture memos — and he makes a good point.
"We shouldn’t over-read President Obama’s statement", the ACLU lawyer, Jameel Jaffer, said in an interview with me a few moments ago.
The key line in Obama’s statement from yesterday is this: "In releasing these memos, it is our intention to assure those who carried out their duties relying in good faith upon legal advice from the Department of Justice that they will not be subject to prosecution."
Obama singled out those who carried out duties "in good faith." But Obama said nothing about what might happen to any interrogators who may have gone beyond what the torture memos condoned. His statement is also silent on those who created the torture program, Jaffer points out.
Discuss.