More Evidence That Liberals are Weak on National Security

Despite the country’s engagement in two separate wars, and the continued threat from Al Qaeda to attack the U.S., President Obama is allowing Attorney General Eric Holder to appoint a special prosecutor to look into alleged abuses by CIA officers during interrogations of high-value detainees. This is contrary to the president saying recently that he wanted to “go forward,” and not seek prosecutions of CIA employees and contractors in the matter. Holder said that he, not the president, decided to conduct a “preliminary review” of the findings of a formal investigation that was conducted by the CIA’s Inspector General, and reviewed by career Department of Justice prosecutors, who found no merit for prosecution. Why the sudden urgency to rehash the whole thing again? Could it be that a distraction is in order because Democrats’ prospect for taking over health care is fading? OK, I know I sound cynical, so let’s assume for a moment a distraction from the health care debate is not the reason for resurrecting the matter. Then what is? Is it to simply derogate the morale of CIA interrogators? Which is it? Either way, this “preliminary review” of the same old, thoroughly investigated allegations will only serve to further demoralize the CIA. Not only is Holder’s “review” a complete waste of time, but it’s a waste of money and scarce Department of Justice resources. Holder realizes that the review will not enhance national security, but it will deter CIA employees from doing controversial jobs in the future. I’m not suggesting that rogue CIA employees and contractors should be given a pass if they broke regulations or committed crimes. I’m suggesting that in light of these CIA employees already being investigated and disciplined by their employer where necessary, this matter should be put to rest so the agency can “go forward” as the president said. Have Holder and the president ever heard of prosecutor discretion? These interrogators did not personally receive benefits from their actions, and their motivations were purely to help prevent and disrupt future attacks on America. Wouldn’t a little discretion be in order? If the career Justice Department prosecutors who reviewed the original investigation felt there was a chance of securing a conviction, they would have pursued indictments. Obviously there was insufficient credible evidence. That’s the way it goes. The president, Holder and their extreme left-wing friends need to get over it. The president putting responsibility on his attorney general for the new review demonstrates his lack of leadership and desire to appease his liberal base. Who works for whom, anyway? Imagine being a CIA interrogator working within the legal parameters of your job. Then, years later, a new presidential administration comes into power and decides that the legal opinions of White House attorneys at the time about the way you do your job are not the same opinions extreme liberal attorneys would have given today. The new attorney general wants to prosecute you for doing your job, and he wants to seek disbarment of the attorneys who wrote the legal opinions and guidance you were following. And the Director of Central Intelligence, Leon Panetta, doesn’t make a peep about it. You probably wouldn’t want to continue your employment with the CIA, and wouldn’t recommend government work to others. What sense does any of this make? It only does if your ultimate goal is to degrade the moral of front line CIA employees who forever more will wonder if they will someday be prosecuted for doing their jobs. How many people will accept future controversial assignments if they think they might be prosecuted by a future administration? Liberals want law enforcement to battle international terrorists instead of the CIA and military. They want to give our sworn enemies hugs instead of water boarding. They believe if we hug them, they will love us instead of hate us. Either liberal Democrats are stupid and naive, or they want to weaken national defense. Which is it?