Six former U.S. attorneys general expressed doubts Friday about the wisdom of launching a federal investigation into whether harsh interrogations of terrorism suspects following the Sept. 11 attacks violated the law.
Such an investigation wouldn't fix policies that have been criticized because the new Democratic administration already has changed them, said former Attorney General Benjamin Civiletti told a panel discussion at the annual meeting of the American Bar Association in Chicago. Civiletti was the only one of former attorneys general who served in a Democratic administration.
Civiletti, who served under President Jimmy Carter, said the probe could end up as "a hunt for that which can't be identified any more than it has already been identified."
"The likelihood of producing prosecutable cases and penalties of some nature is very remote," he said.
Attorney General Eric Holder is weighing whether to name a criminal investigator to determine whether laws were violated during interrogations of terrorism suspects after Sept. 11, 2001, according to a Justice Department official, who requested anonymity to discuss a pending matter. Holder is said to be focusing on whether to prosecute interrogators who went beyond legal boundaries laid by Justice Department lawyers.
The move would be certain to stir partisan bickering on Capitol Hill and be a distraction at a time when President Barack Obama is trying to win support for a sweeping health care initiative.
Obama, a Democrat, has repeatedly expressed reluctance about a probe into alleged abuses under the administration of Republican President George W. Bush administration, saying he wants to look forward.
Dick Thornburgh, who served under Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, stressed the urgency in the minds of many Americans about capturing terrorists and heading off a catastrophe involving weapons of mass destruction.
Thornburgh said anyone who prevented an attack and saved millions of lives would most likely get "a ticker tape parade down Broadway" _ even if he used torture, illegal wiretaps and warrantless searches to do it.
Michael Mukasey, who served under George W. Bush, said he saw no realistic means of prosecuting anyone because of irregularities in the interrogations. And Edwin Meese, attorney general under Reagan, said prosecuting attorneys for writing opinions justifying harsh interrogation methods by CIA personnel would set a bad precedent.
John Ashcroft, who served under George W. Bush, said the president needs enough power to defend the country.
"When it comes to national security I think you have to give the president the benefit of the doubt," he said. He said few would agree the president "ought to have almost enough power to defend the country."
William P. Barr, who served under George H.W. Bush, said critics should remember whatever happened in the wake of 9/11 was designed to combat "a foreign enemy who is operating outside the rules of war."
Barr recalled that at one point during World War II, President Franklin D. Roosevelt wrote a letter asserting extraordinary national security powers. Barr said it was probably drafted by Attorney General Robert H. Jackson.
"By today's standards they'd both be wearing jumpsuits as criminals," Barr joked, drawing a laugh from the audience.
___
Associated Press Writer Nedra Pickler contributed to this report from Washington.
