Bush Says No Imminent Decision on Guantanamo

By Jeralyn, Section Terror Detainees
Posted on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 12:46:00 PM EST
Tags: Guantanamo, Detainees (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

Bump and Update: President Bush said today there is no imminent decision on closing Guantanamo.

Original Post: 7/2/08

Bush to Consider Closing Guantanamo

ABC News reports that President Bush is holding talks about the future of Guantanamo and may decide to close it.

[More...]

High-level discussions among top advisers have escalated in the past week, with the most senior administration officials in continuous talks about the future of the prison camp at Guantanamo Bay--and how it will be dramatically changed and/or closed in the wake of the Supreme Court's ruling that gave detainees there access to federal courts.

He may decide by Saturday when he leaves for the G8 summit. But it's unlikely he will issue an announcement that soon. As to the reason: the recent Supreme Court decision and those that preceded it.

High-level administration officials say the Court's decision dramatically changes the legal landscape--and raises questions about whether the government has solid evidence to present to federal judges to justify ongoing detentions.

Meaning, of course, evidence that would be admissible in a criminal proceeding as opposed to a military tribunal.

< Is the Investigation of Ronnie White's Death Being Obstructed? | Viacom to Get You Tube Viewer Details and Habits >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Bush Says No Imminent Decision on Guantanamo | 17 comments (17 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

Hiding and dispersing (5.00 / 3) (#1)
by Carolyn in Baltimore on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 08:44:30 PM EST

I'm sure Guantanamo is also chockfull of evidence of torture and abuse. How convenient if it were all dispersed and sent to the 4 winds before anyone might get around to a real investigation.

: Real Investigation? (none / 0) (#13)
by kdog on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 09:53:57 AM EST

Whose interested in that? Not the Democrats...
It may be an attempt to cover up the evidence of their crimes...or a weak attempt to save the Bush legacy...if Bush closes the joint the next president won't have the opportunity to be the one to close it while ragging on Bush's abysmal human rights record, further turning his name to Mudd.
They also know the attention span of the average American...if Bush closes the joint, in two years most Americans will have forgotten it ever existed.

CYA (5.00 / 1) (#3)
by mmc9431 on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 09:00:50 PM EST

Military Act, FISA and now Guantanamo. Lost e-mails and shredders. By November they will have succeeded in burying or destroying all evidence. See, Cheney did learn a lot from Nixon's mistakes!

Regarding torture, (5.00 / 2) (#8)
by Blowback on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 10:53:30 PM EST

Wes Clark should have pointed out that John McCain wasn't tortured in Vietnam because McCain didn't suffer pain equivilent to organ failure or death.

After all, that is the Bush Administrations definition of torture.

: If enough of us start repeating this (5.00 / 1) (#14)
by scribe on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 12:48:34 PM EST

it will gain currency and someone, maybe even Clark, will say it.

this is about as (5.00 / 1) (#12)
by cpinva on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 09:19:07 AM EST

scathing an open admission of criminal acts, by this administration, as we've seen in 7.5 years:

in essence, they admit to wrongfully imprisoning these people.

: Nope (none / 0) (#16)
by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:07:09 PM EST

They don't say that and you know it.

If they close it, I think it is imperative (5.00 / 1) (#15)
by Anne on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 12:57:17 PM EST

that it not be done with typical Bush administration secrecy, but under supervision - perhaps by a consortium of international organizations to monitor both the legal and human rights aspects.

[Okay, I have finally gone completely 'round the bend even thinking such a thing would be possible]

: Why? (none / 0) (#17)
by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 04:12:02 PM EST

None of the groups you mention have any jurisdiction.

Do Nothing Dems (none / 0) (#2)
by downtownted on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 08:55:04 PM EST

This Administration especially (but Repubs in general) look at the Democrats as prosecutorial wimps. And they acted based on their assumptions that they would get off scott free. No matter what the crime. No matter what the damage to the future of America.

Hope i am wrong. Fearful I am not.

I am just thankful that it will be closed (none / 0) (#4)
by befuddledvoter on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 09:04:56 PM EST

I don't need a pound of flesh. The Supreme Court rocks!

: I'm glad if it's true (5.00 / 1) (#6)
by mmc9431 on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 10:24:08 PM EST

As for the pound of flesh, I think it's very important that this or any administration that willfully ignores the laws or creates their own laws be held accountable. If their actions are accepted, they will become the standard for future administrations. This should never be allowed to happen again.

Too much to be exposed (none / 0) (#5)
by Saul on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 09:45:47 PM EST

if he waits for the next adminstration to close it. I agree with the prior post it's being done to hide and eradicate all evidence of wrong doing before he leaves. I would call for congress to hold a hearing on just how it would be closed.

Pigs to consider flying (none / 0) (#7)
by scarshapedstar on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 10:53:24 PM EST

No chance of this one.

: Well (none / 0) (#9)
by scarshapedstar on Wed Jul 02, 2008 at 10:54:27 PM EST

Okay, I could see him shuffling off all the detainees to CIA black sites and shutting the doors.

federal judges (none / 0) (#10)
by diogenes on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 12:07:59 AM EST

When US prosecutors have trouble getting witnesses in US cities to testify in murder cases due to witness intimidation, how exactly are federal judges using the same standards going to get people from Afghanistan to testify against alleged terrorists? The unintended consequence of all this is the next batch of unlawful enemy combatants will be left in a prison in Saudi Arabia or some similar place where all this stuff doesn't apply at all.

Bush & Cheney (none / 0) (#11)
by weltec2 on Thu Jul 03, 2008 at 08:57:39 AM EST

making all evidence of their criminal behavior disappear... who is surprised? These two are just laughing in the faces of Nancy & Company. But not just in the faces of Nancy & Company. They're also laughing in our faces.

Literally billions of our tax dollars have gone missing under this administration's watch. This has been the most secretive administration in the history of this country. And now Bush & Cheney will clean up the most visible evidence of their crimes and chuckle to themselves as they disappear completely from public view.