Maybe one more reason the Obama administration kept Howard Dean out?

I once said that I thought the Republicans would be scared stiff of the next
Democratic Attorney General. Howard immediately added "IF he does his job."

That turned out to be a bigger "IF" than I ever thought possible.
Apparently Howard's way of thinking on this (not to mention on health
issues) was not welcome in the Obama Administration. So far, at least
in public, Howard has been far more supportive of the Obama Administration
than it has ever been of him. I wonder if this will continue?

A rotten egg left alone only becomes more rotten.

Clinton's refusal to have Reno go after criminal acts committed under Reagan
begat us Bush Lite. Obama refusing to go after Bush Lite's bad apples will
only get us a president Gingrich (or someone similar with fewer wives),
unlikely as that might seem now. Unlike some, I am far from saying Obama has
gotten everything wrong, and he has gotten quite a bit right so far, but in
this, he either has a lot of Democratic skeletons to help bury that only a few
know about, or he's disappointing his base something fierce.

I very much hope that the Jane Harmon incident, "this conversation doesn't exist,"
is an exception rather than a rule. It disturbs me to say that I don't know, one
way or the other. It disturbs me even more to speculate that I might never find out.

IMO spending all his time and energy will just waste political capital Obama needs elsewhere. It will also open the door for republicans to bash him for looking backwards etc.

You assume that by being reticent here, Obama will get a break from Republicans elsewhere,
or risk being taken on by Democrats who think he'd be spending too much time on revenge.
Republicans will show him no quarter, anywhere, period. They will not reward his holding back
with cooperation. They will see it as a sign of weakness, and become ever more intransigent
and uncooperative.

I don't see prosecution as revenge, but bringing criminals to justice. We are not talking about
Karl Rove's or Alberto Gonzales' brand of justice here. I am talking about why a country has law
enforcement in the first place, and not to spy on political dissenters wherever they may lurk,
or remove political adversaries by malicious or false prosecution. I am talking about bringing
to justice those who used malicious and/or false prosecution in the first place. I do not see a
middle ground between condemnation and collaboration here. It is not passive to say, "oh well."
That in this case is not passive condemnation. There is no such thing. Either what they did was
wrong and must be publicly castigated as such, or it was tolerable, and thus acceptable behavior
for the next round, if and when they get back to power. That would say that any means to get there
is now OK, there now being ample judicial precedent for letting it happen.

Besides, this is something Obama can (and should) not instigate on his own, but delegate to an activist
Justice Department, who can leave Obama to address issues that do require his political capital, such as
foreign affairs, health and the economic crisis. As the Justice Department is not heavily involved in any
of those three issues, I submit that they do need to look at gross violations of laws by the previous
administration. I don't mean issuing a summons for every time Rove ran a red light on Wisconsin Avenue,
but for grave constitutional violations as well as criminal activities that would include the outright
theft of billions of OUR money, yeah, I say go get 'em. Even some of Nixon's gang was pursued under the
Ford administration after Nixon left in disgrace. Nixon's Attorney General spent some time in jail.
By what new laws on the books should Gonzales, Cheney or Rove be treated with greater leniency? I see
nothing in common sense or political savvy that dictates that they should.

The way I see it is, he has nothing to lose by not obstructing investigations.

There's nothing they can do to him that's worse than what they're doing now.

maybe it has more to do with me not having the stomach to put up with listening about Bush and his cohorts on a daily basis again.

e-ville I tells yahs.

We just had 8 years of evil, and ah dint lahk it not one bit, nosiree......