We'll see ...

Glenn Greenwald writes that 'Binding U.S. law requires prosecutions for those who authorize torture.'

It's just as simple as that. Once Eric Holder stated unequivocally that waterboarding is torture, and once a top Bush official used the word "torture" to describe what the U.S. did at Guantanamo using authorized techniques other than waterboarding, the "discretion" to investigate and prosecute disappeared-- at least for people who believe in the most basic precepts of the rule of law and equality under it, Western principles of justice established at Nuremberg, and the notion that the U.S. is bound by the treaties it signs. There simply is no way to argue against investigations and prosecutions (and no way to argue that we should use torture-obtained evidence against Guantanamo detainees) without fully rejecting all of those principles.

We'll see. If Obama's administration follows the law, instead of hiding lawlessnes behind such slogans as looking to the future and not the past (an approach that is offered when powerful law breakers are involved but not the rest of us), then I will let Obama explain to me what he means by 'fixing' Social Security.