Post Politics: Detainees, Obama, More

Discuss the latest news about Congress, the Obama administration, upcoming elections and more with Washington Post White House reporter Michael Fletcher.

____________________

Herndon, Va.: Is it my imagination or does President Obama get out more often than previous presidents? It seems like there's a motorcade every other time I drive in D.C.

Michael A. Fletcher: Good morning. Lots to talk about. Health care, Sotomayor, Rev. Wright, stimulus, spending. Let's get started.

_______________________

Dallas: Hi Mr. Fletcher, thanks for the chat. I am 59, what are the chances of an investigation of Bush/Cheney in my lifetime?

Michael A. Fletcher: Senate Intelligence is doing its own, closed-door review of the interrogation controversy. Beyond that it is hard to say. President Obama has struggled to straddle a line between not angering his supporters on the left while continuing to express a preference for looking forward. I know he feels that something like a 9/11 type commission would only distract from the monumental changes he is trying to make in the economy and domestic policy generally.

_______________________

Rhode Island: Does the naming of special emissaries to several countries by President Obama dilute Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's role ?

Michael A. Fletcher: I think not. Her plate is full. Despite the fears expressed early on, everyone in the administration says she has integrated well into the administration. She meets for breakfast once a week with Vice President Biden and has been described by all as a team player and an important voice and presence in setting foreign policy.

_______________________

Rev. Wright?!: You're kidding me, right? You find him to be newsworthy? A retired pastor with no contact to Obama? Jeez, the "news" biz sure must be hard up for stories, these days.

Michael A. Fletcher: I'm just saying he's been in the news, if marginally.

_______________________

Chicago: Serious question -- does anybody actually sincerely believe that it's unreasonably dangerous to bring Gitmo detainees into the US, or is that just political posturing? I'm trying not to conclude that we've become a nation of spineless cowards. Thanks.

Michael A. Fletcher: I think some people are sincerely concerned about bringing some detainees here and then having them found not guilty by the criminal justice system then being set free here. Some of the detainees have been described as being avowed enemies of the U.S. but having tainted evidence against them, making any trial or even military commission proceeding dicey. But most of it strikes me as playing into public fears, however rational or not, that these prisoners somehow are more dangerous from the scores of terrorists, would-be terrorists, and hundreds of thousands of others criminals of all stripes currently incarcerated in this country.

_______________________

Boston: So Obama has punted on releasing any former innocent/cleared Guantanamo detainees in the U.S. Has he also given up on putting other detainees in U.S prisons for further detention? If not, how can he get out front of the political pressure to present a case that this is necessary and safe? This seems like a political minefield for him.

washingtonpost.com: Obama Bows on Settling Detainees in the U.S.

Michael A. Fletcher: Earlier this week, the administration moved Ahmed Ghailani from Gitmo to New York to stand trial in the bombings of two African embassies 11 years ago. The sense is that they want to prove(again) that terrorism suspects can be convicted in federal courts. Congress, of course, has pushed back, reflecting fears out there among their constitutents. That is why,as the Post reporterted today, the administration has all but abandoned efforts to resettle innocent detainees in the U.S. All of which is to say you're right. This is a political minefied.

_______________________

Boston: Is anyone in Congress looking into the implications of a baseball team that spends $800 million over the past two years but can't beat their chief rival even once? That is an investigation I can get behind!

Michael A. Fletcher: Funny. But Yankee fans must cling to this hope: It is just June. And the Boston Red Sox, for years, earned their reputation in August.

_______________________

They're "suspects" ... not "terrorists": Am I still living in America? We've known for years that we didn't have real evidence against many of these terrorist suspects, and what they later obtained in the form of "confessions" had been obtained through torture. Common sense says that the Bush Administration wouldn't have felt the need to create their patently illegal "extra-legal" system if they could have convicted them in normal civilian or military courts, would they Michael?

Michael A. Fletcher: Yes, they're suspects but the Bush administration argued that they were picked up often under unsual circumstances. War-type circumstances. There was no crime scene investigation, in many cases. And, yes, some evidence was collected through the use of "enhanced interrogation techniques" which include some methods commonly regarded as torture. So the evidence in some cases was not of the quality you would find in the court system. Plus bringing suspects to the U.S. would trigger all kinds of legal protections. Thus, the "extra-legal" system. But at the same time, the current administration, as it moves to close Gitmo, has struggled to deal with detainees against whom there is little usable evidence but are nonetheless veiwed as hostile to the U.S. All of which to say, the situation is complicated--and that is without getting into the charged politics surrounding all of this.

_______________________

The Hissyfits: For decades Leno and Letterman and every late night comedian made countless jokes about the Clintons, some funny and many far more tasteless than saying that Palin goes for the "Slutty airline stewardess" look. No one cared. Why? Cause they are late night jokes and they should be a little ribald. But, get the masters of manufactured outrage on the case and all of the sudden we really have to make Letterman jokes a three day and counting story?

Michael A. Fletcher: Funny.

_______________________

Houston: Thank you for taking questions today. Your well reasoned answer regarding the movement of detainees to U.S. soil is appreciated. However, since 9/11, our country has time and again let irrational fears get in the way of reasoned decison making. How does President Obama begin to address this? Can a president give a speech that essentially says "we need to start thinking and stop fearing"?

Michael A. Fletcher: He could but it is hard to say how many people would listen. I think Obama tried to address some of this several weeks ago with his National Archives speech where he laid out the dilemma he faces with closing Gitmo and adhering to this nation's founding principles without closing his eyes to the threat posed by terrorism.

_______________________

Herndon, Va.: I think the Letterman kerfuffle is more about his going after Palin's daughters, rather than Palin herself.

Michael A. Fletcher: Have to admit, I have not kept up with this particular kerfuffle.

_______________________

Anonymous: Any White House reporters ask who President Obama has in tonight's hockey game? Who's he gonna side with -- Pennsylvania or Michigan?!

Michael A. Fletcher: Not to my knowledge. Obama is a hoops guy and a bit of a baseball guy, as you know. Not sure whether he follows hockey...

_______________________

Claverack, NY: Is it really consistent to simultaneously believe: a) the free market is always right; b) the government would be terrible at running health care; and c) the government CAN'T offer a public insurance because it would run private insurers out of business. If you can't compete with someone who's terrible at what they do, why should you stay in business?

Michael A. Fletcher: Interesting point. I think some opponents of a "public option" fear that the government-run plan would be subsidized, creating an unfair, artificial competition.

_______________________

Washington, DC: If we were to bring the detainees here and try them in US courts, they would not be released into the US if they were acquitted. They would be deported because of immigration issues. The anti-transfer NIMBYs are posturing and blowing hot air. Too bad many Americans are eating it up with a spoon.

Michael A. Fletcher: Would they? After being captured and transported to the U.S. from all points of the globe? And even if that turns out to be the case, where would they be deported to? It's a real problem.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: At what time will results start coming out for the Iranian elections?

Michael A. Fletcher: Not sure. But it is going to be interesting to see not just in the results, but in the aftermath. This kind of activism seems unusual. Does it portend a real change?

_______________________

Michael A. Fletcher: Gotta go. Thanks for the questions.

_______________________

Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.