The Anonymous Liberal counters Greenwald:

[L]et's keep the pressure on Obama to do the right thing and support better policies, but in doing so, let's not lose sight of the fact that the primary criticism of the Bush administration was not that its terrorism policies were bad (though they were), but that they were illegal. Cheneyism, at its core, has little to do with policy and everything to do with process. It is exemplified by contempt for the rule of law and a willingness to disregard even clear legal constraints on executive power. So far at least, I have not seen evidence of that mentality in the Obama administration's approach to terrorism policy.

I agree wholeheartedly. I've never opposed even wire-tapping as long as it is within the law and accountable to more than one branch of government. I didn't have a cow over the Patriot Act. I know we are at war. I can live with rendition as long as the US never hands anyone over to be tortured. And I'm immensely glad that torture is over and the tyrannical spirit of the unitary executive is ended. But the al-Rabiah prosecution was and is shocking:

One of the more puzzling aspects relates to Eric Holder and his Justice Department. Although they ostensibly reviewed all these cases, they decided to stick to the unsupported position of the Bush Justice Department to the end. The Holder Justice Department, which has denied it would proceed on torture-induced evidence, did exactly that. One lesson from the al-Rabiah case is this. The Obama Justice Department has very little interest in justice for the detainees at Gitmo, but an obsession with guarding the dark secrets of their predecessors.

We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to letters@theatlantic.com.