My admittedly limited understanding of criminal justice leads me to conclude one is not fined or incarcerated to damage their image. I’m not talking about political payback here, and I could care less about the esteem anyone in the Bush administration is held at this point. I’m talking about a war, something that cost many many people their lives, and whether or not the difference between the true and stated motivation for going to war constitutes something heinous. I really cannot imagine what is a more important issue to address, not just for the here-and-now, but for our long-term security and role in the international community, of which we must be a functional part, however grudgingly we go about it.
All true enough. The trouble is, investigating Bush is going to appear to be nothing more than attempt to make him look bad and damage his party politically. I’m sure there are things that he should be imprisoned for. But would such a prosecution benefit the country? I think Gerry Ford made the right call in pardoning Nixon- the nation would suffer greatly if such a circus came to town.
Ford pardoned Nixon but did not suppress the investigation into Watergate. It was too late for that. I say “investigate away.” Let the truth come out.
If Bush finishes his term, sells the pig farm & retires to that gated community in the Metroplex–as planned–I don’t really care. But it would be great if he needed a pardon.
What’s the standard for subpoena issuing? IIRC there are times when the majority had to give the minority subpoena power. Not sure whether that was just part of the whole investigation negotiation or what.
We can argue about who the Pubs might want to subpoena later, but for now…
If its a matter of investigating corruption, I say go for it. If there’s another Dem congressman out there with some tainted cash in his freezer, drag his/her ass up on charges and ream them but good! I’m totally non-partisan when it comes to corruption, because a corrupt Congressman doesn’t belong to any party and has no loyalty worth worrying about.
Of course, it has not escaped my attention that, for the most part, nobody bothers to bribe somebody who hasn’t any power, corruption investigations must therefore, necessarily, lean heavily on the Republican side. Oh, well.
Hate to nitpick, Evil One, but FWIW, as a moderate Republican, I wouldn’t have a problem voting for Hillary Clinton. After eight years of Bush, the main presidential trait I’ll be looking for is some semblance of competence, which she seems to have in spades. So if it’s between her and some jagoff Republican ideologue, I’ll take her any day.
I think the torture issue should be front and center in any investigations, primarily because it will be a huge step forward in making a good faith effort in winning back the hearts and minds of a country that’s falling apart. Our actions have been demonstrated to be the perfect recruiting poster for potential terrorists, so our ability to humble ourselves in the international community will go a long way in regaining some of the “moral high ground” we lost and demonstrating that we are serious in the Rule of Law and the human rights of the people we’re allegedly trying to help.
And, since this has no real relation to the strategy of fighting the war (except in a circuitous way that can be easily undermined), it can be argued that it doesn’t contradict our pledge to Support the Troops (though obviously, some heads will have to roll). Heck, Rummy’s gone–lay the blame on him; though I hate the idea of Bush, Cheney, Gonzalez, Yoo, et al getting a pass on it, the mere exposure of the issue (especially Congressional testimonies of innocents sucked into the torture vortex) will still show that unlimited Executive Priviledge has its dangers, and that wars can be waged without abandoning our principles.
I know it’s a bit of a pipe dream, but since almost nothing has been done to investigate this on the Hill thus far, it would be a highly visible positive step.
After that, I’d say any misappropriation of the billions of dollars to no-bid contracts, and then the NSA wiretaps. Forget about the intelligence SNAFU’s in the lead-up; that’s going to hit too close to home for the Pubbies and the Dems should be about looking to the future anyway, not dwelling on the mistakes of the past (I have faith that will all come out eventually, if not as soon as some of us would like).
Well, perhaps for actions directly related to the war, in return for total disclosure, amnesty could be granted to anyone, from Bush on down. I still think it’s of vital importance that we really know what happened, so we know how to prevent it from happening again, if possible.
First, establish a new Truman Commission to root out the war profiteers and take back their blood money. This should keep the Judicial Committee busy for some time.
Second, I would sincerely like to know who was responsible for the forged Niger uranium documents that were used by the President in his State of the Union address to claim that Saddam was going to make a nuclear weapon. Since the Vice President got bent out of shape about Wilson calling bullshit on that enough to order the treasonous outing of a CIA agent, I suspect that’s the key to unraveling this whole knot of murderous lies. Let the chips fall where they may.
Third, and most importantly, the Committee for Greeting Opal must be reinvigorated.
Fourth, Bush has been responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people. His lies have come close to bankrupting our country and destroyed two generations worth of good will. He has turned us into torturers. He must be dealt with. He must be made an example of. We must show the world that we will not suffer this war criminal to retire quietly, if for no other reason than treating the murderous liar with kid gloves will encourage other Presidents to commit similar outrages. Bush wants to be a dictator. This is America. We must show him how Americans deal with would-be tyrants. This is not about revenge, it’s about justice. Investigate his crimes and punish him accordingly. That’s what a nation of laws does.
But the Dems DO have a mandate – a HUGE one. All the polls showed that the reason people voted for the Dems was that they are sick of the Iraq war and think Bush fucked up big time. They WANT the Dems to go after Iraq. It would dumb of the Dems not to investigate the living shit out of the Iraq war, and to challenge Bush on it at every opportunity. The American people have told the Dems what they want done – shame on the Dems if they don’t listen.
Well, right to Nancy Pelosi, because she appears to be quite averse to the very thing those of us who voted Democrat would like to see: Investigations, of any kind, if I read her statements correctly.
Can’t be done, Vib. Love it to pieces, but can’t be done. The most we can hope for is an exposure of the truth, the whole truth and nothing but. Why? Mainly, time. We can depend on solid popular support to root out corruption, we can depend on sending a goodly number of Pubbie congresscritters off to spend more time with thier families.
By the same token, Truman Committee type investigations are a good bet, Americans viscerally hate war-profiteering.
But we probably know about as much about the intelligence cooking and serving as we are going to. The truth has been out for years, its only that the Bushiviks were in such a solid position of power that they could afford to ignore it. You can speak truth to power, but you can’t make them eat it.
(PS: last I heard on the Niger crapola, it was a clumsy forgery put out by Italians with some murky connections and credentials, the kind of people who would have been entirely ignored by a CIA [and was, IIRC] but was seized upon the Bushiviks and their Feith-based intelligence initiative. Can’t really subpoena Italians…)
I’d like to investigate, just to be sure. Also, I’d like them to admit it, if they have anything to admit, even if they get off scott free. The past is the past, and can’t be undone. I’m thinking of the future. How many wars started over lies do we want in our history? You’d think Vietnam was enough, but clearly it wasn’t. I’m sure as Hell not betting Iraq will be the end of it if the true story isn’t known, if can all be swept aside as one big misunderstanding. I mean, what do we want, an America with power and influence that wields it justly, or a distrusted, former ally of the free world, prone to paroxysms of ill-conceived adventurism and aggression, that can’t face up to its own misdeeds, and shows little sign of self-restraint?
Yes, I knew about the Italians. But why did they do it? Who put them up to it? That’s the question. People just don’t forge Nigerian government documents for fun.
I dare say that the Truman commission will be enough. Once the light of day is shown into the dark corners of the Great Iraq Scam, a lot of people are going down. Certainly Deadeye Dick, and maybe even King George himself.
That kind of thinking will get the Dems thrown out on their asses in 08. There is NO MANDATE. Moderates, not extreme liberals, took seats away from the GoP. Going on a two year witch hunt would be political suicide. IF there’s something that they can be pretty sure will stick, fine. Broadscale muckraking would be a disaster.
If the Dems want to keep power, they have to define themselves as a party, and articulate a common vision for the future. They won this time because they are not Republicans. That won’t fly in 08. They have to be FOR something.
I agree. One of the few similarities I see between the Iraq war and what I remember of the Vietnam War is the war fatigue here. People are just sick and tired of it. They want out, they don’t want two years of “All Iraq, all the time.” If anything, the Democrats should take this election with gratitude and humility. America has given them a gift: a chance to show them something different, not more of the same tired political demogoguery under a different color.
I think they outta focus on their 100-days stuff first and foremost. Get the ball rolling on some of that min-wage and 911-commission legislation, then start to investigate the NSA wiretapping, and katrina and iraq spending. You can’t fix being lied to. You can fix unconstitutional programs and gross misappropriations of tax-payer money.
You are simply wrong on the facts. Poll after poll after poll showed that people were voting Democratic because they were sick of the Iraq war. It wasn’t a mandate for DEMOCRATS, if that’s what you’re thinking, but it was DEFINITELY a mandate to oppose Bush on the Iraq war. I mean, it’s really hard to think of a clearer mandate from the people than was just had. They want the Iraq war to be over.
Wanting the war to be over is not the same as wanting to launch a series of what will surely be seen as politically motivated witch hunts. The big game here is holding on to power. The way to do that ain’t through pursuing “revenge” on the GoP. Investigations need to be limited in number, and carefully selected for maximum impact. To retain power, the Dems have to show results. Pick fights they know they can win rather than tilting at ideological windmills.
If they want an investigation that appeals to middle America, I’d say an investigation into war profiteering ought to do it. Nobody likes to see their tax dollars wasted.