Obama pledged to be bipartisan and he talked a lot about no blue America or red America, just America. An example of his bipartisanship is keeping Gates as SecDefense.
I heard a WTF idea that he may make concessions to the minority Republican senators so that his economic stimulus plan passes by 80 votes. The fact that I didn’t dismiss it as untrue because I think Obama really wants to be bipartisan.
I am afraid that he will try to hard to reach across the aisle and not investigate his predecessor and not hold his administration accountable(justice) for their well documented crimes. Is my fear unfounded? Does anybody have evidence that Obama will hold Bush Admin. accountable or will he let them be in the name of bipartisanship? I hope I am wrong.
Sorry, he’s not gonna do it. Even if it’s the right thing, the precedent is questionable and particularly at this time, it’s not something he’s going to spend a lot of energy on - and that’s what it would require. On top of all that, if he did that, a Republican Congress or future president would do the same thing to him and he’s not going to want that.
I think Obama’s already said he’s not going down this road, at least in terms of prosecuting interrogators who used torture.
Obama isn’t going to investigate Bush’s “crimes” for the same reason any sane person entering the WH wouldn’t - 'cause they open up the likelihood of exposing themselves to the same idiotic witchhunt tactics that you’re proposing, once he leaves the WH.
Now future presidents can commit wrongdoing with impunity because Congress and future administrations won’t hold them accountable because that would start a “withhhunt” precedent.:rolleyes:
Clinton’s impeachment didn’t start a never ending string of impeachments, even though Bush had reason to be impeached. Government must be held accountable for it’s actions or it will trample the rights of it’s people and we can’t always wait or rely on elections. Government must self-police a little bit.
Exactly. The message being sent to future Republican Presidents is that they might as well grab for all the power and profit they can, trample any right they feel like because the Democrats will ALWAYS cave in and suck up to them. That there is NO consequences to their actions. It’s a major reason why America is becoming ever more corrupt and fascistic; it’s a major reason why I have no long term hope for this country.
A president is only going to be held responsible for his ‘crimes’ if they are personal - taking bribes, paying bribes, committing perjury, breaking into an opponent’s campaign office…
You will never see a President go after another President for ‘crimes’ committed by the state, because that will open up every President to charges from the opposition when they get into power. Presidents make life-and-death choices every day, and sometimes the decisions are very questionable. Some people have demanded that Kissinger stand trial for his ‘crimes’, or Bomber Harris in the U.K. But it’s just not going to happen.
Some people on the right were calling for criminal investigations of Clinton over Waco. I’m sure some people wanted to make hay over the fact that he defied the U.N. in Kosovo. Or perhaps for the bombings in Sudan. I remember some people claiming that he was ‘selling’ the White House because it appeared that big donors could buy a night in the Lincoln Bedroom. How would you feel about that?
Also, you think that Bush committed these ‘crimes’, but at least 30% of the country, who still support Bush, do not. And I’ll bet that a good percentage of the people who do not approve of his job still don’t believe that what he did rose to the level of criminal conduct. So Obama would be going after a President who a majority of the country believes has committed no crime. How do you think that would go over?
Frankly, the only people calling for Bush to be charged with these ‘crimes’ is the wingnut left. It’s just not a credible option.
The last thing this country needs is to be distracted by an inevitably hyperpartisan and divisive investigation into crimes committed Bush and company.
This country has more important things to do right now.
I’m not on the “wingnut left” (whoever the hell that is supposed to be), but I think that after all the secrecy, all the whispered rumors about what was done with illegal spying, with torture, with a lot of uncovered “crimes”, a Truth and reconciliation commission would be a very good step forward in putting the last eight years behind us without the cries of “witch hunt”.
I think we’re headed down the ol’ road again, the one about how there isn’t any proof of crimes, therefore there is no need for any investigation which might uncover proof of crimes.
We might be better served by a truth seeking committee under rule of perjury: you must testify, and you are immune from prosecution so long as you testify fully and truthfully.
Usually, I’m all about the truth and justice, but the truth is more important. And what “justice” is possible, what sentence commensurate. For instance, if what I’ve read about Jose Padilla is true, that he has been driven bonkers by deprivation and isolation, what is the crime? We can readily see the wrong, but what specific statute speaks of malicious mind-fucking?
No, I don’t want any trials, I simply want the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but. Then let the people decide.
If they got a story to tell us how the evil terrorist knew where the nuclear anthrax bond was ticking down, and Jack Bauer ripped out a few fingernails and thus saved Disneyland…let it be told.
But I also want to hear about the simple dumfuk camel jockey who got turned in by his brother-in-law for $5,000 U.S…, and doesn’t know C-4 from a see saw.
Maybe we can’t have justice, but its no reason we can’t have truth.
Even if Barack Obama were not a Democrat and a pussy, he won’t really be able to launch an investigation without enthusiasm for it on all levels of American society and United States bureaucracy. This is absolutely lacking.
What he may be able to do is slowly build up this enthusiasm over years. But he won’t.
It’s sad, because the truth is obvious. Bush, Cheney, and Co manipulated the intelligence services to produce lies about Saddam Hussein. They created the war, then maliciously fucked up the reconstruction. The goal was simply money. The horrible aftermath raised the price of oil and created a large market for the defense contractors. What’s ironic is you don’t even need to finger hidden benefactors pulling strings. Bush and Cheney are literally top representatives of the oil and defense industries.
What they’ve done isn’t vague “fallible judgements in the name of US interests” that America unjustly defends in its previous leaders. It is simple corruption.
I’m willing to let Bush go free with the punishment he’s earned - complete public scorn. The irony is that his conservative soulmates will be denouncing him ten times harder than liberals will in an effort to distance themselves from him.
But what I would like is a nonpartisan investigation to bring sordid secrets out in the light so they can wither in the sunlight. Something like the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in South Africa - public confessions and exposure of crimes and malfeasance in exchange for amnesty.
The ancient Athenians and Romans, from whom we have borrowed most of our civilization, have gone down the prosecuting road before. The regular Athenian practice of having an accounting didn’t cause much problems, but prosecuting the bad guys who abused power almost always led to civil war for both the Athenians and the Romans. Having them run off to other countries (as in the case of Alcibiades and Themistocles and being set up in style by the Persian King turned out much better.
I wouldn’t mind a commission with the power to compel testimony under pain of contempt to document all the abuses, but it would be a bad idea to center the country’s attention on this for the next five, ten or twenty years. Now if one of the idiots happens to step into a foreign jurisdiction that wants to prosecute or extradite, then that is another matter.
People did go after Clinton for that. Not because he defied the UN, which isn’t a crime in and of itself, but because he defied the House of Representatives. Read CAMPBELL v. CLINTON, 203 F.3rd 19 (D.C. Cir. 2000).
As far as for the rest of your post, it would be nice if there was some mechanism to hold the President (any President, mind you) accountable for their extra-constitutional misdeeds. Rightly or wrongly, it probably can’t or won’t ever happen.
Obviously a partisan witchhunt won’t and shouldn’t happen. However there is a large middle ground between that and doing nothing. For example Congress or Obama could set up a bi-partisan commission led by someone like Volcker to investigate abuses and make recommendation. As suggested above the Truth and Reconciliation Commision could offer a model.
In a democracy, I can’t think of anything more important than investigating and punishing crimes committed by the country’s government and public authorities, except maybe if the country is on the verge of collapse.