I truly despise Bush, much of his administration, and many of his practices/policies. But I am very hesitant to suggest that the new administration ought to investigate either Bush or his cronies. To a large extent, I think we get the government we deserve. Bush had a considerable track record when he was re-elected, and given a Republican majority in Congress through much of his stay.
I am not sure that I believe investigations/prosecutions by a successor administration are the desireable method for addressing questionable decisions or exercises of power by a predecessor. Moreover, I think such lengthy examinations can be costly and achieve little, distorting what actually occurred in the process.
I do believe, however, that an incoming administration ought to be able to initiate a very limited number of focussed investigations of specific situations. Instead of being aimed at punishing, such investigations would be aimed at preventing recurrences in the future. I think one obvious and appropriate target of such an investigation would be the apparent profitteering by private companies during the Iraq War and occupation, perhaps accompanied by investigation of the oversight - or lack thereof.
Do you have something of substance to add, Shodan? I mean other than following me around and emphasizing your misunderstanding of my posts and baseless personal attacks? Maybe about the OP? Your feelings on truth commissions or prosecutions? Or maybe both? What do you think about prosecuting FISA violations? The torture statute. Anything?
But you can’t sentence people for crimes against which there is no law. I can’t just bring you into court tomorrow and have you sentenced you to death for “hating America”, even if the jury agrees with me. The Constitution does not provide a penalty for its violation, so you can’t charge anyone with violating it unless there is also a law specifying the punishment. “Endangering the People” is a consequence of the crime, not the punishment for the guilty party; your argument doesn’t even make sense. If “endangering the People” were the only punishment, then the big bad evil guys would have no problem with it.
It’s a resolved issue anyway, since, as **Hamlet **pointed out, there is a law against it.
Valete,
Vox Imperatoris
ETA: If Hitler himself ran for office and won, you still can’t charge him in court with any crimes until he actually starts violating laws that carry punishments (although you can impeach him, of course). To do so would wreak all kinds of havoc with the rule of law.
Look, I got it. You don’t like me and enjoy making stuff to in an attempt to make me look bad. Point taken. I don’t mind, whatever gets you through the night.
Now that that’s out of the way, can you actually discuss the OP? Me, I think there should be investigations and, if there is enough evidence, prosecutions. I don’t think justice would be served by simply calling a do-over for any crimes. To me it smacks of whitewashing over the problems and the lack of accountability won’t do anything to stop these things from happening in the future.
I liked this quote: "Of course all this is not the language of the law either. It is the language of self-fulfilling prophecy. With each successive recitation that there is no political will, the political will dissipates. With each repetition of the mantra that Americans just want to turn the page on the past eight years, Americans feel ever better about turning the page.
And why wouldn’t we? We aren’t merely forgiving Mr. Rumsfeld and Vice President Dick Cheney (who admitted in December to approving torture techniques) and others for their actions. We are also forgiving ourselves. We are telling ourselves that what happened at Abu Ghraib is behind us, and that what happened at C.I.A. black sites is over. We are telling ourselves that bad people did bad things under bad circumstances, but that it’s better to forgive and forget, that we are really truly sorry and it won’t happen again. We sound like a nation of drunks after a bender. We are full of good intentions, but unwilling to hold ourselves to account."
Of course, the biggest problem is the investigation itself. The legal wrangling it would take to get actual evidence would take years. This administration has shown it has no problem closing ranks, lying, and using any legal outs they can, to try and fight disclosure of actual information. I don’t think that’s going to stop anytime soon. So the road to investigation and prosecution would be a long one. But I still like it better than just pretending it didn’t happen or that it doesn’t matter. That only makes it easier the next time.
It’s worth remembering that current treaties provide for universal jurisdiction for war crimes. Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and the lower tier of enablers are at risk of being arrested and taken to The Hague for their roles in creating the Iraq war, if they set foot in any other signatory nation. Rumsfeld, in fact, was already indicted in Germany.
I’m pretty sure this is false. My recollection and bit of research seemed to indicate that German’s head prosecutor refused to file any charges against Rumsfeld. There is no indictment. There may be civil cases, but I can’t find any evidence of a criminal indictment. Supposedly, the group that wanted the indictment were going to try Spain next.
There were a number of stories that jumped the gun in announcing his actual indictment, or at least misinterpreted the formal filing of a complaint as being an indictment.
Well, no here as well. I don’t actually dislike you. Does the Road Runner dislike the coyote? And I haven’t made anything up - your post really and truly was imbecilic. And not because of anything I did - it was you that made it so.
Because - well, look here -
Remember how, a couple posts ago, you said the same thing, and I said you should read the thread? I’ll repeat that, because if you do, then you will realize, probably, exactly why your post is so silly.
Or perhaps not, and then you can fulminate and throw around ad hominems and continue on with business as usual.
Nothing of substance about FISA? Nothing about torture? Nothing about our treaty obligations? Nothing about truth commissions vs. prosecutions? The stuff in the OP? Just more of the same personal attacks and substanceless crap about Bush didn’t lie, complete with your usual potshots at the next President?
Figures.
Why you start a nice pit thread about me, so you don’t waste my and everyone else’s time in this thread?
The choice on how you spend your time is yours. For instance, I note you are so pressed for time that you forgot the word “don’t” (presumably).
Unless this is International Speak Like A Caveman Day, and I missed it.
Anyway, as is often the case, you are mistaken. The personal attacks that you think you see don’t actually exist, which is why I not start nice Pit thread. Oogar not have desire to start nice Pit thread. Oogar like nice debate. Oogar like making fun of your post. Oogar think that better use of time that rehashing the same warmed over crapola. That why Oogar say so in first post to the thread, which you not read until Oogar tell you to, twice.
As I said, whatever gets you through the night Shodan. If you get around to getting past your obsession with me and want to debate FISA, torture, Guantanamo, our obligations under our treaties, Padilla, or something other than what I’ve already pointed out, let me know.