Are corrupt Congressional Democrats being coerced into not prosecuting Bush/Cheney criminals?

[bobthedrummer]

Poll question: Are corrupt Congressional Democrats being coerced into not prosecuting Bush/Cheney criminals?

Most citizens want prosecution. This is in play. What do you think?

[mmonk]

1. 1st recommend.

[AndyA]

2. Which, of course, means there's some cleaning up to do on the Dem side as well!

They are all in violation of their oaths by looking the other way.

[corruptmewithpower]

3. I think the "good ol boy" network is the most non partisan thing in DC.

[Captain Hilts]

4. There are a lot of conservative Dems. Being corrupt isn't necessarily the case. nt

[Greyhound]

5. Corruption is just one of the perks. n/t

[Two Americas]

17. lots of money

Lots of money is involved, not to mention positions of power, status and privilege. Is that all a coincidence? The poorest of poor people are immediately assumed to have self-serving motives for everything they do. Why are the people who are making the biggest scores immune from such scrutiny?

Strange double standard there.

[mmonk]

21. What does being conservative have to do with supporting illegal acts

on the part of government officials?

[babylonsister]

6. Why did Susan Collins quash the whistleblower protection? You

should add rethugs to this, too, because she seems like she's hiding something, or wants to.

[bobthedrummer]

7. babylonsister, you know that I've stated year after year that the Republican Party has become a

criminal organization, that it is the locus of the BFEE. You also know that I'm against party loyalty when it conflicts with our Constitution and other vital organs of democracy. I mean, look at what happened to the Replicant Party, yet they still vote in bloc to keep their gangster asses out of lock-up. Then they "influence" Dems, who already have a powerful internal RW political machine working against progressives and the traditional Democratic base (DLC,New Democrats).

[eomer]

8. Prosecution is not the responsibility of congressional Democrats.

It is the DOJ's decision to prosecute or not and any interference in that decision by members of Congress would, itself, be a violation of law, wouldn't it?

[bobthedrummer]

9. We have a DoJ that tortures, kidnaps and is chock full of nuts.

Ashcroft, Yoo, Mueller, Gonzales, Fisher, McNulty & many others should all be prosecuted too.

[mmonk]

10. And what party currently controls the Department of Justice?

While it is true that Congressional Democrats do not prosecute, they could demand a prosecutor.

[eomer]

11. Agreed. They should be calling for a special prosecutor.

Edit to add: this is excessive picking on your wording probably, but it's an important point: the DOJ is not supposed to be controlled by a party, especially with regard to prosecutorial decisions. Under Bush, of course, prosecutorial decisions were controlled by and for the benefit of the party -- they were politicized -- but the Holder DOJ should change that and should base these decisions on the law. Even Holder's boss, the President, should not be involved in the decision. If Holder just restores the rule of law then there's no need for congressional Democrats, a Democratic President, or any other members of the Democratic Party to have any significant role in it. If they just get out of the way and let AG Holder do his job, then that's all that is needed. In other words, it is the oath of office of AG Holder that needs to kick in. Everyone else's oath of office will tell them to just stay out of the way.

[mmonk]

12. Maybe we can keep heat on our representatives to do so.

Fingers crossed some day it could happen.

[bobthedrummer]

13. I'm still flicking my bic at my New Dem congressman...

[mmonk]

14. Lots of flicking going on these days.

:-)

[blm]

15. They should INVESTIGATE and have public HEARINGS so American people would KNOW what's been done

in their names.

We also need Dem lawmakers who don't try and block the investigations or deepsix the matters that are being exposed as Bill Clinton did when he sided with the secrecy and privilege of GHWBush and protected that secrecy and privilege throughout the 90s as he deepsixed many of the most serious matters being revealed in IranContra, Iraqgate, BCCI and CIA drugrunning investigations that were ongoing and current throughout his terms in office.

[eomer]

16. The important thing is for the rule of law to be restored, which means criminal prosecution.

I'm concerned that some of the other alternatives, like a truth commission or congressional hearings, might be just a subterfuge to avoid prosecution. So I'm in favor of prosecution, beginning right now, and then those other alternatives will be unneeded.

[Octafish]

18. What was all that illegal domestic spying about?

James Bamford on Democracy Now!

Without privacy, one can't organize an opposition to the machine.

[Solly Mack]

19. If they're corrupt then there's no need for coercion is there?

If I'm corrupt then I probably don't care if others are also corrupt - provided their brand of corruption doesn't interfere with mine. Also, if I'm corrupt, I may come out against someone else's corruption because, being corrupt, hypocrisy that gains me some advantage would certainly be within my capabilities. And, of course, being corrupt myself, if it serves me to not come out against someone else's corruption, I wouldn't.( I'll let you slide on what you did if you let me slide on what I did - or will do...or if you'll give me something I want, I'll let your corruption slide)


If I'm being coerced, then I'm might be weak (of character/mind) but not necessarily corrupt. Though I would argue that being corrupt is a weakness. (of character and mind)

My point...and I could possibly have one (or not)

I don't think anyone against prosecution is being coerced. They might well be corrupt - and I'd argue that anyone willing to let the crimes of the Bush admin. go un-prosecuted isn't without corruption. (to some degree or context) Motive can't be discounted...for good or ill. Still..

If I say " no one is above the law" but then act in a way contrary to that...even if I think a good will come from it(and I could just be claiming a good will come from it)...I have corrupted the idea that "no one is above the law" ...because, clearly, if not applied to all, then some people are above the law, and by claiming no one is but acting differently, I'm not only corrupting the idea, I'm lying when I say "no one is above the law".

Because, obviously, my actions show I do think some people are above the law..regardless of my motive (which may or may not be corrupt in and of itself). Because I can find an excuse for their actions that allows me to make the exception....or there's something I hope to gain by making the exception...still, if I tell people that "no one is above the law", that "no one" disallows for any exceptions...then I have to act contrary to that idea to make the exception...corrupting the idea in the process and making a liar out of myself(and a lie is the corruption of the truth). Such a precedent could create (and has) a class of people who are above the law even as they, themselves, proclaim that "no one is above the law"


Course, I'd argue that a system that makes excuses for the criminality of their leaders is a corrupt system to begin with... and if those excuses turn the crimes of government into excusable, if not acceptable, behavior then those excuses have to first be agreed to/accepted by - others in power(though not limited to those in power)...and to accept and agree that the crimes of government can be excused, a person would have to be a willing participant within that (corrupt) system's framework. A business as usual, that's just how the game is played attitude...and I'll go along with it (for whatever reasons)

And if the corruption of government is a wink-wink, nod-nod, can't be changed so might as well accept it kind of thing, then that doesn't say much about anyone involved.

And though it should go without saying...I'm talking the whole of government. Not this party or that party/this branch/that branch...but the whole...and the individuals, because they are individuals and often act accordingly, that make up government.



Fey!Dinna fash yersel, Solly.

Overlook me...carry on

(No. Not drunk..alas...no such excuse for me) lolololololol

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

20. Seeing as how they went along, or ignored, the crimes, they aren't about to prosecute themselves.

It's kinda like having the Mafia investigate prostitution. Or, the Pentagon investigate war-crimes.