Touching Dick Cheney

[H2O Man]

{1} "Sometimes, ‘turning the other cheek’ means breaking the other man’s jaw."
--Malcolm X

One of the things that I liked about Barack Obama during last year’s democratic primary and general election campaign was the way that he combined the imagery of Martin Luther King, Jr., and Malcolm X. Both of these men made significant contributions towards making this country live up to the promise of freedom and justice for all of its citizens. While Martin is remembered for being a militant pacifist, willing to accept the blows of his opposition by turning his other cheek, Malcolm is remembered as a militant who preached the right of self-defense. It’s interesting to note that Martin’s career had a long association with breaking laws and violence, while Malcolm’s involved following the law and relatively little violence. Different tactics at different times, but used with a common goal.

I also liked when Obama was in Philadelphia, and reporters asked him about the likelihood of republicans using gutter tactics in the fall election, and he responded, "If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun." He was paraphrasing Sean Connery’s character from the movie, "The Untouchables." Obama continued, "We don’t have a choice but to win," adding that, "folks in Philly like a good brawl. I’ve seen Eagles games."

These statements upset some people …..primarily those who had hoped that the republicans could safely bring a few knives to the election campaign, and that Barack Obama would be the type of democratic candidate who would suffer stabs in the back peacefully. Some were "outraged" that Obama dared to compare the republican leadership to Al Capone’s criminal organization.

I often referred to the primary and general election campaigns as boxing matches, and candidate Obama to a classic counter-puncher. Just as in any good match featuring talented boxers, there were a few "fouls" from each side. Political campaigns are not pillow fights. But what we are seeing today, as high-lighted in the speeches by President Obama and Vice Mobster Cheney, is as different from a political campaign as a boxing match is from a pillow fight. It requires different tactics.

Doing battle with an Al Capone or a Dick Cheney requires that the lead agent know three things: himself, his team, and the character of his opposition. Know yourself: if this is indeed a struggle in which you have no choice but to win, then as Connery’s character noted, you must know how far you are willing to go. Or, as Malcolm was fond of saying, "By any means necessary."

Know your team. When push comes to shove, are they going to be there with you? Will they back down? Is it possible that Capone-Cheney actually has infiltrated your group?

Know your enemy. Now, there is no question that there is going to be a fight. Trying to talk reason isn’t going to help at this late date. It’s "show time." Yet, Dick Cheney’s speech reminded me of a school yard bully, who really is concerned about his own hide. We know that Dick is, at heart, a coward. He wants his boys to do his fighting for him. In fact, he’ll let his own daughter fight his battle. Still, his boys believe that Dick is a tough guy. A leader. And they will follow him.

Hence, when he resorts to the bully’s bluff of, "You hit me first!" – then hit him. Don’t hesitate, or he has won a psychological victory. Hit him, again and again, until he concedes defeat. And his boys will follow. They’ll know that you prosecuted their head mobster, and convicted him in the court of law. They won’t be like King’s followers, willing to go to jail for what is a just cause. No, that’s not in their character.

Now, I recognize that there are differences of opinion on this. And everyone has the same right to their opinion, as I have to mine. But when I hear people say that President Obama has more important things to do right now, than go after former VP Capone, even though I recognize they may be sincere, I think they are sincerely wrong. You can’t get much done in the city, if the mobsters are able to establish rule by law-breaking, and you ignore it. You have to take care of business.

In my opinion, the Obama administration has to reassert the rule of law. That means honoring their pledge to uphold the Constitution. That means doing what others have failed to do in the past eight years – just as Eliot Ness did – and that’s prosecute the head of the mobsters. And if President Obama doesn’t have the right people in the Department of Justice, then he needs to find himself a good Jim Malone: a beat cop that hasn’t lost sight of what the rule of law is supposed to be, and who knows how to fight for what’s right.

[ClusterFreak]

1. ...is like touching Polonium 210???

:shrug: :evilgrin:

[spanone]

2. k&r...

[elizfeelinggreat]

3. k & r

"You can’t get much done in the city, if the mobsters are able to establish rule by law-breaking, and you ignore it. You have to take care of business."

I agree wholeheartedly.

[malaise]

4. K & R

Good post.

[mmonk]

5. Recommended.

If Eric Holder is not willing to fight, then the fight has been conceded. As far as the team being infiltrated, my opinion is has been. But I must fight so someone on the team will fight.

[Maineman]

61. Eric Holder might be more willing than Obama

I have a sneaking suspicion that Eric Holder is less political and more inclined to uphold the rule of law than Obama might prefer, although I cannot read obama on this. It appears that Obama is so much of a compromiser that he may be a placater. He wants to get things done more than he wants to enforce the law. Let's hope Holder will take care of law enforcement in spite of Obama.

[mmonk]

65. It may be, it's hard to tell but I can only go by the stances

in court where there are no detectable differences between this Justice Department on key issues of the rule of law and the previous one. If I'm wrong, I would like someone to show me.

[H2O Man]

88. In the last one,

there were a group of individuals, led by James Comey, who despite some of their peculiar republican leanings, did have a sense of right and wrong. They were, as you know, ready to resign in protest of some of the more toxic policies from VP Cheney. We can only hope that there are individuals with that type of character in the DoJ today.

Now, isn't that a terrible statement? But it's true.

[mmonk]

93. Yes, it is.

[Me.]

6. Interestingly, I Watched Powell Two-Step The Torture Issue This Morning

I felt it was one of his less honest moments and was filled with what we were facing at the time, had the legal opinions to back it up, enhanced interrogation blah, blah, blah. Also interesting, he pointed out that torture in this country was ended by 41.

[tomp]

63. prosecute powell, too.

but he's obama's friend. the mutual powell-obama love fest was EXACTLY what told me obama was not going to go after bush, inc.

[azul]

7. But to be electable these days you have to strut your military nuts and bolts business.

And I think that is where Obama is vulnerable and is taking these punches: continuing the collateral damage, that infuriates and disgusts vast populations of people, and continuing the suspension of constitutional rights in an indefinite and false "war", that exposes a hypocritical disregard of the rule of law -of which he is unable to plead ignorance or justify his actions.

Prisoner of war himself. And I do believe that he had a anti-war mandate in his election.

[lunatica]

8. Why this is even a debate is beyond me

Saying it's not the right time is a cop out. It's never a convenient time.

[lunatica]

9. We ceased being a Constitutionl Democracty in 2000 when Bush was selected

It's up to Obama to make us one again. Or not.

The fact is, we're not a Constitutional Democracy now. And the rule of law is no longer ours either.

[Hepburn]

10. Excellent....truly excellent....

...and deserving of a K&R.

You know the different between you and me, H20?

My OP would have been entitled "TORCHING Dick Cheney"...and the total contents would have been:

:grr:

Love you and your magnificent ability to analyze and express!

:hug:

[Raksha]

11. K & R - great post!

[OneGrassRoot]

12. Bingo. Thank you. K&R n/t

[PufPuf23]

13. I agree. Moving forward requires piercing and

healing the neocon and religious wingnut boil. There is no moving forward without re-instituting the Rule of Law. There is no higher priority for the USA and for the USA in the world of nations. The beauty of the Constitution is that it is a living document. Liberty is freedom expanded not diminished by fear.

[stevedeshazer]

14. A fish rots from the head down

The head is Dick.

That makes him a rotten Dick head.

Rotting fish stinks, yet it's decomposition serves as compost for the next generation.

A wise boss I once had said that manure is like money. If you start to pile it up, it smells up the place. If you spread it around, it grows food and flowers.

I really hope President Obama upholds the Constitution and rids us of this awful smell.

Thanks for your thoughtful essay.

[Mind_your_head]

46. THAT is an excellent quote!

"A wise boss I once had said that manure is like money. If you start to pile it up, it smells up the place. If you spread it around, it grows food and flowers."

Thanks for sharing that one.

[madmax]

15. Love the Malcolm X quote. n/t

[hwmnbn]

16. Obama can land plenty of rhetorical punches...

from his bully pulpit. To put it in a boxing analogy that's like a fighter opening up the gym to the public to watch his work out. He can flash some speed and power but it's just for show.

If he really wants to bring the heat and nail these criminals, he has to step into the ring for real. And for that, Obama needs a clean DOJ. As far as I can tell there are still plenty of "loyal bushie" moles at various levels who would undermine those efforts. I don't know how effectively or quickly Holder can clean up the mess.

IMO, there is enough evidence already out there to warrant criminal investigations on several fronts, there is just not the political will yet. That "cloud" Patrick Fitzgerald put over Dick Cheney IS STILL THERE.

Maybe team Obama has a fight plan to start wailing in the later rounds. Maybe Obama is doing the rope-a-dope letting Cheney fire his best shots before unleashing his counterpunches.




Maybe I'm getting carried away hoping Obama has some Muhammad Ali in him. They're from the same neighborhood in Chicago. :evilgrin:

[Gregorian]

17. I'm trying to imagine the conversation between Dick Cheney and his daughter.

I wondered whether she offered herself up. But having read your post, I found it almost comical that perhaps he begged her to go out there and do it for/with him.

And I'm glad to hear that you feel the way I do about taking care of this business. I've said that if they shut down the entire show but for this, I'd be happy.

However, there is reality and reality. One is a hope, a dream. The other is a country in ruin, with millions of people on the financial edge. I read a post last night, however facetious, regarding the environment. Our secretary of energy was pushing "clean coal". The post mentioned a reality that exists there as perhaps here. The machine is not going to stop. And if it takes coal, then so be it. And really, that's how this is all playing out. And much to my sorrow and rage. And it's not the same as prosecuting. But there is something that I might be sensing with Obama. What if prosecuting actually does more harm than good? And I thought of this after reading The Authoritarians. When I think of an authoritarian, like the Jesse Ventura versus Hannity interview, I see someone who doesn't want to learn, or change. I know there are Senator Byrds and George Wallaces, but they're far far and few between. Obviously, prosecution would have a dividing effect on the country. I could see a dozen or so people going to prison. But I don't see much more coming from it. Hannity would still spew. Cheney would still be Cheney. Now if I imagine that Obama takes the reigns and simply moves away from this period of time, he may be able to achieve more by doing so than by prosecuting. A dozen men and a couple of women in bars, and what else? They're still going to impeach the next Clinton they can get their grips on. They're still going to be authoritarians. What, beside upholding the law, will it do?

I love the Malcolm X quote. And Jesus wasn't a complete pacifist. He chased the money changers out of the temple with a whip. I'm 1000% in favor of kicking their asses. But I'm trying to think of the two scenarios down the road. One being after prosecutions, and the other being having never prosecuted. Now that I think of it, there is surely another set of possibilities. And perhaps that is what we haven't focused on yet. But still, the point is, what will we have at the end. Is Obama looking at the end result and asking which avenue to take in order to achieve the best future?

As I walk away I begin asking if this kind would be the equivalent of shifting to the right. In other words, like you said, we have to sock them in the jaw. As you can see, I don't really know. The whole idea of being robbed, and then offering up your coat. That's pacifism.

[hwmnbn]

19. Don't you hate when this happens??...

I ended up with more questions at the end of writing this than when I began.

Your points are well taken. But if we had successfully prosecuted many of these same criminals for the Iran-Contra scandal, they may not have been able to re-insert themselves into the positions of power this time. Some other cabal might have replaced them but these guys knew the ropes already.

I fall on the side of EVERYONE is subject to the rule of law. Right now they are making a mockery of our justice system and openly flaunting their transgressions. IMO, it's put-up or shut-up time for the good guys.

[OneGrassRoot]

24. I tend to agree. Accountability is imperative to have any integrity --

systemic or individual.

Holding people accountable is the best prevention of further crimes and abuse. If BushCo had been held accountable, we wouldn't have to be subjected to Cheney and Company so much of late, with him joining in to agitate the Limbaugh-Faux News followers.

Those followers are like a nest of hornets. They have a target for their anger -- the black guy who was actually elected -- and Cheney is stirring that nest with lies and cowardice, cloaked in the "We're Number One!" bullshit.

What's so awful is that the so-called "mainstream" media is giving he and Liz an unchallenged outlet to keep spewing lies, which inadvertently lends some credibility to their lies for the low-information citizens.

Unconscionable, in my opinion.

[upi402]

18. Rule of Law seems very important to me

The media continuing to dupe the people is seeming intractable though. So it's prime, in my mind. The restoration of democracy has no chance if the Cheney merde is still spewing from the spinning fan. Somebody needs to unplug that thing, the stench is unbearable!

[bleever]

20. Watergate, BCCI, Iran-Contra: all missed opportunities

to assert the power of the law over the mobsters. A few wrists are slapped, and the criminal enterprises not only remain intact, but become more entrenched, with wider ambitions. The result: the imperial presidency, "unitary executive", torture, wire-tapping, and the Iraq war. Not to mention a global financial meltdown in no small part due to scorn for basic regulation of key economic institutions.

And here comes Dick Cheney, practically the living embodiment of all the previous scandals, sneering down and saying, "Oh yeah? What are you going to do about it, kid?"

I think President Obama may have the right answer. Some of his blows will be strong and swift, and others will be quiet, slow, and strategic. But I continue to believe that he understands the stakes.


Thank you for this outstanding perspective. Recommended!

[zippy890]

21. how is that 'beat cop' going to fight for what is right

if the DOJ won't?

Seems to me that Cheney is taunting Obama, using your metaphor he's stickin his face out daring Obama to try and punch him. He -Cheney wants his day in court, to testify how he was driven by nothing less than overarching desire to protect the American people, between wheezes and curling lip he is a practiced politician and is confident he would win a jury over in a court of law.

sorry to disappoint other DUers but I don't want to hear or see that spectacle- Cheney believes his lies profoundly. I would rather let him continue muttering them until everyone is tired of it and he becomes the muttering old man of the town who everyone is sick of listening to and has no credibility left.

[H2O Man]

23. Respectfully disagree.

Cheney believes his own lies? Really? Like the "yellow cake" from Niger? Nope.

Cheney wants a day in court? Sure he does. Just like when he was prepared to go to court to speak out on behalf of his buddy Scooter Libby. But he backed down, at the last minute. Dick Cheney does not want to go in front of the public -- especially not a jury -- and have to answer serious questions.

How would a "beat cop" fight for what is right, if the DoJ won't? The answer is self-evident: if the DoJ put an honest investigator/prosector in charge of this, it would mean the DoJ -- though not those individuals who are not interested or willing to go after VP Capone's outfit, would be.

[Tangerine LaBamba]

31. Jurisdiction for this wouldn't

lie with DOJ, but wiith Congress, I believe. Remember the Watergate hearings? That's how it would have to happen, if it were to happen at all.

But it's never going to happen.

Nothing is going to happen.

They're all going to get away with it............

[H2O Man]

32. Congress can investigate.

If there is evidence of a crime or abuse of power, they can impeach. But they can't impose a penalty beyond a civil one -- impeachment. Congress thus reders criminal matters to the DoJ for criminal prosecution. For both Watergate and Iran-Contra, it is important to remember who actually did criminal prosecutions. Congress simply can't.

[Tangerine LaBamba]

34. That's correct ............

I'm thinking far too narrowly.

Thanks for snapping me out of it.

If only W had gotten a blowjob in the Oval Office, maybe we'd have a better chance of getting him investigated?

[peacetalksforall]

71. Also, Cheney did not allow a criminal trial for the destruction of the U.S.

on 9-11. Rumsfeld stated he did not want the bombers going to court because he did not want them tried by a jury. Cheney put his foot down, said no, then relented by agreeing to a phoney investigation about how well or poorly our intelligence is.

Cheney is in his own media courtroom presently and he jumpe to his statement to the judge and jurty. In an filled legal courtroom, he would only say the same thing and add nothing. His trial would be the trial about everyone else until we got around to individual trials.

Np, I don't see how Cheney wants a court trial. However, it would be the best thing that could happen to this nation with the right prosecutors.

All the other players need to get exposed through the law simultaneously. Cheney could die on any day. It's foolish to put all this attention on him. And no one mentions George any more.

We need justice, President Obama. We need the truth. We can stand up to the truth. Moving forward mired in dirt, mud, and quicksand will make us a wretched nation.

We need a new beginning with light on it all, not a dimmer.

[Garbo 2004]

27. "Cheney wants his day in court?" Is that why he fought against the Wilsons' lawsuit?

He could have had a day in court but he fought to dismiss the case, hiding behind sovereign immunity: the King can do no wrong and is not subject to accountability.

Cheney believes in one thing: power. He absolutely does not want to go into a court where he is not in control, where he is subject to other peoples' will. That's why he's out of his bunker and on his grand tour, in the hopes of making enough noise so that any investigation/prosecution might be viewed as political, rather than reinforcing the rule of law. He's scared. And that's why he's on the offensive.

[Uncle Joe]

22. No truer words.

"Hence, when he resorts to the bully’s bluff of, "You hit me first!" – then hit him. Don’t hesitate, or he has won a psychological victory. Hit him, again and again, until he concedes defeat."

Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, H2O Man.

[Garbo 2004]

25. K & R. n/t

[Patsy Stone]

26. K&R nt

[rosesaylavee]

28. What do you think the chances are of Cheney going to court?

I still dream of the day I wake up and hear on the news that he's been arrested. I dream of it but it seems less and less likely as time goes on. Or maybe my expectation was that the Obama Administration would have indicated their direction on that by now.

[H2O Man]

29. Good question.

My understanding is that there are people in Washington, DC, who are saying that there may have to be some accounting for the torture scandal. There has been some back-and-forth, and one possibility is that the republicans would sacrifice Donald Rumsfeld. At the same time, they would publicly call it a "witch hunt," and raise hell.

Cheney is aware of this. First, he has been closely associated with Rumsfeld for even longer than he has been with Libby; he is angry that two of his buddies may have to "take the weight" for the entire administration. Second, just as the Libby investigation went directly to Cheney -- and made it "crystal clear," to borrow a phrase, that Cheney had at very least committed abuses of the power of office that should have resulted in his being impeached -- any investigation/prosecution of Rumsfeld would place criminal actions squarely upon Cheney's desk. And that is exactly why he is so angry.

[BeFree]

39. Ahhh, Rummy

He would be quite a target. Nobody likes Rummy. Methinks Rummy might spill a few beans, too, were he to be nailed and had all the blame on his shoulders.

It would make a great way to get at Bushco as an opening round in the fireworks to come. Sometimes those people in DC know how to get things done when they finally get around to doing the right thing.

Since we can't see the background stuff, it sure is good to see Cheney being out front and center. It means there is a lot going on that we may never know about until one day -- WHAM!

Cheney being out there defending himself means something is going down and Cheney doesn't like it. Clearly, it is good news.

[H2O Man]

54. "Rummy might spill a few beans..."

Right. He is not going to pull a Scooter, sitting silently, confident the president will eventually pardon him. You hit the nail on the head.

[bulldogge]

91. Rummy

Can't control his own temper. I really believe something as simple as that would be his/their own down fall. A bit of prodding in the wrong area, being asked to answer the same question repeatedly only phrased in a different manner etc, once he blows his cap he would start speaking without thinking as he did in news conference after news conference and he would throw away his own key in the process.

[Senator]

40. What do you think the chances are of...

...letting those "people in Washington" know that their arrogant efforts to manipulate our rule of law and compromise our core values, for whatever reason -- some imagined greater-good they have deluded themselves into believing they are forging, or some more personally/politically corrupt purpose -- are far worse than even cheney, rumsfeld, etc... and the atrocities born of those terrified little megalomaniacs.

The cheneyites violated some grave laws. The DC People seek to (continue to?) violate justice itself.

(Note to H20 Man: Yes, this is virtually rhetorical. And thanks for your powerful OP.)

--

[H2O Man]

55. Those people want

to get by this with as little discomfort as possible. Our job is to make it uncomfortable for them. Now, this may sound small and of little consequence, but I can -- and will -- forward this OP/thread to a friend, who will then send it to someone in DC. That person in DC isn't a "mere" aide, he is in a US Senate seat. And he is one of those people who is advocating doing something to address this situation -- because he knows there is no chance for resolving the conflicts in the Middle East if this country grants war criminals a pass on their crimes. Again, this is an example of something small, but if we get enough people to send enough small messages, they will hear.

[PinkyisBlue]

73. Include my small message in this.

I recommended your post and wasn't going to write a response, but I believe that this is issue #1 in our country right now. We can't move forward until we resolve the past. And holding people accountable for their crimes is first on the list.

I don't see why these criminals aren't automatically apprehended and prosecuted once evidence of a crime is clear; if I robbed a bank 10 years ago and was caught today, would the authorities let me go because the crime happened in the past and they wanted to "move forward"?

[rosesaylavee]

80. This is so very very important to the future of our country...

If there was something more I could personally do to convince 'them' or someone that this is vitally important - I would do it short of endangering my family. These criminals will continue to resurface as they have in the past.

I know you know this Mr. Waterman. This message is for your friend.

[Senator]

89. I always try to be grateful for small things.

But the surest path to the least discomfort is by demonstrating conscience and satisfying the sworn duty to lead with honor. The rest is just facade.

--

[mmonk]

68. It will be inadequate to accept a fall guy because it will still buy into lies,

but of course on the same token, he could really spill some ultimate beans during his defense if he doesn't pull an Ollie North.

[underpants]

62. I think the chances are small

There are so many staunch defenders of the new status quo (turn on the TV to any news channel) and the precedent would be so alarming to those inside the castle walls (skipping over the torture precedent) that they will hold off until the bitter end.

If there really ever is any accountability (unlikely) they will offer up Alberto Gonzales as sacrifice. Gonzo will most assuredly do whatever they ask him to do just as Scooter did.

[sellitman]

30. Why do you stop at Cheney?

Do you think George was out of the loop?

I don't.

Not for a second.

I am of the mind that folks who refuse to implicate everyone involved are just as guilty of looking the other way as those who would pass on putting Cheney in front of a jury. Yes , Cheney with his sneer and his outspoken press is an easier target but he is only 1/2 of the picture IMHO.

[H2O Man]

33. I don't stop at Cheney.

[azul]

37. thank you, and for previously correcting my post on impeachment.

I knew that calling for impeachment for obstructing justice or pardoning those he ordered to break laws was not "explicit" in the constitution. Bad choice of word. Where my argument came from was from some articles some months previous that the framers of the constitution clearly expressed or made it clear in their discussion that the president should be impeached for these actions.

I got involved and lost in reading the framer's discussions, which was an education in itself. So sorry about flaking. Maybe better late than never?

----------------


"The founders were exceptionally clear on the question of what should be done if a president abuses his privilege to pardon an associate, or by extension to commute the sentence of an aide.

James Madison, who is rightly referred to as "the father of the Constitution," wrote extensively about the times in which impeachment would be necessary. " the President be connected, in any suspicious manner, with any person, and there be grounds to believe he will shelter him, the House of Representatives can impeach him; they can remove him if found guilty," observed the man whose notes provide the essential outline of the deliberations of the Constitutional convention.

Madison's Virginia compatriot, George Mason, who was an even more ardent advocate of impeachment, was similarly concerned about abuses of the power of the president to keep the law from touching his associates. The man now remembered as "the father of the Bill of Rights" feared that a future president might attempt to shield himself by preventing the prosecution or jailing of an aide who could testify to the president's involvement in a high crime or misdemeanor.

Mason suggested that impeachment would surely be in order were a president to attempt "to stop inquiry and prevent detection" of wrongdoing within his administration -- as the Bush White House is currently doing with its use of executive privilege to undermine congressional investigations of the politicization of federal prosecutions. Equally, the thoughtful founder suggested, impeachment would be in order were a president might to "pardon crimes which were advised by himself" -- as Bush has essentially done with the commutation of the sentence of his own former counselor and the chief of staff of his vice president.

~~~~

His point was that, if a president could not be impeached, he could not be held to account. To neglect the demand of that accountability, especially in moments when abuses became clear, Madison suggested 'might be fatal to the Republic.'"

http://www.thenation.com/blogs/thebeat/210216

[NewJeffCT]

51. Because it went past Bush and up to Cheney

I think Cheney ran a lot of this. Bush knew, but probably didn't care for all the messy details. Bush was the guy that mocked a death row inmate, after all. Is a "little" torture really going to bother him?

[Redstone]

35. "Touch Dick Cheney?" I'd rather touch a known-virulent anthrax sample.

Redstone

[femrap]

36. The only thing that should

touch Cheney is an operating microwave that upsets his pacemaker. Really...it's time he goes to some other plane/plain. He just needs to go away.

[Time for change]

38. Absolutely right

Prosecute the damn mobsters, for God sake.

Otherwise we'll continue to live in a mob infiltrated country for a very long time, very likely until our implosion.

[HughMoran]

41. Sometimes when a man dares you to punch him, you must take him out

Cheney is daring Obama to prosecute him. If Obama is truly the great counter-puncher that he is renowned to be, then this would be the time for the knockout punch. Clearly Cheney is looking to maryr himself, but this is where Obama has shined in the past - I expect noting less than a fake followed by a precisely placed punch that breaks the cowards glass jaw.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

42. Cheney is worried or else he would be sitting out on his deck in St Michaels all the time

instead he is running around like a hunted fox.

[pitchforksandtorches]

43. I would like to touch Dick C.

after school, by the bike-racks.

[The_Casual_Observer]

44. Touch? Cheney is walking all over him.

Where is the counter punch?

[BlueMTexpat]

45. Thanks, H2O Man ...

I sincerely hope that the Obama Administration and the Democratic leadership in Congress will quit waffling about and stand firmly for the Rule of Law! It's simply the right thing to do.

Investigate and, wherever the evidence leads, indict. Then prosecute to the full extent of the law and punish the evildoers.

They certainly do not have to do this personally; they simply need to authorize and begin the process.

We CAN do this now ... and saying that it is not the right moment is a total and complete cop-out.

[Nothing Without Hope]

47. As with so many of your posts, clarity and refreshment. Clear H2O. Thanks! n/t

[opihimoimoi]

48. Cheney is a MALIGNANT TUMOR.....DO NOT TOUCH...He is worse than SIN...he is a POX

That is all....

[democrank]

49. I respect your opinion but don`t share your optimism.

It seems to me that torture isn`t one of those issues that belongs in the deal-making back rooms of Washington. Torture isn`t on the same level as a fuel efficiency standard deal...as in I`ll agree to your 42MPG if you add that bridge in my district to your to-do list. Torture isn`t something President Obama needs to ponder, since he knows more than a little something about our Constitution and the law. He doesn`t need a focus group or a gazillionaire image consultant to reach a conclusion on this issue. Our government comitted war crimes in our names and this president and this congress needs to stop hiding the truth.

If I know that children were sodomized and men were hung from ceiling chains for days, then I`m sure President Obama does as well. Then why would he announce to the nation that it`s time to look forward not backward? Why wouldn`t he say that someone has to answer for this barbarism? Was it too risky? Not middle-of-the-road enough? Does he fear the political backlash?

I didn`t make torture excuses for President Bush and I`m not going to make them for President Obama.
I don`t care if it has been 100 days, 10 days or 1 day.President Obama had plenty of time to think about this during his long, long campaign. Since the president is good at speech writing, I assume he could come up with something powerful on why torturers...and pro-torture policy makers...must be prosecuted.

Imagine the postings at DU if we were talking about President Bush right now. I guarantee DUers wouldn`t be so patient and understanding.

[H2O Man]

53. I hope that President Obama

doesn't back down. But I'm not fully confident that he is going to do the right thing. And it is, in my opinion, the single most important issue. Everything else is closely related. If he takes the challenge, then he can accomplish his other goals; if he backs down from the challenge, he loses the ability to do anything meaningful in a long-lasting sense.

[olegramps]

50. Put up or shut up!

Are you sick and tired of seeing Cheney's fat ass on TV spewing his propaganda? Are you tired of hearing Rush Limbaugh and his ilk lying daily. Do you really want to shut them up? Then start a massive, and I mean massive, boycott of all of their sponsors' products.

The members of this board have the power to put these people out of business if we really desired to do so. Make it the MAJOR ISSUE and within a very short time they will be silenced. There is no weapon that is more effective than hitting someone in the pocket book. When their sponsors receive a couple of hundred thousand letters from people saying they will no longer buy their products since they support fascists bastards I assure you that they will take notice. Vow to never watch or listen to the stations that host these bastards and you will have a two edged sword that will decapitate these scum-bags.

As long as we buy their sponsors products, we are paying them to spread their lies since this is their only source of revenue. We have the power to put them out or business. We only need the resolve to do so.

[H2O Man]

52. Well said.

What you say here is -- by no coincidence -- exactly what both Martin and Malcolm recognized as one of the Civil Rights Movement's most powerful weapons: for while an individual may be poor, a large group of poor people indeed has a large amount of money. Pooled together, they can make their resources into a meaningful statement. By not buying, and letting those who benefit from every time the cash register usually rings up a sale know why, they make a statement that communicates their message. And that is the only language those people understand.

[olegramps]

60. The gay and lesbian community brought Coors around.

The bars they frequented refused to sell Coors beer and the whole community wrote letters and boycotted their product. Coors reversed their policies in short order.

We could do the same with an effective boycott. It is one of the most powerful weapons that ordinary folks can wield when it become national.

[pleah]

57. I'll do my part.

:thumbsup:

[Aviation Pro]

56. Ew....

...not even with Liz Cheney's whatevershehas.

[pleah]

58. K&R

[yy4me]

59. Well said, K & R

[kywildcat]

64. Thank you H20 Man.

I'm starting to wonder if Cheney is more concerned with Bush (W and HW) than Obama. My hypothesis is that Bush was warned about Cheney starting in 2003. I remember background noise about taking Cheney off of the 2004 ticket under the guise of health concerns. As we know, Bush in his infinite bullheaded narcissism resisted. I think he started to rein in Cheney and Cheney in so many words (and deeds) said - ok, lets see you run this show-hence Harriet Meiers nomination for the supreme court and other bizarre decisions from Bush. I think at that point as well the CIA recognized they had been hung out to dry,and a flood of information and misdeeds that would not have otherwise seen the light if day-did (Does anyone really think that Scooter Libby would have been investigated let alone prosecuted if Cheney still had control). Enter GHW Bush, and his long and deep ties to that organization. Around the time of the 2006 elections we saw several GHW Bush cronies step forward and 'advise' and help Jr. Seriously-why would Gates-having a successful academic career want to clean up Rumsfelds mess? And we saw the opening shot across the bow to Cheney-the dismissal of Rumsfeld. I'm getting the feeling that Cheney is feeling like a cornered rat. Internationally-he's toast. The cost of the Iraq war in terms of instability is far greater than the benefits-and this rest squarely on Cheney's shoulders. Cheney's quest for world domination has also damaged the Bush Family Legacy beyond repair. Jeb will never have a chance at the presidency. While W hasn't a clue or the capacity to understand what he has done to the family name-his father does. And I think Bush Sr. wants blood. I'm starting to wonder if the push pull with Cheney and Obama and now Bush Jr. and Obama is an attempt for both to secure their future-one is working behind the scenes and could be seen as 'cooperative' and the other has chucked his hand and publicly dared Obama.

[Turborama]

69. Interesting perspective, one thing though...

What's this about Jr. working cooperatively behind the scenes? I haven't heard anything about this and am intrigued...

[kywildcat]

72. Obama acknowledged in an interview last week

that he had spoken with Bush since the inauguration. I think publicly acknowledging contact upped the ante with Cheney. From both Obama and Bush. It tells Cheney in the most in your face way that Bush and Obama are 'talking' and that can't be good for Cheney. In addition, numerous ex intelligence people are talking about torture-and not in a positive light. No one 'with credibility' is saying that the torture worked. So we see the alignment happening. I think at this point Bush (being prodded by his father) is trying to salvage what he can. I see a huge miscalculation on Cheney's part in the very near term. Bush is spilling his guts behind the scene-Cheney counters publicly. And Obama is is playing mediator.

[grantcart]

74. I think that you are largely correct except that what Cheney is really concerned about is

spending the rest of his life in litigation, and is afraid that others in the Bush Administration are going to lay it at his door.


I suspect that W is smarter than most people think and that when it came to the over the line shit he used Cheney as a cut out, he gave Cheney an ambiguous order with a wink and Cheney's name is going to be on the memos giving more specific direction. When they work back up the pyramid its going to stop at Cheney, and that Bush is not going to be prosecutable.

This scenario seemed to match what happen on the Liddy affair and had Liddy opened his mouth Cheney would have been in deep trouble, again with no direct connection back to Bush.

Ironically it may turn out that Bush had a better sense on how DC works in the long term (perhaps because his father had given him specific direction not to get his fingerprints on anything too specific) than Cheney.

It is clear that Cheney is scared, I think of both Obama and the part of the Bush Administration he alienated. He knows that he is walking around with a big target on his back. By speaking out on a constant basis he knows that he is making any prosecution of him look like a partisan attack.

[kywildcat]

77. I agree with you on the Bush smarts statement

He is much smarter than people realize, and he plays the DC game well-I think entirely to his fathers credit. I still believe this will come down to Cheney vs Bush-with each trying to get to Obama first (each in a different way-Bush will bring him into the inner sanctum, Cheney will challenge him and try to make him misstep). Cheney's first big mistake was dissing Powell and sucking him into this. From here-it's nothing but downhill for Cheney. I do know that I'm saving 20 bucks a week for the trip to the Hague to watch the trial. It's what I'm living for.

[grantcart]

78. If he gets prosecuted, and its a big if, it will never be at the Hague, it will be for

violating National Security laws in the US.

[kywildcat]

79. Please explain-I'm afraid that I have tunnel vision on

this issue-or maybe wishful thinking. How do you see this playing out?

[grantcart]

83. Prosecuting at the Hague isn't going to happen for a lot of reasons

but most of all because he won't go to any country that has the balls to arrest him.


I believe that very technical laws were broken, laws having to do with the interference of intelligence analysts in their reporting, the use of classified information, and perhaps the most important, instructing the CIA not to pursue certain sources that would undermine policy.

For example ordering the CIA to create this forgery is certainly a violation of law

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0808/12308.html

A new book by the author Ron Suskind claims that the White House ordered the CIA to forge a back-dated, handwritten letter from the head of Iraqi intelligence to Saddam Hussein.

Suskind writes in “The Way of the World,” to be published Tuesday, that the alleged forgery – adamantly denied by the White House – was designed to portray a false link between Hussein’s regime and al Qaeda as a justification for the Iraq war.

The author also claims that the Bush administration had information from a top Iraqi intelligence official “that there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq – intelligence they received in plenty of time to stop an invasion.”

The letter’s existence has been reported before, and it had been written about as if it were genuine. It was passed in Baghdad to a reporter for The (London) Sunday Telegraph who wrote about it on the front page of Dec. 14, 2003, under the headline, “Terrorist behind September 11 strike ‘was trained by Saddam.’”

The Telegraph story by Con Coughlin (which, coincidentally, ran the day Hussein was captured in his “spider hole”) was touted in the U.S. media by supporters of the war, and he was interviewed on NBC's "Meet the Press."

You can't be prosecuted for being ' a piece of shit' or 'acting like an idiot'. However manufacturing evidence or ordering intelligence disregarded that resulted in the needless deaths of American serviceman seems to me like a reasonable case to build on, and passes the bar of 'partisanship'.

[spooked911]

66. good luck-- my guess is you'll be disappointed

[H2O Man]

86. Nope.

I'm never disappointed, because my only stake is what I, as an individual, do. Those who fail to do anything should be disappointed in themselves. What others do is beyond my responsibility; it's a stick I don't feel.

[Blackhatjack]

67. Every great fight is won and lost BEFORE the first punch is ever landed ...

As you so eloquently pointed out it is not enough to be willing to fight, but the level of commitment you bring to the fight that is most important to success.

Psychological warfare is no trick. IF you believe you will lose, you will lose.

Take down Cheney in a frontal assault on his own territory(issues) and you will see his supporters melt away.

IMHO that is what we are seeing right now. Cheney is trying to preemptively neuter actions to bring him to the bar of justice by exuding an air of inevitable success. If no one is willing to challenge him, it will become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

[Octafish]

70. Justice

After sealing his Poppy's presidential papers, about the first thing Bush Jr. did was destroy the Department of Justice. I assumed it would be the first thing President Obama would focus on and repair -- even before the stupid economy. Staffed with people of integrity, rather than loyal Bushies, Obama's DoJ would investigate and prosecute war criminals, corrupt officials, and the rest of the traitors who ran America into the ground for eight years. Besides, with the gangsters who looted Treasury, Wall Street and the banks still on the loose, the economy would continue its slide as it devours the future of the middle class.

The only thing I'd add to your outstanding essay, H20 Man, is America's new Eliot Ness also must go after the big bananas who ordered and continue to boss VP Capone around. And how.

[H2O Man]

84. I agree

completely. There was no individual "above" Cheney between 2001 and 2008 in public office. But there were certainly some people pulling strings from behind the curtain.

[grantcart]

75. For the first time I have to disagree with you.

Any legal action taking against major actors of the previous administration has to be completely seperated from partisanship.


President Obama knows it and has made remarks about this.


That does not mean that they cannot or should not be done, but that it has to be done without any attachment to the partisan side of the Administraion. Career prosecutors must be completely insulated and judge all aspects on only the facts without any influence to the nature of who did it.

They need to identify very specific violations of the law, at the lowest level; violations of national security rules and laws and marshal the evidence and get people to flip as they go up the chain of command, just like any prosecution.

I suspect that, in the end, the paper trail will go to Cheney who in his hubris committed himself in writing to things that Bush, in his feigned ignorance did not. It would not surprise me to find in the end 'W' was smarter than people thought and that he remained ambiguous in his instructions while Cheney gave out specific written instructions that he knows if they surfaced, would make him the fall guy on illegal action.

It would account for Cheney's vigorous attempt to try and make the issue a 'partisan' one while 'W' lays back quietly.

In anycase President Obama cannot have any direct involvement, it must come from professional career prosecutors who proceed without any kind of political or partisan direction.

[H2O Man]

82. Though we may have

some minor disagreement on how best to approach this, I am fully confident that we both have the same goal in front of us. And I always respect your opinion, and value your adding your viewpoint to any conversation.

[grantcart]

85. yes of course we share the same goal and the differences are minor

[H2O Man]

87. I have to say

that the garbage Cheney was spewing annoyed me. I understand exactly what he is tying to do. And so, thoughts of Brother Malcolm play in my mind!

I hope that you and yours are having a good holiday, though it is by definition a somber day.

[grantcart]

92. We have to be as persistent as they are annoying.

They are counting on draging us down and defusing our passion. It has worked for them for decades.

Persistence, persistence persistence.

"If you are persistent, then these problems can be dealt with," Obama said. "That whole philosophy of persistence, by the way, is one that I'm going to be emphasizing again and again in the months and years to come as long as I'm in this office."

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1887496,00.html

I got my little dose of H2O Man today, so I am good to go!

[Overseas]

76. Kicking !!

I think prosecuting the Torturer in Chief is very important too. And I like this different angle on the issue.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

81. I don't want to touch Dick

heheh

[Piewhacket]

90. Touch him? Not a chance. Just stand off at a fair distance...

and have the Army bombard the living hell out of
his "undisclosed" location. Reduce it to rubble,
cover it with concrete, and quarantine the area for 200 years.