We have a former president who has admiited to criminal acts.

[Stinky The Clown]

What are we going to do about it?

He admitted to ordering men tortured. He said "Damn right!" as his emphatic, the verbal equivalent of poking you in the chest with a finger while speaking.

He is admitting this, why?

To rehabilitate his sorry reputation?

To boost the fortunes of his party?

To appear tough?

He is probably doing it for all those reasons and more, but mostly he's doing it . . . . .

. . . . because he can.

No one apart from some loudmouths on the internetz is calling for consequences. Others are more concerned with looking forward, not back. They're more concerned with clean tables.

[HereSince1628]

1. And our government will ignore it. What else you got for today? n/t

[donheld]

37. Does that make them an Accessory After the Fact?

[nc4bo]

2. Must look forward, never look back. No one in power is concerned

therefore we should be unconcerned.

The powerful walk away free while the rest of us are tossed in prison for failing to pay a debt.

Something sure does stink in America. When are people going to really wake up to the sad state we find ourselves in?

What will it take?

[Hawkowl]

34. Obama will be impeached

Then maybe he will change his tune. But I doubt it. It's more likely he resigns to spare the country from the trauma of his own impeachment. I never would've thought I was going to live in a Kafka novel.

[Demeter]

48. Oh, I Think Obama Will Have FINALLY Found a Line He Will Hold

when he is impeached. Unless they get him on war crimes--aiding, abetting, continuing....of course, that might rope W in, which makes the "sacrifice" all worthwhile, IMO.

[Lint Head]

3. Man convicted to death for killing three people. George Bush is

directly responsible for killing thousands. There is no real justice in this world.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/world/jury-sentences-man-convicted-in-connecticut-home-invasion-murder-to-death/story-e6frf7lf-1225949740632

[canoeist52]

4. Just dust around the bodies and spray some air freshener.

No one will notice.

[wildbilln864]

5. k&r! nt

[DrDan]

6. has the torture stopped?

[SammyWinstonJack]

13. +1

[grahamhgreen]

24. oops

in these cases a person is kidnapped, taken to another country where they may be tortured.

Waterboarding, in any case, is and was illegal, and should be prosecuted.


""Human rights advocates condemned the decision, saying that continuing the practice, known as rendition, would still allow the transfer of prisoners to countries with a history of torture. They said that promises from other countries of humane treatment, called “diplomatic assurances,” were no protection against abuse.

“It is extremely disappointing that the Obama administration is continuing the Bush administration practice of relying on diplomatic assurances, which have been proven completely ineffective in preventing torture,” said Amrit Singh, a lawyer with the American Civil Liberties Union, who tracked rendition cases under President George W. Bush.

Ms. Singh cited the case of Maher Arar, a Syrian-born Canadian sent in 2002 by the United States to Syria, where he was beaten with electrical cable despite assurances against torture.

The announcement, by President Obama’s Interrogation and Transfer Policy Task Force, seemed intended in part to offset the impact of the release on Monday of a long-withheld report by the C.I.A. inspector general, written in 2004, that offered new details about the brutal tactics used by the C.I.A. in interrogating terrorism detainees.

Though the Obama administration previously signaled that it would continue the use of renditions, some civil liberties groups were disappointed because, as a presidential candidate, Mr. Obama had strongly suggested he might end the practice. In an article in Foreign Affairs in the summer of 2007, Mr. Obama wrote, “To build a better, freer world, we must first behave in ways that reflect the decency and aspirations of the American people.”

Mr. Obama continued, “This means ending the practices of shipping away prisoners in the dead of night to be tortured in far-off countries, of detaining thousands without charge or trial, of maintaining a network of secret prisons to jail people beyond the reach of the law.” In January, the president ordered secret prisons run by the C.I.A. to be shut down.

The task force has proposed a more vigorous monitoring of the treatment of prisoners sent to other countries, but Ms. Singh said the usual method of such monitoring — visits from American or allied consular officials — had been ineffective. A Canadian consular official visited Mr. Arar several times, but the prisoner was too frightened to tell him about the torture, a Canadian investigation found."

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/25/us/politics/25rendition.html

[grahamhgreen]

25. Not really, rendition is still openly practiced by Obama,

in these cases a person is kidnapped, taken to another country where they may be tortured.

Waterboarding, in any case, is and was illegal, and should be prosecuted.


""Human rights advocates condemned the decision, saying that continuing the practice, known as rendition, would still allow the transfer of prisoners to countries with a history of torture. They said that promises from other countries of humane treatment, called “diplomatic assurances,” were no protection against abuse.

“It is extremely disappointing that the Obama administration is continuing the Bush administration practice of relying on diplomatic assurances, which have been proven completely ineffective in preventing torture,” said Amrit Singh, a lawyer with the American Civil Liberties Union, who tracked rendition cases under President George W. Bush.

Ms. Singh cited the case of Maher Arar, a Syrian-born Canadian sent in 2002 by the United States to Syria, where he was beaten with electrical cable despite assurances against torture.

The announcement, by President Obama’s Interrogation and Transfer Policy Task Force, seemed intended in part to offset the impact of the release on Monday of a long-withheld report by the C.I.A. inspector general, written in 2004, that offered new details about the brutal tactics used by the C.I.A. in interrogating terrorism detainees.

Though the Obama administration previously signaled that it would continue the use of renditions, some civil liberties groups were disappointed because, as a presidential candidate, Mr. Obama had strongly suggested he might end the practice. In an article in Foreign Affairs in the summer of 2007, Mr. Obama wrote, “To build a better, freer world, we must first behave in ways that reflect the decency and aspirations of the American people.”

Mr. Obama continued, “This means ending the practices of shipping away prisoners in the dead of night to be tortured in far-off countries, of detaining thousands without charge or trial, of maintaining a network of secret prisons to jail people beyond the reach of the law.” In January, the president ordered secret prisons run by the C.I.A. to be shut down.

The task force has proposed a more vigorous monitoring of the treatment of prisoners sent to other countries, but Ms. Singh said the usual method of such monitoring — visits from American or allied consular officials — had been ineffective. A Canadian consular official visited Mr. Arar several times, but the prisoner was too frightened to tell him about the torture, a Canadian investigation found."

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/25/us/politics/25rendition.html

[DrDan]

30. we certainly cannot claim the moral high-ground when these practices continue

from administration to administration

[truth2power]

56. Has the torture stopped?...

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

You crack me up!!!

[shraby]

7. What do you have when you have a clean table? Nothing!

Zilch, zero. It's time to put something on it before the other side does.

[leveymg]

8. They want clean tables so they can do some more waterboarding on them.

That's why nothing is being done about this. It's going to happen again during the next "national emergency", only the next time, it'll probably also be US Citizens who get the "water cure."

If they prosecuted Bush, they'd be reducing their range of options.

This is just the way democracies die. Move along - nothing to see here.

[lunatica]

9. You nailed it. "...because he can."

and right in our faces too.

[bdamomma]

19. and he is smirking about it too.

damn criminal.

[bettyellen]

10. and he is proftting from it, isn;t that illegal?

[GrpCaptMandrake]

11. This internetz loudmouth

called for it last week . . . loudly, I might add. The archive is at www.whiterosesociety.org/Kincaid.html I think it was either Wednesday or Thursday.

Of course, such a prosecution would require a Department of Justice that hadn't been hogtied by a president who wants to "look forward."

[worriedshrimp]

12. Dubya has a lot more question to answer...

http://www.facebook.com/note.php?created&¬e_id=165464120143423#!/note.php?note_id=165455390144296

[Solly Mack]

14. Yep...because he can.

[spanone]

15. hopefully some foreign governments are issuing subpoenas

i won't hold my breath.

[progressoid]

16. We're going to do exactly nothing about it.

We need to keep our powder dry.

[mmonk]

17. Nothing of course.

As long as the ruling class can convince one of the most propagandized populations in the world there is nothing wrong with torture and as well as the other crimes. Afterall, Americans have fallen for the exact same thing the people of Germany fell for, that being, their legal protections needed to set aside for their protection (up is definitely down in our country).

[Hydra]

35. I used to get my posts about Nuremberg deleted here

And how much we're pissing on it. That was back during the Bush Administration.

I never ONCE thought we'd be having this discussion during a Dem administration. Shows what I know.

[UTUSN]

18. K&R #15 n/t

[The Uncola]

20. K&R

[EFerrari]

21. Remember the UN Special Rapporteur for Torture called for an investigation

during Obama's first year in office? Too bad the DoJ is too busy trying to prosecute the Wikileaks whistleblowers to follow up.

[ProudDad]

42. Or threatening potential pot smokers in California... (n/t)

[TheKentuckian]

22. Maybe a pollyanna could let this go if the former regime kept their heads down

but only a very sick system and people would deny justice to those who brag about their crimes against humanity.

What's next genocide? Depravity and murder against our citizens?

They BRAG!

[grahamhgreen]

23. Turning a blind eye to torture, makes one complicit in the crime. Prosecute now, before they're

all guilty.

[Poboy]

26. We don't even get the empty jesture of a strongly worded letter

from our reps anymore. What a joke.

[grahamhgreen]

27. The CIA director clearly states water boarding is torture:

"Moreover, the nominee for C.I.A. director, Leon E. Panetta, opened a loophole in Mr. Obama’s interrogation restrictions. At his hearing, Mr. Panetta said that if the approved techniques were “not sufficient” to get a detainee to divulge details he was suspected of knowing about an imminent attack, he would ask for “additional authority.”

To be sure, Mr. Panetta emphasized that the president could not bypass antitorture statutes, as Bush lawyers claimed. And he said that waterboarding — a technique that induces the sensation of drowning, and that the Bush administration said was lawful — is torture." http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/18/us/politics/18policy.html


Failure to act, makes one complicit. Prosecution should be on the table.

[Uncle Joe]

28. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, Stinky The Clown.

[Supersedeas]

29. It would be like Nixon writing a book bragging his involvement in protecting

the democratic process by having his team engage in Watergate.

Was it legal -- his lawyers said....

[HughMoran]

31. Yes, this is what the crowds are clamoring for

Let's do it.

[glitch]

32. Clean tables? More like empty tables.

Otherwise agreed.

[felix_numinous]

33. Bush's book confirms all his delusions,

what a perfect storm for the RW to have him as a tool for 8 years.

[Canuckistanian]

36. Yes, but "the lawyer" told him it was OK

And when your "lawyer" says it's OK, it's OK.

[slipslidingaway]

38. Maybe they are just really bad policies and not criminal acts ....

Obama would ask his AG to "immediately review" potential of crimes in Bush White House
http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/attytood/Barack_on_torture.html

April 2008

"Tonight I had an opportunity to ask Barack Obama a question that is on the minds of many Americans, yet rarely rises to the surface in the great ruckus of the 2008 presidential race -- and that is whether an Obama administration would seek to prosecute officials of a former Bush administration on the revelations that they greenlighted torture, or for other potential crimes that took place in the White House.

Obama said that as president he would indeed ask his new Attorney General and his deputies to "immediately review the information that's already there" and determine if an inquiry is warranted -- but he also tread carefully on the issue, in line with his reputation for seeking to bridge the partisan divide. He worried that such a probe could be spun as "a partisan witch hunt." However, he said that equation changes if there was willful criminality, because "nobody is above the law."

The question was inspired by a recent report by ABC News, confirmed by the Associated Press, that high-level officials including Vice President Dick Cheney and former Cabinet secretaries Colin Powell, John Ashcroft and Donald Rumsfeld, among others, met in the White House and discussed the use of waterboarding and other torture techniques on terrorism suspects.

I mentioned the report in my question, and said "I know you've talked about reconciliation and moving on, but there's also the issue of justice, and a lot of people -- certainly around the world and certainly within this country -- feel that crimes were possibly committed" regarding torture, rendition, and illegal wiretapping. I wanted to know how whether his Justice Department "would aggressively go after and investigate whether crimes have been committed."


Here's his answer, in its entirety:


What I would want to do is to have my Justice Department and my Attorney General immediately review the information that's already there and to find out are there inquiries that need to be pursued. I can't prejudge that because we don't have access to all the material right now. I think that you are right, if crimes have been committed, they should be investigated. You're also right that I would not want my first term consumed by what was perceived on the part of Republicans as a partisan witch hunt because I think we've got too many problems we've got to solve.

So this is an area where I would want to exercise judgment -- I would want to find out directly from my Attorney General -- having pursued, having looked at what's out there right now -- are there possibilities of genuine crimes as opposed to really bad policies. And I think it's important-- one of the things we've got to figure out in our political culture generally is distinguishing betyween really dumb policies and policies that rise to the level of criminal activity. You know, I often get questions about impeachment at town hall meetings and I've said that is not something I think would be fruitful to pursue because I think that impeachment is something that should be reserved for exceptional circumstances. Now, if I found out that there were high officials who knowingly, consciously broke existing laws, engaged in coverups of those crimes with knowledge forefront, then I think a basic principle of our Constitution is nobody above the law -- and I think that's roughly how I would look at it.

The bottom line is that: Obama sent a clear signal that -- unlike impeachment, which he's ruled out and which now seems a practical impossibility -- he is at the least open to the possibility of investigating potential high crimes in the Bush White House. To many, the information that waterboarding -- which the United States has considered torture and a violation of law in the past -- was openly planned out in the seat of American government is evidence enough to at least start asking some tough questions in January 2009."

[truth2power]

60. Everyone here needs to carefully read that statement of Obama's...

Especially..." Now, if I found out that there were high officials who knowingly, consciously broke existing laws, engaged in coverups of those crimes with knowledge forefront..."

How in holy hell does what the Bush thugs did not meet those criteria??

Obama is a hypocrite. IANAL, but add, "accessory after the fact."

[slipslidingaway]

62. It was all just talk :( n/t

[earth mom]

39. Meanwhile, Pelosi & Congress refused to impeach * who was and is a known criminal!

:argh:

[pitohui]

40. he;s doing it to sell a book

and if arrested will point out that a book is a story, not a work of truth

this is not evidence, it's just a piece of shit selling himself for money

[ProudDad]

41. And who will get a pass...

Since the new guy's doing the same and worse...

And wants to protect pResidential Privileges...

[Schibulsky]

43. Ex-Chancellor Schröder Says Bush 'Is Not Telling the Truth'

Looks like he is called out again. Is it just stupidity or does he really not understand the meaning of a condition??
Schroeder:
"Just as I did during my subsequent meetings with the American president, I made it clear that, should Iraq ... prove to have provided protection and hospitality to al-Qaida fighters, Germany would reliably stand beside the US," Shröder said. "This connection, however, as it became clear during 2002, was false and constructed."

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,728217,00.html

[AmandaMae]

44. what are we going to do? Have him on Oprah, apparently.

and then let him, like all of America's other top war criminals, walk free.

[defendandprotect]

45. Obviously, Obama/Holder are not moving on anything ....!!!

Will take tremendous power to catch the Bush's at anything --

Perhaps one day the table swill turn?

But not until we all become more aware of the right wing violence

which puts them in power and keeps them there!

[Skittles]

46. he knows the current president won't do a damn thing about it

heck, he was IMMEDIATELY ABSOLVED - no investigations, no questions asked. *Poof*

[indimuse]

47. KNR! n/t

[democrank]

49. Matt Lauer & Oprah interviewing a war criminal on teevee.

USA! USA! USA!

[tclambert]

50. "Did you order a Code Red?" "You're damn right I did!"

"You're arresting me?"

A few lines from A Few Good Men that W. ought to learn . . . and ought to experience first hand.

Cheese and crackers! If the guy comes right out and says, "Yes, I committed war crimes! Whattaya gonna do about it?" Will anyone do anything about it?

[Vinca]

51. Apparently we are going to have to beg a foreign government to prosecute.

I sure hope the POTUS rethinks his decision to "move forward" after the Issa investigations get underway. The Republicans are going to make the Clinton years seem like the good old days.

[Bluenorthwest]

54. Issa and the Teapublicans say they will investigate Bush too

And frankly, there is no love lost with Bush and the Baggers, they'd gladly see him go down as part of a package deal. Two birds, one stone.

[truth2power]

57. "Teapublicans". I like that! I hope you wouldn't mind if I pass it along. eom

[PerpetuallyDazed]

52. "The lawyers said it was legal"

Leader of the free world for 8 years... :banghead:

[The Wizard]

55. Lawyers argue cases

Judges determine legality. Bush is hiding behind a false premise. What's new?
Bush could abduct a pregnant woman and abort her baby on TV and eat the fetus. His lawyers would argue he was very hungry, and therefore justified.
It's all OK if you're a member of the Bush cartel.

[dflprincess]

63. That's not fair

Bush would never hurt a fetus - he's very "prolife" - ever since his mother showed him her "fetus in a jar".

(I wonder if that really happened or if his alcohol addled brain imagined it. Either way I'd love to see how Babs & Poppy react to it.)

[Beartracks]

53. When did cowboy heroes do torture?

With this whole aw shucks, brush-clearing, life-on-the-ranch, tough guy, straight-shootin', no nonsense persona that has grown up around Bush, I find myself trying to remember where in cowboy mythology it was established that good-guy cowboys would be in favor of torturing people for information...

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

[truth2power]

58. He giggles when he talks about death and destruction. Ever notice that? eom

[spanone]

59. obviously the world could care less....

it sickens me to the bone

[Scruffy1]

61. Keep moving-nothing to see here

I mean did you rally believe that nonsense about "freedom and justice for all"? Oh I'm sorry it was written by a socialist. The new version "is freedom for haves, fuck the rest of you." Except we get the freedom of being punished for our crimes of course, and pay the consequences when the rich fuck up the economy. We are not allowed to protest to much or the FBI will come and raid us. And of course we have the choice to vote for the war mongering fascist of our choice. God, I love freedom. It's almost as good as the smell of Napalm in the morning.

It's just childish George flipping us the finger. I mean whats the point of shitting in the sandbox if you can't rub someones nose in it.