One Bush administration legal advisor, Jack Goldsmith, says his colleagues were acutely conscious that the president or his advisors could someday be investigated for the steps they took or approved after 9/11.
Please, oh please, oh please, I have been a good boy (well most of he time) and THIS is all I want for Christmas.
Saturday, September 05, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
It would truly be the gift of a life time.
ReplyDeleteAnd just deserts for that Bull Shit Impeachment of Clinton, planned a executed so that Congress wouldn't have the guts to Impeache the Bushies.
And yes it was planned. I heard two Republicans on a radio show after Clinton's first election but before he was even sworn in, saying that the Republians would Impeach Clintol.
I'm nooooot making that up.
Same 24 hour talk show out of Dallas, withing months, probably the same Repos talking calling Dubyah President Bush. So yeah the cheat was planned also.
Soooo, For my Christmas can we please Impeach Scalia for anouncing a judicial decision, before the case is even heard?
I'd even give you my two front teeth to see this happen!!
ReplyDeleteAmen, brother!
ReplyDeleteIf the Hague decides to try them, it could be worse than jail time. I believe Cheney is running scared.
ReplyDeleteGryphen, I am so with you. I'll even go back home and get that 24" Huffy from Christmas '59, clean it, repair and repaint it and give it to the first orphan I meet, for the hope that this comes off. Although, I have to admit that I think to put it all on Georgie would be wrong. I think he is particularly damaged,(trying to be PC,here)
ReplyDeletealthough I don't think he should be totally absolved. Cheney on the other hand!!! Get the drill.
Wouldn't that just get their panties in a wad,.... eh! I love it.
ReplyDeleteNever gonna happen. I loathe Dubya, and I live in Texas, so I've had much longer to loathe him than most of you, but it would be terribly destructive to the nation. I cannot imagine any sitting president supporting such action, and I guarantee you that Obama would not. Pat in Texas
ReplyDeleteSanta doesn't give to fibbers either...he he
ReplyDeleteI have hoped and dreamed to Bush/Cheney/ et all in orange jump suits!
ReplyDeleteI'm with Johnie2xz - I'm even more interested in prosecuting Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Ashcroft.
ReplyDeleteI could be way off base here, but I see G W Bush as a pretty weak individual. I think he had some pretty practiced bullies yanking his chain. I have this gut feeling telling me that on 9/11, he just lost it. Maybe went and got himself drunk. Remember the 9/11 video clip of him sitting in that kindergarten class and the Secret Service guy whispered in his ear? He looked like nothing was registering. I think he had a bit of a breakdown and Cheney stepped in and took over. Had to keep up appearances, of course, but from that day on, Cheney had the goods on Bush and used it to call the shots himself. But hey - what do I know? It's just a gut feeling.
Pat in Texas @ 6:53- I agree. But, if they set foot on foreign soil, do you think they might be picked up and tried for war crimes (in the World Court)?
ReplyDeletedid you know google ads has put a sarahpac ad on your page? perhaps this is a good thing, as this is a place she's unlikely to get any money from visitors and perhaps keeps the ad off one other place that would, but still!
ReplyDeletewow, and the bottom of this comment screen is begging us to read ann coulter's column! icky, icky.....
"The public clearly doesn't have much of an apetite for this." James Carville, WTF?
ReplyDeletegryphon, as some one said earlier, your 'paste' function is not working...had pertenant video to share...thanks for working for the body politic on this, the historic 'Labor Day Holiday'.
ReplyDeleteHope that big ol' moon is rising about now up there in the Anchorage area. Here in Portland, OR it came up like a glowing apricot in an indigo sky, before being occluded again by the rain clouds.
There is a Support SarahPAC Google ad just under the Bush post... how funny is that!!? May disappear if I refresh my window... I hope.
ReplyDeleteI'm with gregory. When Jonathan Turley has been on Keith or Rachel's show, he has made the warning that people like Bush, Cheney, Rumsfield had better think twice about a foreign trip, because they could be picked up for international war crimes either by the World Court or another authority.
ReplyDeleteHas it happened? Yes it has. Augusto Pinochet, the former dictator of Chile sought medical care in England. Flying home through Spain, Spanish authorities arrested him for murdering three Spaniards in Chile during his repressive regime. (They may have worked at the Spanish embassy).
Pinochet was sick, old and returned to Chile to await trial. He died before ever having to face justice for the thousands of people he caused to be murdered when he violently overthrew the democratically elected Allende government.
But the answer is: Let's hope that one of those greedy bastards is offered a foreign speaking engagement that they just can't refuse, and they get stopped along the way. We can dream.
I had hoped for justice, but I do not think they will do much. One reason could be they are afraid of the violence which could occur. They are alreay calling Obama a Nazi now, they would loose their minds.
ReplyDeleteOMG there is a Newt Gingrich ad on your blog,lol.
ReplyDeleteGryphen we can only hope he will be tried at some point. I wish the World Court would arrest him on his next trip out of the country. I don't quite know how it works(maybe someone with some knowledge could share) Do most countries honor the world court?? Will they allow someone with charges of war crimes to be arrested?? We know Bush as been to Canada, would Canada honor a world court arrest in their country???
ReplyDeleteCelia Harrison-(with apologies to Gryphen for posting this here):
ReplyDeleteI love your blog, "Frozen Justice," and you are a great writer. But the pink background and tiny red font is hard to read. I hope you will consider changing the colors and font.
Keep up the good work, you stories are riveting and your research is impressive.
Re the SarahPAC ad. It costs them advertising dollars everytime someone clicks the ad. You can click without donating. Just sayin'....
ReplyDeleteshould have said I think it costs them.
ReplyDeleteI believe 9/11 should be re-investigated completely. I forgot to mention previously about the youtube videos, "911 Blueprint for Truth." That is the one that is also at mininova.org, and is an 2008 documentary. The forensic science based facts of 9/11 with Richard Gage, AIA.
ReplyDeleteIt would be nice, but I really do not think it will happen. Any time its brought up so many democrats talk about the politics of it and nowhere is 'JUSTICE' talked about. It really does not matter if it divides the nation, we're already divided. What we should be concerned with is Justice, nothing more.
ReplyDeleteI hate the fact that there is two sets of rules in this country. One set for the rich and powerful and the other set for everyone else.
Why should we not impeach a Bush for high crimes and misdemeanors?
ReplyDeleteIf our country has rules of laws, then don't you think the person with the most power should follow those rules?
If as you state, our country would not survive this, then are we a true democracy? I think not.
Our country was founded by men of principals who were willing to die for them.
Can or should we do no less when we have been lied to, when atrcities have been committed in our name.
As the supposed "best country" in the world, should we not set the standards or wait for other countries to clean up our mess.
I am of the firm belief, that we need to hold the republicans accountable now and in a way that will make them think twice. I think they manuvered President Clinton and were planning the long reign of republican conservative. Everything that was done during Bushes term was done to consolidate power for the long term.
My God, why should a President be impeached for lying about sex, when Bush killed hundreds of thousands of people while lying?
While it might be a good idea, I think it will make every President from now on subject to lawsuits following their term. If the President is going to be investigated, it should be during their term of office.
ReplyDeleteHi--Bush at the school on 9/11? I think he was thinking "So, Cheney actually pulled it off...NOW what the f*ck do I do?"
ReplyDeleteHow's this for a scenario: all the Bushies and Cheneys get hauled into federal court, get convicted, get sent to prison, and then, on the last day of Obama's Presidency, he issues a pardon, but they have to leave the country? Then the World Court can have at them?
Just a little dream of mine. :)
The Daily Beast has an article by max Blumenthal about Sarah Palin's religion.
ReplyDeleteIt is an eye opener.
"Nonviolence is the answer to the crucial and moral problems of our time: the need for man to overcome oppression and violence without resorting to oppression and violence. Man must evolve for all human conflict a method which rejects revenge, aggression, and retaliation. The foundation of such a method is love."
ReplyDeleteMartin Luther King, Jr., Nobel Prize acceptance speech, Stockholm, Sweden, December 11, 1964.
My dream is in The Hague. Any country can pick them up outside the U.S. We have a big problem here. If the Worldview is that we are aiding and abetting criminals who have violated human rights, any country can bring charges and try them, since we obviously have chosen to not do this.
ReplyDeleteViolating our treaties that we have ratified (Geneva for example) is a violation against our Constitution. Violating our Constitution is a violation of Bush's Oath of Office.
This is a HUGE Constitutional mess. I don't think our willingness to overlook "Crimes Against Humanity" is being viewed too positively in other parts of the world. If we do not handle this ourselves, it is within the right of the World Court to handle our criminals.
I doubt that Cheney has the balls to step out of the country. Bush probably will try and hopefully he will be arrested.
Just remember Nuremberg - our "outrage" at the German Third Reich can be duplicated by any country that believes our past Administration has committed War Crimes AND Crimes Against Humanity.
If found guilty, they can be hung. ALL of them.
I would just like to add - I do understand Mr. Obama's unwillingness to crawl through this pit with these people, but a crime is a crime and many of us are not liking the whole "move past it" when it comes to torture.
ReplyDeleteWe are now a country that TORTURES people. And our current President is alibi-ing the people who authorized the action.
Mr. Obama has lost a great deal of my respect for these actions.
IMO president Obama can't put himself in a position of saying much else about torture than he already has.I think he was right to leave it up to the attorney ,The AG to handle this and it seems it is being done.I have thought and thought about being told to water board ect some and what would happen if someone said no,possible treason charges ,outright shot for treason with no trial.Remember this is the GOP we are talking about and the Cheney GOP at that.
ReplyDeleteOne can dream that Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Ashcroft, Everyone from PNAC , Christie Todd Whitman (the air is safe...) everyone who aided and abetted the crimes pre and post 9/11 will be brought to justice. Unfortunately, Obama is showing that he is only a puppet on a string for not supporting a new and independent investigation into pre and post 9/11.
ReplyDeleteSome things to consider: Why did Pakisatani ISI wore 100k to Atta? Why did we not implicate Pakistan in 9/11? Google Urban Movers and the dancing Israelis.....I could go on and on but I won't. Cheney you are a dick of the first order and Ih ope you die a slow and painful horrible death. Bush - you are jsut too sick and stoopid to understand. I just can't hold mental imbeciles accountable.
You should read Vincent Bugliosi's book _The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder_. It lays out how any prosecutor could file charges against Bush for his actions while in office.
ReplyDeleteBugliosi only convinces the constitutionally illiterate.
ReplyDeleteIn 1952 Truman tried to Nationalize a segment of the private industry in the name of national defense. SCOTUS in Youngstown Sheet and Tube v. Sawyer, said, "Sorry, Harry. No can do."
Justice Black, however, in his opinion, went far beyond telling the president he had no constitutional authority to seize private property. He gave the president virtually unlimited power to act unilaterally in time of war.
Still with me.
Jackson considered Presidential Power--including his powers as
Commander of Chief , "not fixed but fluctuate, depending on their disjunction or conjunction with those of Congress."
When the President acts in accordance with congress his authoirty is at its maximum. Subsequent to 9/11 a Joint Congressional Resolution
provided that, "Tthe President is authorized to use all necessary force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons."
(Notice congress expressly said "He" and not "We" or the "ACLU".)
But that doesn't seem "just" does it? Certainly congress couldn't mean Bush could authorize "gasp" things like "waterboarding".
Jackson presided at the Nuremberg trials so he saw some pretty nasty shit done to get testimony from Nazi criminials.
He continued, " If the President acts. . . in the absence of either a congressional grant or denial of authority, he can only rely on HIS OWN independent powers."
So, unless congress and the senate were completely in the dark during visits to Gitmo, which is not really likely, Obama is out of luck. He's got no way to go after Bush even if congress knew what was going on but didn't like it--or planned reprisals in the future.
Justice Jackson established the precedent that "congressional inertia"
enables " if not invite, measures on independent presidential responsibility."
Sucks, doesn't it? Obama, the ACLU, and his boys have a lot to say about water-boarding now but they were suspiciously silent about it when it was going on, which can easily be proved. That is a slam dunk.
Now, had it been apparent that Bush acted against the EXPRESS wishes of congress, or even their implied wishes, he would have had to act with in the scope of the powers granted him by the constitution.
But congress did or said nothing: they just sat backed and watched and now they want to cry "foul"
It doesn't work that way. (Have you ever wondered why Bush was never impeached for invading Iraq without a 'Declaration of War"?
Same thing.
Or why Ollie North never did time for his Contragate activities? It's because there are two kinds of law: the one people like you think we live under and the one that is the child of the constitution--for better or worse.
The two have very little in common.
The real point of law in question about waterboarding and such is that
congress "actively acquiesced" concerning the alleged "torture" of
Gitmo inmates thereby telling Bush, "Have at it."
I guess Obama did learn a few things at Harvard. No wonder he doesn't
want any part of this nonsense. This dog just won't hunt.
Finally, Jackson opined that the "theater of war" was a fluid concept that was always evolving requiring new thinking about the manner in which decisions were made about it.
You'll hear the same tired, old shit about putting Bush behind bars and Cheney with him but it's just political porn.
If Bugliosi had a clue, was he the only one who had. There are a thousand guys in the Beltway who could have sandbagged Bush if they could make a case against him.
Truman lost "Youngstown" and by doing so he's going to make sure people like you aren't far from a pack of Rolaids for the rest of your life.