George W. Bush has confessed to the murder of Pat Tillman.

[BuyingThyme]

By invoking "executive privilege" in an effort to keep the details of Pat Tillman's murder a secret, George W. Bush (and or Dick Cheney) has demonstrably confessed to his role in the cover-up, and thus confessed to his role in the murder.

Only Bush (and or President Cheney) can legitimately or otherwise invoke executive privilege, thus we have proof positive that Bush (and or Cheney) was involved in the cover-up, and thus involved in the murder. He/they literally put their name/names on it.

Does anybody see any other possibilities?

If Congress doesn't start convening emergency hearings and sessions immediately, they too will take a fall for this in the near future. And they don't have far to fall anymore.

http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Top_News/2007/07/13/bush_claims_executive_privilege_on_tillman/9127/

[whistle]

1. Certainly KKKarl Rove and Paul Wolfowitz were behind the murder as well

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

2. If you cover up a murder, that makes you complicit.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=1454292&mesg_id=1454292

I tried explain it earlier, but it doesn't seem to be catching on.

There are some very profound implications here.

[BuyingThyme]

4. You are correct. I don't know why it would be difficult for people to grasp that concept.

[merh]

21. Stick with the UCMJ - that's what would apply, wouldn't it?

Punitive Articles of the UCMJ
Article 78—Accessory after the fact

http://usmilitary.about.com/library/milinfo/mcm/bl78.htm

[BuyingThyme]

22. I can't get it to load. Can you post it?

[merh]

26. here you go

Punitive Articles of the UCMJ
Article 78—Accessory after the fact

“Any person subject to this chapter who, knowing that an offense punishable by this chapter has been committed, receives, comforts, or assists the offender in order to hinder or prevent his apprehension, trial, or punishment shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.”

Elements.

(1) That an offense punishable by the code was committed by a certain person;

(2) That the accused knew that this person had committed such offense;

(3) That there after the accused received, comforted, or assisted the offender; and

(4) That the accused did so for the purpose of hindering or preventing the apprehension, trial, or punishment of the offender.

Explanation.

(1) In general. The assistance given a principal by an accessory after the fact is not limited to assistance designed to effect the escape or concealment of the principal, but also includes acts performed to conceal the commission of the offense by the principal (for example, by concealing evidence of the offense).

(2) Failure to report offense. The mere failure to report a known offense will not make one an accessory after the fact. Such failure may violate a general order or regulation, however, and thus constitute an offense under Article 92. See paragraph 16. If the offense involved is a serious offense, failure to report it may constitute the offense of misprision of a serious offense, under Article 134. See paragraph 95.

(3) Offense punishable by the code. The term “offense punishable by this chapter” in the text of the article means any offense described in the code.

(4) Status of principal. The principal who committed the offense in question need not be subject to the code, but the offense committed must be punish-able by the code.

(5) Conviction or acquittal of principal. The prosecution must prove that a principal committed the offense to which the accused is allegedly an accessory after the fact. However, evidence of the conviction or acquittal of the principal in a separate trial is not admissible to show that the principal did or did not commit the offense. Furthermore, an accused may be convicted as an accessory after the fact despite the acquittal in a separate trial of the principal whom the accused allegedly comforted, received, or assisted.

(6) Accessory after the fact not a lesser included offense. The offense of being an accessory after the fact is not a lesser included offense of the primary offense.

(7) Actual knowledge. Actual knowledge is required but may be proved by circumstantial evidence.

Lesser included offense. Article 80- attempts

Maximum punishment. Any person subject to the code who is found guilty as an accessory after the fact to an offense punishable by the code shall be subject to the maximum punishment authorized for the principal offense, except that in no case shall the death penalty nor more than one-half of the maximum confinement authorized for that offense be adjudged, nor shall the period of confinement exceed 10 years in any case, including offenses for which life imprisonment may be adjudged.

Next Article > Article 79—Conviction of lesser included offenses >

[BuyingThyme]

39. Thank you.

[Blue_In_AK]

10. I believe you are correct...

It makes them accessories, or they could at least be guilty of hindering prosecution. We have a statute here in Alaska, as I'm sure most states do...and my guess is it's based on a federal law.

AS 11.56.770. Hindering Prosecution in the First Degree.

(a) A person commits the crime of hindering prosecution in the first degree if the person renders assistance to a person who has committed a crime punishable as a felony with intent to


(1) hinder the apprehension, prosecution, conviction, or punishment of that person; or


(2) assist that person in profiting or benefiting from the commission of the crime.

[BuyingThyme]

12. I think you can probably find a better law than that (those).

Bush took part in this to benefit himself, not to benefit the guy(s) who shot Tillman in the head.

[Blue_In_AK]

17. True enough.

But proving that might be difficult unless there are some documents somewhere.

[rateyes]

28. Obstruction of justice. nt

[Zywiec]

3. I'm sure Congress has connected all the dots like you

They're sure to start those emergency hearings soon!

[Disturbed]

11. Pat Tillman's uniform, other equipment & diary were burned.

Have there been any official explanations why that was done?

[hisownpetard]

16. I've asked this question on another thread but no answer yet. Of course

they burned his journal - too incriminating, bad press, etc.
But why burn his uniform, unless there were bullet-holes in it
that would contradict the story they were putting out for publication?

I'd love to hear anyone else's theory on this.

[BuyingThyme]

19. Or no bullet holes at all.

[KittyWampus]

20. because if you burn the diary you need to burn everything. Idiots think it looks less

'suspicious'.

Think- suppose they JUST burned the diary, which his family knew he kept.

But either way, it stinks.

[eppur_se_muova]

37. Um ... not to get too graphic, but ....

as I suspect any CSI fan would tell you, blood splatter could be the biggest clue from the uniform.

[dflprincess]

43. And gunshot residue

(though I know nothing about guns, would the kind used to kill Tillman leave residue?)

[HootieMcBoob]

40. destruction of evidence

that's gotta be a crime too.

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

25. Accessories after the fact - destroying evidence of culpability

or covering up the destruction of evidence.

[theredpen]

5. We know who didn't pull the trigger

Neither Bush, Cheney, or Rove could have been the actual murderer. We know that for sure. That would have required them to be in a combat zone.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

7. Yeah, but it doesn't matter.

Once they cover it up the blood's on their hands.

[BuyingThyme]

9. That's important, but it makes absolutely no difference in regards to Bush and or Cheney's role

in the murder.

[theredpen]

13. I agree...

I was just getting in a dig about what a bunch of cowards they really are. They stand for nothing, the stop at nothing. The only saving grace they have is a relatively low body count. I guess they deserve credit for trying to make each one count for as much evil as inhumanly possible.

[Bjorn Against]

31. A relatively low body count?

You do realize that nearly a million people have been killed in Iraq don't you?

[theredpen]

34. Compared to Stalin or Hitler, Bush and Cheney are pikers

I said "relatively low". The word relative is key here.

Let's be realistic. They're not the greatest mass murderers of all time. I think they rank in the top 25 though.

[Bjorn Against]

35. It is a sad day when a million dead bodies becomes considered a relatively low number

When we are reduced to saying "well at least they aren't as bad as Hitler or Stalin" it is a sad day for our nation. We need to hold ourselves to higher standards than simply being better than Hitler.

[theredpen]

36. Who said is wasn't a sad day?

I'm not saying that there's no reason to be hopeful, but yeah, we are reduced to saying, "well at least they aren't as bad as Hilter or Stalin."

I really think that realization needs to be made more clear to the general public: things are that bad.

[malaise]

53. Even sadder when we remember that Governor George Bush

executed people for killing one person. I can't wait for his punishment.

[coalition_unwilling]

63. They're actually still a bit below Kissinger, but closing fast -n/t

[seemslikeadream]

6. Somebody was driving that get away car!

[stillcool]

8. Executive Privilege has become..

taking the fifth. Makes me nostalgic for the good old days of the mafia.

[razors edge]

14. Shot in the face.

Where exactly was Crash Cart at the time?

[WinkyDink]

15. Oh, man. Now THAT creeps me right out.

[EFerrari]

18. Exactly.

We have no smiley to express this.

[ryanus]

23. Excellent point. Why invoke Executive Priviledge if they have nothing to hide?

[BuyingThyme]

24. Or, why invoke executive privilege is the executive is not involved?

[libnnc]

32. Bingo.

[MasonJar]

27. Pleasseeeeeeeeeee call your Congress people and remind them

that if the WH claims ex priv on the Pat Tillman cover-up, then the WH must be culpable.

[cascadiance]

29. I have another theory on why they are doing this. Potecting certain loyalists in the military!

Read my post in this thread yesterday:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=2931311&mesg_id=2931404

Bush and his cronies are of course concerned about impeachment, and we all have seen many places where they are trying to block that from happening. This could be an attempt to cover up yet another impeachable offense... OR...

It could be that they know that there's a heavy overlap of the people that all conspired in this coverup and realize that if they are all exposed to what happened in this wrongdoing (even if it wasn't blessed by people like Bush or Rumsfeld), that they will probably have to ask for all of their resignations, if not jail time for some of them.

The other potential big item for Bush to protect is what Paul Craig Roberts has been talking about. Their ability to "leverage" a disaster, either by LIHOP or MIHOP 9/11 style event to declare martial law and basically shut down all other parts of government and elections depends a LOT on having a good element of control over the military forces. If enough key people are taken out of that chain, such a martial law declaration and move to a fascist state may not be possible if enough people resist orders to support them on this.

I'm guessing that this might be an effort to ensure that those that they might want to have stay in the military don't get touched by this scandal. Perhaps they felt executive privilege was the easiest way to do that, and perhaps draw attention to themselves (if they know there's no documents pointing to their direct involvement in the crime or subsequent coverup), when their actual desire is to keep the investigation from doing an in depth look at the military chain of command for those to blame and get rid of.

We need to make sure that EVERY officer that was a part of this heinous act is prosecuted to the full extent of the law and removed from the services. That way, perhaps we might also stop a coup, even if we're not knowledgeable about any details of such a plan.

[cynatnite]

30. Oh, for shit's sake

:eyes:

That's a huge leap.

[Hydra]

33. and if anyone calls them on this

I get to find out if I called it correctly:

Could * and his boss murder someone and get away with it?

Accessory to murder is likely as close as they'll ever have witness to...

[tabasco]

38. Yeah, but it's not quite as important as having consensual sex.

Now if we catch him doing THAT, then maybe we can get him impeached.

[moondust]

41. I'm sure the WH knew

Pat Tillman's politics and the potential implications if the hero came back with "bad news" about the war.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

42. Yes.

MKJ

[cutlassmama]

44. I think so too. Especially the Chomsky meeting. It was posted

on another message board "my "conspiracy theory" is that the guy was clowning around, and accidently killed himself in a manner so embarrassing that the details went unreported. These guys can get a little stir crazy out in the field, and I've personnaly seen some wildly stupid stuff that stopped just short of Russian Roulette."

He claimed * was "acting out of compassion" for Tillman's family by not talking about it.

Yeah, right :crazy:

[KAT119]

45. K&R n/t

[sanskritwarrior]

46. Crazy much???

Oy vey when this story reaches its conclusion it will make progressives look like fools.............

[SpiralHawk]

47. If Commandander AWOL has nothing to hide, why is he blocking the truth???

Commander AWOL owes it to America's troops, veterans and citizens to do everything in his power to get to the truth of this matter.

What is he hiding? If he is innocent, then drop the phony Executive Privilege claim.

He and his republicon cronies are the only ones who will look like fools -- despite republicon attepts at propaganda to the contrary.

[sanskritwarrior]

48. This is much like the argument

if you have nothing to hide why don't you support the Patriot Act???

Sigh.........

There is nothing to do when madness infects our community.......Time for a hiatus, a nice day at the beach, and a few days away from DU while the crazy fuckers draw link diagrams putting Bush at the center of Tillman death, 9/11 and the grassy knoll........

It is embarassing coming in here somedays..........

[SpiralHawk]

50. Yes, it is indeed the republicon argument

And they deserve to have it shoved back in their faces.

[karlrschneider]

51. Yep. As much as I love DU I sometimes wonder about the sanity of some of our members.

Seriously.

[mudesi]

54. That's a bad analogy

Not wanting to give up personal freedoms in exchange for false security is not the same as abusing power to cover up a crime.

[moondust]

55. "Somedays" is not a word.

Please try not to be an embarrassment while you're here.

[karlrschneider]

56. Sure it's a word. I see it written in 2 posts, ergo it is a word.

Would you apply the same grammar-nazi opinion to "sometimes"?

[moondust]

57. If you don't know

then take a wild guess.

[karlrschneider]

58. My wild guess is that it is nice and cool down there in your mommy's basement.

How did I do?

[moondust]

59. You clearly demonstrated one thing.

You can easily pass as a clueless Oklahoma hillbilly. Just be yourself.

[karlrschneider]

60. You're an amusing little prick. Hopefully you're having some fun with that

idiotic rhetoric.

[Prisoner_Number_Six]

49. That's what I postulated in my thread from yesterday

FYI: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1462130

[mod mom]

52. Are you even allowed to claim Exec Privilege in a murder case?

[BuyingThyme]

61. The thing is, executive privilege should not come into it all all.

If there are matters of national security here, then there's no reason information can be selectively withheld or redacted. But instead, by making the EP claim, the Chimp is admitting that he's somehow involved in the crimes that went down.

But, no, you can't use EP to hide your own legal wrongdoing.

[shance]

62. I just read (Washington Post) CIA paramilitary were present at Tillman's murder

n/t

[BuyingThyme]

64. I haven't seen that. Are they using the CIA presence as an excuse

for their executive privilege claim?

Link?