Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Obama's plans for probing Bush torture

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
babsbunny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-15-08 08:52 AM
Original message
Obama's plans for probing Bush torture
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/11/13/torture_commission/print.html

President Bush could pardon officials involved in brutal interrogations -- but he may also face a sweeping investigation under the new president.

By Mark Benjamin

Nov. 13, 2008 |

With growing talk in Washington that President Bush may be considering an unprecedented "blanket pardon" for people involved in his administration's brutal interrogation policies, advisors to Barack Obama are pressing ahead with plans for a nonpartisan commission to investigate alleged abuses under Bush.

The Obama plan, first revealed by Salon in August, would emphasize fact-finding investigation over prosecution. It is gaining currency in Washington as Obama advisors begin to coordinate with Democrats in Congress on the proposal. The plan would not rule out future prosecutions, but would delay a decision on that matter until all essential facts can be unearthed. Between the time necessary for the investigative process and the daunting array of policy problems Obama will face upon taking office, any decision on prosecutions probably would not come until a second Obama presidential term, should there be one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
newfie11 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-15-08 08:58 AM
Response to Original message
1. Is it legal to pardon someone before they are officially accused?
If so that sucks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-15-08 08:59 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Sure is.
Nixon being the obvious example.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jackpine Radical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-15-08 09:29 AM
Response to Reply #2
6. ...not to mention a bunch of pre-emptive pardons by Bush I--Weinberger
being a classic example.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wtmusic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-15-08 10:14 AM
Response to Reply #1
8. It does suck.
In ex parte Garland {1866) Johnson officially pardoned those accused of treason in the Civil War. However when it comes to pardoning members of your own administration (and even yourself - law is not entirely clear on that) this deserves a rehearing by SCOTUS. It would still be too late for the Bush cabal, however.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Turbineguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-15-08 09:08 AM
Response to Original message
3. Ok, so let's say
you're a guy who works for Bush and you torture people. Nobody really knows who you are, you just go about your work. The people you torture either die or go back to their place of detention where they are held incommunicado.

But then you get a Pardon. Very nice. Very Official. Very everybody-knows-who-you-are-now-and-they-know-you're-guilty.

Bush saves people some work and expensive trials.

Then along comes Obama and releases all the prisoners who were tortured. Bush has provided them with a list of names.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
frogcycle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-15-08 09:21 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. the concern is that it will be a blanket pardon without names n/t
Edited on Sat Nov-15-08 09:22 AM by frogcycle
like the amnesty for draft dodgers in the 70s (or was it 80s?)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jackpine Radical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-15-08 09:30 AM
Response to Reply #5
7. Carter did the VN amnesties. Probly 1977 or '78
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
frogcycle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-15-08 09:20 AM
Response to Original message
4. I read the headline initially that
Obama is probing the possibility of torturing bush! :rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madokie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-15-08 10:22 AM
Response to Reply #4
9. You can bet that bushler isn't sleeping too good now a days
my bet is anyway. By Mr Obama's not going into detail his plan as to the question about the war crimes has to be a real worrying point for these criminals. My money would be on Mr. Obama doing the right thing for our country and if he does that we have nothing to worry about. Bushco is going down and going down hard.
:fistbump: I just had to do it :-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-15-08 11:48 AM
Response to Original message
10. I don't think Bush cares about "the little people." In fact, some of the littlest of the
"little people" already got charged and are in jail. It's the big honcho torturer "deciders" like himself and a handful of others who will be his only concern. And I believe that that matter was settled just prior to Nancy Pelosi's "impeachment is off the table." (Nobody asked, WHAT "table," Nancy? And who was sitting at it?). The bargain was: 'Give us our country back, don't nuke Iran and go peacefully when the time comes--and get rid of Rumsfeld--and we won't hold you accountable.'

To figure out who got their country back (who was sitting at the table) will probably take us the rest of the century. It certainly wasn't "we, the people," but some consortium of global corporate predator interests--including politicos, military, the Bilderburg Group, who knows?--who felt that the Bushwhacks had gone too far. Notice how--at least so far--everything is the same. Even Obama sat back for the Financial 9/11 that the Bushwhacks just pulled off. And his plan? To put the Clintonite "free trader" neoliberals back in charge, with no money whatsoever left in the treasury for the poor and middle class, and move the Forever War to Afghanistan (and quite possibly to South America, for the oil).

Accountability is "off the table" for the big honchos. We might have some fun hearings about it all--but we won't see anybody who was in charge inflicted with any consequences for their mind-boggling crimes (not just torture).

You know, I think Obama is a good guy, I really do. But I think he is extremely hedged round, on peril of his career and possibly his life. He might be able to ease some of the pain of Great Depression II (--although things are set up for him to take the blame, and for the righwing dragons who run the 'TRADE SECRET' code voting machines, to come back in 2012, for the final end of our democracy. Beware! Get rid of these machines!) But he won't--and probably can't--achieve the structural changes needed to right this sinking ship. Our democracy was built by the middle class (after many a brave and magnificent movement by the poor--the labor movement, the civil rights movement, etc.) The American middle class is gone--deliberately destroyed, in my opinion, for its progressive values, and for its potential as the one force in the world capable of curtailing the global corporate predators who rule us all. We are back to square one, pre-New Deal, or square zero, pre-Revolution. (The first King George/British East India Co. = our President-King/Corporate Rulers.) But Obama is no FDR. At least, as far as I can see. (A friend points out that FDR was not a radical until after he became president.) The way it looks now, we're in for one helluva rough ride, and the analogies to Germany early 1930s are haunting, indeed.

It's also possible that some of the people at the "table" aren't such bad folk. Maybe they were looking at Armageddon and did the best they could, under the circumstances. They wanted to restore order, if not democracy. And their main bargaining chip was the personal liability of Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Gonzo, Addington, Cambone, Tenet, some generals, some private contractor CEOs, and the other junta players. It will be greatly unfair to prosecute anyone under that level. Investigate? Oh well. Yeah, sure. We do need to know. But I would be equally interested in Congressional Medals of Honor for whose resisted illegal orders, including the deserters who are in jail and/or sought refuge in Canada. (Canada is extraditing them, one after another--to face jail here for NOT committing the crimes that Bush ordered them to commit). Bush couldn't care less who suffers from orders he gave--except for him and his string-pullers. But we should care about fairness, and, in that respect, rewarding the brave is more important than prosecuting the moral cowards who went along with torture and the heinous slaughter of "shock and awe," some of them (esp. military) under threat of severe penalty.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lunatica Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-15-08 11:58 AM
Response to Original message
11. As long as the whole torture issue isn't just ignored I'm satisfied for now
Once the truth comes out I want everyone to know it. I want it published far and wide. I want the crimes to be named and the criminals pointed out and branded as torturers for the rest of their lives. If it's possible to prosecute I want that too. I want everyone to be held accountable. Let karma visit them if we can't prosecute. Let the history books tell the truth.

We're going to find out a lot of bad things in the years to come.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Apr 24th 2024, 08:18 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC