I've changed my mind on prosecuting Bush/Cheney

[SCantiGOP]

I was opposed to it for a lot of reasons, mainly that it would be a process that would happen only when the opposing party was in power when a President left office. But an article on Sean Penn in the current Rolling Stone changed my mind. He mentioned how most people were opposed to Ford pardoning Nixon, but that when Ford died there was this revisionist history where everyone talked about how courageous this was for Ford, how it helped the country move on, etc. What got me was his next statement: Do you think Bush and Cheney would have done what they did had Nixon served time in prison? Pretty powerful agruement.

[w4rma]

1. Exactly. (nt)

[Name removed]

39. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[pberq]

2. Are we going to follow the rule of law or not? nt

[atreides1]

3. If the US cannot prosecute its own

Then the US has no right to prosecute any of those men currently held in Guantanamo!

I had a 1st Sergeant when I was in the Army, he would always tell his NCO's that to be a good NCO you had to lead by example, and if you were not capable of doing that then he would take your stripes and give them to someone who was!

[rurallib]

4. For me, Ford's pardon of Nixon led directly to Bushco abuses

The pardon showed you could do the most outrageous and illegal stuff and depend on being let go by another member of a very exclusive club.

[Jackpine Radical]

8. Oh, not directly.

Don't forget the further examples of Reagan and Bush I in re: Iran-Contra, BCCI, the S&L debacle and a few other things. It wasn't just Ford. Clinton also let the ball drop in 1993.

[tomp]

9. the u.s govt has been thoroughly corrupt for a good hundred years.

we just know more now, the stakes are higher, and we're reaching the breaking point where this level of corruption cannot be sustained.

it also is, and always has been, bipartisan, or better, unipartisan.

[defendandprotect]

53. Don't forget "October Surprise" and basically election steals ....

didn't begin in 2000 nor 2004 --

they began, IMO, the minute they put the Voting Rights Act in place --

They were stealing when the lever machines were in place by shaving the plastic counting

wheel which made it jump 200-300 votes.

They were stealing when the large computers came in to MSM for reporting votes --

odd breakdowns/crashes followed with odd jumps in votes for the unpopular candidate.

I'm rethinking Nixon vs Humphrey--!!

Later, of course, in 1960's the electronic voting machines began to come in enabling them

to steal larger blocks of votes faster --- and from greater distances.

Two journalists did investigate this in the 1960's . . .

http://www.constitution.org/vote/votescam__.htm

[Enthusiast]

64. I respectfully disagree

Ford's pardon of Nixon led directly to abuses under Reagan, like Iran-Contra. Not prosecuting Reagan led directly to illegal activity by Bush/Cheney. Just splitting hairs, here. :fistbump:

[Beam Me Up]

5. What the hell have we been saying lo these many months/years??

Why do we not let criminals get away with their criminality? What difference should it make if the criminal is a president or vice president of a country -- except to make it even WORSE?


:crazy:

[ThomWV]

6. Gerald Ford had 2 Chief's of Staff, Donald Rumsfeld and Richard Cheney

Does that explain anything?

[leveymg]

19. And a CIA Director, G.H.W. Bush, Sr.

Don't forget the central role Poppy had in subverting and privatizing U.S. intelligence to Saudi interests. See,

The Saudi Prince's Secret: Bush, Sr. Sold-Out CIA
leveymg's Journal .... Through the Safari Club, Trento writes, “the Saudi royal family had taken over ...
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/leveymg/280

[bobthedrummer]

24. As DCI Poppy did achieve one objective-he expanded the "secrecy" agreements throughout the federal

government, which eased the path of covering-up crimes committed behind the shield of national security, a crime in itself. That's essentially what Poppy did as DCI imo.
Now the politicized thought police are literally talking about the "desirability" of "neutralizing" them whistleblowers and snitches that are loyal to our constitution and rule of law and not the current version of a "Decider" or HOMELAND (tm), just like the lying criminal thinkers they are.
:puke::argh::puke:

[defendandprotect]

52. Prescott Bush a founding member of the CIA . . .

[navarth]

55. That's when FDR 'dropped the ball'

He should have strung up Prescott Bush and the others for The September Plot. (Thank you again, General Butler).

He let them walk. Because he needed to get us out of the depression? I guess....

Don't get me wrong, I revere FDR, second only to Lincoln.

But he let those fucks walk. Prescott Bush, Hitler's banker. echhh

[defendandprotect]

56. There was a USHR hearing or hearings . . . .

it wasn't only Prescott Bush it was also, of course, Allen Dulles whose law firm

Sullivan & Cromwell/? was involved in raising money/gold for Hitler.

Both then "wrapped themselves in the flag" and pledged to devote themselves to

secret intelligence.

I agree . . . don't know why this wasn't prosecuted -- they did confiscate Bush's $$ --

but their activities in converting dollars to gold and shipping to Hitler weren't

tracked? I really don't know. Perhaps it was so great a part of the establishment --

a lot of prominent companies! -- that was the reason?

Obviously, I don't know enough about all of this -- but it's a subject I'd like to get back

to some time. Gore Vidal may have covered it in one of his books?

[leveymg]

68. At the end of the war, they grabbed most of the stolen gold of Europe and Asia - "National Treasure"

meets "Kelly's Heroes." Here's the nasty secret - the intelligence officers took much of the loot for themselves, but let the Nazis keep a great horde they had stashed away in South America. This is the original slush fund that allowed the Fascist International to rebuild itself after World War Two. Saudi oil revenues, the "Yamamah" funds, played that role later.

[defendandprotect]

81. Thank you --

Lotta stuff I'll have to try to catch up with ---

Project Paperclip and the founding of the CIA did us tremendous damage -- plus they

fed some of them into the FBI. And NASA.

Mae Brussel got it exactly right immediately after the JFK assassination.

I'm rethinking every election since '68 --

Evidently, these reporters had left their evidence for Larry O'Donnel at the Watergate --

http://www.constitution.org/vote/votescam__.htm

[navarth]

79. If Mr. Vidal wrote a book about The September Plot...

I've never heard about it. If it exists, I'd love to read it. I'll have a look.

I actually wrote a letter to George Clooney to see if he'd be interested in making a movie about it. Wouldn't that be awesome....

[Richard D]

7. I agree totally

Crimes and criminals allowed to go unpunished create the probability of even worse crimes occurring in the future.

Kicked and recommended.

[robinlynne]

10. exactly. yes.

[DKRC]

11. Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld/Rove would

No matter how many people go to prison there is always a certain mindset with some criminals that their intellect is so superior & their plot/crime so brilliant that they will never be caught. The perfect crime fantasy. Those 4 probably have that delusion 24/7.
Nixon going to prison might have curtailed the number of people they could use as a cat's paw to broaden their damage.

[ejpoeta]

13. that may be. but when they get caught committing a crime

there is no debate over whether it IS a crime. trying bush et all would set a precedent that we do not tolerate abuse of power and war crimes.

[DKRC]

18. I'm with you on that

If we don't have the balls to prosecute them, then I hope the rest of the world steps up to the task. I'd help load the plane if someone would rendition their asses to The Hague.

[newtothegame]

12. I honestly don't think it will happen unfortuneatly...

There were not criminal penalties for Reagan or Bush 1, no criminal penalties for Clinton lying to Congress (irrespective of the triviality of what he was testifying about), why would they start with Bu*sh 2?

[DemReadingDU]

14. Bush/Cheney, the whole cabal, need to be prosecuted

If we don't then we don't live in a democracy. No one is above the law.

If we only look forward and don't prosecute backward, then what is to prevent worse crimes in the future?

[Left Coast2020]

59. Correct-Amundo!

What happened in 70's or 80's can't be brought back to re-do. We can only deal with now. And now means prosecuting the Bush crime family. Rice, Rove, Dums-feld, Wolfowitz, Pearl, etc.

[Enthusiast]

65. I'm with you. But

I'm starting to think that we actually do not live in a democracy. The democracy we think we have is only an illusion. If only the media was not controlled.

[no_hypocrisy]

15. And nonfeasance of investigation, adjudication, and perhaps conviction

only encourages future and bolder actions on those in the executive branch.

[cascadiance]

16. Although if we'd prosecuted Iran/Contra, would we now have a different Sec. of Defense?

:eyes:

Perhaps Gates would have been put away too...

Iran/Contra is also a reason why we still get criminal acts from folks like Bush too.

[SCantiGOP]

22. good point

A couple of years ago, someone in a conversation blurted out, "Will someone please give Bush a blow job so we can impeach the son of a bitch!"

[DCKit]

23. Several here offered to give same blowjob...

"take one for the team" was how one self-professed straight guy put it.

[Bette Noir]

48. Wasn't that Jeff Gannon's job?

[defendandprotect]

50. Gates was also a primary and active player in the "October Surprise" . . . !

[radfringe]

17. I can understand where some people think such an investigation

and prosecution may be a distraction from the problems that we have in our laps ---- HOWEVER

if the laws do not apply to all of us, no matter who we are, no matter what "position" we have in society - then the laws apply to NONE of us.

[DCKit]

20. If we don't prosecute, the acolytes of this same crowd...

will do it to U.S. all over again in another thirty years.

They can't be slapped down hard enough.

[Greyhound]

21. Careful now, if you take the red pill there is no going back... n/t

[DCKit]

25. Oh shit. I thought it was the little blue pill.

Now I can't get my pants up.

[chill_wind]

26. Prosecute. Or protect and harbor war criminals. n/t

[FiveGoodMen]

27. Seriously: Why doesn't Obama get this?

[Beam Me Up]

28. Real question: What makes you think he doesn't? n/t

[FiveGoodMen]

29. His constant talk about "looking forward", "moving on" etc plus the state secrets things

and so on, and so on...

[Beam Me Up]

42. I'm not sure but I feel like what I said went right over your head.

Maybe you've had that kind of conversation with someone in the past? You say something and the other person doesn't get where you're coming from because you swim in two totally different information streams?

So lets put it this way: Do you think that Obama doesn't KNOW that Bush is a criminal? Doesn't know that he was put in the White House and kept in the White House for eight LONG years as a representative of a criminal class who profited tremendously from his having been put there? The real question is, what is Obama's role in relation to all that now? Do you actually believe that a President of the United States is free to act based solely upon his own principals in the face of this criminal class? I don't. Not for one bloody second. Not if he values his life and the life of his family.

This is what drives me a bit nuts. People still don't get it. We all say Bush (and the whole gang) are criminals -- but people don't get to what extant that is true. YES THEY ARE. And they've gotten away with treason, mass murder and war crimes -- and WE -- even with a Democratic Congress and President -- still don't have the resources, the manpower, the "ducks in a row" to bring them to justice. THAT IS THE PROBLEM.

[FiveGoodMen]

54. You're right. I didn't understand where you were going with that at all.

I don't have any personal estimate of just how tight a hold on Obama (and Congress) the criminal class -- good name for it -- has.

On the one hand, they've got low friends in high places and have no doubt threatened and killed in the past to keep their power. On the other hand, unless the Secret Service is in on it, he ought to have quite a bit of protection. He'd only have to survive long enough to get the message to the public -- he can hold a new conference every day if he wants -- and then extortion wouldn't be such an attractive option for them.

If he's complicit, that's rotten news.

If he's unable to say what he thinks, that's almost worse since it raises the possibility that nothing can ever be done.

[Enthusiast]

66. After amassing a huge information

base on their political enemies, Bush and the cabal could have some pretty damning evidence of their own to use in extortion. Remember, they wiretapped anyone and everyone. While we can't see a single lousy e-mail they wrote, they had access to every e-mail their political opposition had ever written. And every phone call. Bad stuff happens when organized crime has complete control of your country.

[Beam Me Up]

76. "Bad stuff happens when organized crime has complete control of your country."

:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

[Beam Me Up]

75. I don't have much of a personal estimate either ...

The question I have is how much influence (and this can be defined variously, everything from legal lobbying to blackmail) does the criminal class have over BOTH sides of a discussion. Chomsky: The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum - even encourage the more critical and dissident views. That gives people the sense that there's free thinking going on, while all the time the presuppositions of the system are being reinforced by the limits put on the range of the debate. The thing to note here is that, within this structure, both sides of the debate are controlled. Put another way, neither side of the debate challenges the real structures of power. The way I look at it, if you want to know where the real power structures lie and how they actually operate, you have to look outside that "spectrum of acceptable opinion" -- which you won't find on TV or in the New York Times. Even most "alternative" news sources won't discuss it because they are within the confines of "the more critical and dissident views."

Is this making sense?

For example, see my sigline. Look into someone like Peter Dale Scott and his theories of "parapolitics" and "deep politics" -- quite a different view. In that context one notes that Chomsky is still given at least academic recognition. Someone like Scott or Michael Parenti, less so. And then we have to ask, why is that?

[tbyg52]

30. Been saying it for years. nt

[abq e streeter]

31. But pardoning had to have been courageous & the right thing -the TEEVEE told me so ,a million times

and as a good loyal American, I believe EVERYTHING my teevee tells me

[Mira]

32. Bingo - you're another one to come over to MY side. Thanks for writing this -

and seeing the reason it needs to happen

[xcoastal]

33. Karl Rove

Many of our courts are corrupt right NOW. Judges who were put in place by Rove and know how they are to rule. The judges laugh at the truth. If Karl Rove is not brought to justice the message it sends is we are still a country without laws. Until Karl Rove is brought to justice judges and lawyers are more afraid of him than they are of our laws. There is no choice here. If Karl Rove is not brought to justice we must do something immediately. Something drastic. OUR COURTS ARE CORRUPT RIGHT NOW. This is not looking back. This is more than crimes of yesterday. It is also today and all of the tomorrows in the future until our laws are enforced.

[davidswanson]

34. It's not too late

for us all to wake up and GO HERE

http://prosecutebushcheney.org

[BlueJac]

35. Prosecute to save America....

We need to clean the house!

[hay rick]

36. Maybe it's time to turn over some rocks and see

what kinds of creatures turn up. The media gave Obama a 12 second honeymoon and then turned on him. Make them cover some stories that make them and their corporate masters puke. Keep them too busy to stir up trouble on their own.

[Initech]

37. We need to prosecute to keep these fuckers from getting power again but....

Right now we need to focus all our attention and resources toward getting the economy back on track.

[rosesaylavee]

38. Well. Yeah!

Welcome aboard.

[L. Coyote]

40. Let's begin by asking who killed the Kennedys. Gotta start somewhere!

[Beam Me Up]

44. I would start with somewhat more recent history:

9/11 for example.

We HAVE sufficient evidence to PROVE in both a court of law and in the court of public opinion that what we were told by government and media regarding what happened that day is FALSE and, therefore, there has been and continues to be a criminal conspiracy to cover up and keep the truth from the American people. This is high crimes and treason, mass murder and war crimes.

All we need is a special prosecutor and a DoJ willing to look at that evidence and prosecute.

THAT is what we do not have.

[defendandprotect]

51. Bingo . . . they're all the same people . . .

as soon as I saw "9/11," that was obvious!

9/11 is a shatterable myth by the right wing/Nazis.

Same people who killed JFK -- actually same people who at that time toppled

our "people's government."

[leftofthedial]

41. and Clinton decided to "look forward"

rather than seek justice over theft, BCCI, Iran Contra and other crimes of George the First's reign.


The level of outrageous corruption gets worse and worse each time because they know they'll get away with it.

We went from lying and burglary, to multi-billion-dollar theft and treason, to multi-trillion dollar theft and widespread treason...

[MadMaddie]

43. We have been saying that on DU for years

not having the prosecutions led to the rise of the necon movement and the "lost 8 years of America"!

[barbtries]

45. my mind's the same as it ever was

they need to be locked up. glad to see you've come around

[ooglymoogly]

46. The law is the fkn law anyone standing in the way of enforcing

the laws of the constitution and the laws of the land and the treaties we have signed is courting treason and will lose my support and will incur the opposite. Anyone saying that some folks (pukes) are above the law is talking treason to the very foundations of the Republic and do not deserve a farthings worth of support and should be impeached and hauled off to the brig along with the criminals they are protecting.

[Bette Noir]

47. Everybody email Obama.

It's nice to talk among ourselves, but we have to let The Guy know where opinion lies.

[Enthusiast]

67. He already knows.

And he cannot allow a prosecution. There is something here we can't see, it is obscured. I figure if he doesn't 'go along' he would be dead in a matter of minutes. I suspect this cabal has near COMPLETE control of the government, intelligence, military and media.

[defendandprotect]

49. Ford was a large part of the JFK coup cover up . . .

and, IMO, was certainly agreed to a pardon for Nixon before Nixon resigned.

There has been very little legitimacy in those who have ascended to the presidency

since the coup on JFK -- actually the coup on a "people's government."

Let's hope Obama is an exception!

[rhett o rick]

57. Don't prosecute Bush and Cheney. Prosecute those that actually followed orders.

Just following orders isn't acceptable. Prosecute the CIA torturers that actually did the torture. Don't let them off because they were only following orders. Then the next time a psychopathic leader orders torture, maybe the actual first line workers will object. If we do not prosecute them then we perpetuate the idea that they are safe "just following orders". Prosecute those that spied on Americans.

[Contrary1]

58. I'm sure Cheney would have gone ahead with whatever he wanted to do...

Money is his motivator, his reason for living. Worth whatever risk. The threat of prison does not scare people like him. He could still get whatever he wanted with all his millions, even while residing behind bars.

Bush? Not so much. I am not sure he is so much motivated by money, as he is about pulling one over on the victims. Likes to see how much he can get away with, but wouldn't take such a big personal risk. And, the lack of sufficient amounts of vodka/coke would have deterred him.

[inna]

60. good post (nt)

[EFerrari]

61. Or Reagan. He was a felon, too. And he begat Junior. n/t

[LaPera]

62. I disagree! What's to stop the next republican fascist admin from doing the same...If

there are no negative consequence for the republicans, as there won't be in this administration (if you had your way) nor in the last Dem admin. (Clintons)?

President Obama has said every time asked that he's not interested in the past administration crimes, he wants to "move forward" - So BushCo knew they could break the law (as they did ) as often as they cared to (and they did) with no future repercussions.

Wouldn't every criminal like to have it so good....rob a bank, extort money, lie to false imprison your enemies and then simply have it overlooked by the the new person in command....

But, that only goes for the rich & powerful republicans - certainly not the poor.

Thanks President Obama!

Hopefully congress will have more balls & can override you and not overlook these incredible partisan republican crimes by Rove and the higher ups in the past administration.

Does this also mean Obama won't give his OK to prosecute other BushCo crimes, obviously so....BushCo lying us into a war & bankrupting the country as well as all the soldiers & civilians killed for oil and war for corporate profit, nor investigate illegally spying domestically on the American people for years, or what about torture allowing that as well?

Clinton allowed pappy Bush and the same BushCo crew (many since Nixon's admin.) off the hook, and now Obama wants to do the same, what's to stop the next republican fascist administration from doing worst (if that's possible)....This is outrageous & criminal actions now, by the democrats, allowing this and looking the other way!

[liberalla]

63. Yep. That's been my view for quite a while.

It would be a deterrent for future abuse/criminal activity by elected persons.

[indimuse]

69. BINGO!

K&R!!

[whathappened]

70. bush

he should have been tryed and convected when he was gov of texas , let alone all the crimes he has done since to our country

[jaundicedi]

71. I suggest we start with the R.I.C.O. act.

[marions ghost]

72. tell me where RICO has ever been effective

it really seems to be limited in use. A lot of people think RICO gives them some protection against white collar crime. From what I've seen, it's an illusion.

Any legal heads want to weigh in? Or anybody with experience of prosecution using RICO?

[marlakay]

73. My point exactly if you don't get punished it will happen again

and again and again with greedy selfish power hungry bastards.

[Deep13]

74. So you're flip-flopping?

:hide:

[Tighelander]

77. If Looking Forward is the Most Important Thing

Then the only thing you'll have to look forward to is even worse political corruption.

[CatWoman]

78. Hiya Strom Jr.!!!

:hi:

my opinion is: lock all their asses up and throw away the key!!!! :)

[SCantiGOP]

80. back at ya, Catwoman

Hope all is well in Hotlanta.
Concerning Strom, the old bastard actually looks pretty good compared to our Senator DeMint. He says we don't need the stimulus package, that the market will take care of the problem. He seems to have forgotten that it was the damn market and lack of government action that got us into the mess.