iNow Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 Oh goodness... I'm just shocked. Shocked, I tell you! I'd never have expected it from old Dick. He was always such a nice boy, and always kept to himself. http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h9PvQtj8plxTnRZS7hHmJap_Rt2AD94ICFU00 A Texas judge has set a Friday arraignment for Vice President Dick Cheney, former U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, a state senator and others named in indictments accusing them of responsibility for prisoner abuse in a South Texas federal detention center. <...> The highest-profile indictment charges Cheney and Gonzales with engaging in organized criminal activity. It alleges that the men neglected federal prisoners and are responsible for assaults in the facilities. The grand jury traced a sketchy line between Cheney's influence over the U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement agency, which oversees the county's federal immigrant detention center, and his substantial holdings in the Vanguard Group, which invests in private prison companies. Combining those interests, the grand jury accused Cheney of a conflict of interest because the more the prison companies were paid to hold inmates, the better he did financially. "It is appalling to find that numerous elected officials from different levels of our government throughout our country to our U.S. Vice President Richard B. Cheney, defendant, are profiting from depriving human beings of their liberty," the indictment said. The indictment accuses Gonzales of stopping an investigation into abuses at the federal detention center. I don't know. This just doesn't seem like them, now, does it? These charges simply must be spurious and made up. They'd NEVER do something like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ecoli Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 I wonder if they'll be able to tie Bush up into this... or if he's actually clean. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Realitycheck Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 This whole scenario looks totally frivolous. Next up, Bush gets impeached because of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bascule Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 Bush has his name on the illegal wiretapping program dozens of times, and a federal judge has already ruled that he's a felon because of it. Then there's Scott McClellan's claim that Bush explicitly stated he was behind Scooter Libby leaking Valerie Plame as an undercover CIA operative... Bush has a giant cloud of allegations hanging over him I hope are investigated after he leaves office. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pangloss Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 I wouldn't plan on that. Nor would it be a good idea. As much as the left hates Gerald Ford, the Nixon pardon was the best thing he did while in office. The country cannot afford retributive prosecution of former leaders (and that's not what the laws are for anyway). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bascule Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/Cheneys_lawyer_files_motion_to_quash_indictment.html The DA who filed these charges didn't even bother to show up to court... WTF? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Cuthber Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 I wouldn't plan on that. Nor would it be a good idea. As much as the left hates Gerald Ford, the Nixon pardon was the best thing he did while in office. The country cannot afford retributive prosecution of former leaders (and that's not what the laws are for anyway). Is the law for bringing those responsible for misdeeds to justice? Why should former leaders be exempt from that justice? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bascule Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 Is the law for bringing those responsible for misdeeds to justice?Why should former leaders be exempt from that justice? QFT... Ford, a Republican, pardoned Nixon, a Republican. I'm sure there was nothing partisan involved in his decision making. Well, just count me down as one of the people who would like to see Bush held responsible for his crimes. Although I'm still curious if he'll pardon himself... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pangloss Posted November 21, 2008 Share Posted November 21, 2008 Alleged crimes. Quote all the "truth" you like; pardons are in the Constitution for a reason. Whether Bush would agree or not, we have due process and a right to a fair trial. Whether or not he's "held accountable for his crimes" is actually significantly less important than the danger of a political (i.e. corrupt) prosecution. Take a look at how the Roman Republic came to an end some time. Retributive prosecutions were a major cause for the loss of consular ability to lead their country. By the end nobody could be consul without automatic prosecution the very next year. (Sound familiar in any way?) Pelosi understands this, and so does Obama. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bascule Posted November 21, 2008 Share Posted November 21, 2008 Pelosi understands this, and so does Obama. Fortunately neither of them have a say in cases like Al Haramain Islamic Foundation v. George Bush et al. Thanks, separation of powers! Bush can be prosecuted, and the Democrats don't even need to get their hands dirty. Unless, of course, Bush pardons himself... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pangloss Posted November 21, 2008 Share Posted November 21, 2008 Would you like to have a friendly wager over whether Obama will pardon Bush? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJBruce Posted November 23, 2008 Share Posted November 23, 2008 The charges against Cheney seem to be weak at best. I highly doubt Bush or Cheney will be convicted not to mention serve an jail time. I also agree with Pangloss that political persecution is a very slippery slope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phi for All Posted November 24, 2008 Share Posted November 24, 2008 Slipperier than letting politicians get away with criminal behavior? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Cuthber Posted November 24, 2008 Share Posted November 24, 2008 What's wrong with a politically motivated proesecution? Imagine I'm the new president; I don't like former president Bloggs so I accuse him of some crime. Because of my position he gets taken to court. That's a politically motivated prosecution. Since there's no evidence the court finds in his favour and awards damages too while I look a complete ass. Who suffers here? If my claim of his misdeeds is correct then he gets treated just like any other criminal. The problem is if the courts are politically corrupted. (Hanging chads anyone?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pangloss Posted November 24, 2008 Share Posted November 24, 2008 The problem is that you don't look like a complete ass. That is not the nature of politics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphus Posted November 24, 2008 Share Posted November 24, 2008 The problem is that you don't look like a complete ass. That is not the nature of politics. Sometimes you do. The Clinton impeachment backfired for the Republicans, for example, even though Clinton was technically in the wrong, because people correctly surmised that it was a ridiculous witch hunt. There might be some minor post-Bush legal issues, but I doubt there will be anything major. And I think you're right that if Bush himself gets in major trouble, he'll be pardoned by Obama. And I also strongly believe that would be the smart thing politically and the best thing for the country, even if, as I suspect, there are legitimate grounds for serious charges. All signs thus far indicate that Obama was dead serious about trying to re-unite the country, and I applaud him for it wholeheartedly. Foam-mouthed liberals who think Obama's election is their chance to finally stick it to Bush are living in a bizarre fantasy. Let it go. Bush can't hurt you anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phi for All Posted November 25, 2008 Share Posted November 25, 2008 I don't care about persecuting Bush, but I don't like the precedent it sets if you let anyone in any administration get away with corrupt activity. It just makes it easier for the next administration to say, "Can *we* get away with it since Cheney did? Yes we can!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bascule Posted November 25, 2008 Share Posted November 25, 2008 I don't care about persecuting Bush *psst* it's "prosecuting" but I don't like the precedent it sets if you let anyone in any administration get away with corrupt activity. It just makes it easier for the next administration to say, "Can *we* get away with it since Cheney did? Yes we can!" Yeah, that's what it really comes down to me. What Nixon did pales in comparison to the atrocities committed by the Bush administration, things like torture, treason, and spying on their own people. These aren't the kinds of things I'd really like to see the nation wash its hands of and pretend it never happened. These are crimes against both humanity and America and I'd like to see justice served. Would you like to have a friendly wager over whether Obama will pardon Bush? Sure, I'll bet on the side of justice... although I think it will be far more interesting if Bush pardons himself Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phi for All Posted November 25, 2008 Share Posted November 25, 2008 *psst* it's "prosecuting"Actually, I think it's "proctologicalizing" *. Yeah, that's what it really comes down to me. What Nixon did pales in comparison to the atrocities committed by the Bush administration, things like torture, treason, and spying on their own people.From the most secretive presidential administration the US has ever had, these are the things we know about. These aren't the kinds of things I'd really like to see the nation wash its hands of and pretend it never happened. These are crimes against both humanity and America and I'd like to see justice served.If we want the executive branch to mean something, it can't stand above the law. * treating a rectal disorder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pangloss Posted November 25, 2008 Share Posted November 25, 2008 Sure, I'll bet on the side of justice... although I think it will be far more interesting if Bush pardons himself Ok, this could be fun. So I think if prosecution were to become a real possibility that Obama would pardon Bush, and you think he would not. We can expand this if you want but I think we might agree on Bush pardoning himself (I think he would) -- maybe we could extend the wager to cover whether such a pardon stuck. What could we wager? Something like no posting for a week? Letting the other guy have the last word in a thread? (lol) Any thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phi for All Posted November 25, 2008 Share Posted November 25, 2008 What could we wager? Something like no posting for a week? Letting the other guy have the last word in a thread? (lol) Any thoughts?I don't like abridging any freedom of speech. How about wearing a Teletubbies avatar for a month? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pangloss Posted November 25, 2008 Share Posted November 25, 2008 NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Lol, okay okay, I'll take that as my side. Bascule has to carry a picture of Ben Stein for a month. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bascule Posted November 25, 2008 Share Posted November 25, 2008 So I think if prosecution were to become a real possibility that Obama would pardon Bush, and you think he would not. It's more like I hope he doesn't... I don't know what he actually has in mind. We can expand this if you want but I think we might agree on Bush pardoning himself (I think he would) -- maybe we could extend the wager to cover whether such a pardon stuck. Not being versed in Constitutional law I really have no idea, but my guess is the pardon would probably be upheld. What could we wager? Something like no posting for a week? Letting the other guy have the last word in a thread? (lol) Any thoughts? I thought it was supposed to be a friendly bet! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phi for All Posted November 26, 2008 Share Posted November 26, 2008 Bascule has to carry a picture of Ben Stein for a month.*shudder* Bet he'd rather spend a month at Guantanamo. I thought it was supposed to be a friendly bet!It doesn't get much friendlier than the Teletubbies! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pangloss Posted November 26, 2008 Share Posted November 26, 2008 That's what's so evil about them! I'm game if you are, bascule! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now