Who Will Throw the Book at the Bushies?
If Congress won't, these folks might.
While Democratic staffers say that Congress will continue to pick through the Bush administration's record, they doubt that it will take on the big issues. Assuming Congress and the White House punt on Iraq and torture, who else could throw the book at the Bush/Cheney crew? A few possibilities:
A Rogue district attorney In his recent book, The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder, former prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi lays out a creative argument that state or local prosecutors could indict Bush for murder if a soldier from their jurisdiction was killed in Iraq. It's a far-fetched premise, but with 2,700 DAs out there, Bugliosi—famous for putting Charles Manson away—says, "I just need one." (Last fall, the Vermont Progressive Party's candidate for attorney general said that if elected, she would appoint Bugliosi to implement his plan.) This unusual strategy is not unprecedented; witness New Orleans district attorney Jim Garrison's investigation into John F. Kennedy's assassination (as dramatized in JFK ). Garrison successfully subpoenaed evidence like the Zapruder film, which had not been seen publicly before the trial. Potential upshot: major embarrassment for Bush. Likelihood: low.
Ticked-Off Lawyers Most of what happened under Bush was "legal" in the sense that the Justice Department issued opinions—such as the so-called torture memos—that said as much. The new administration, if only to placate the military and intelligence agencies, will be loath to go after Bush officials who can claim legal cover, no matter how flawed the reasoning behind it. But the lawyers who actually drafted the legal justifications for torture—particularly Dick Cheney's chief of staff David Addington, Alberto Gonzales, and Justice Department lawyers John Yoo and Jay Bybee—may be vulnerable. They could be indicted in federal court if they knowingly issued faulty legal opinions that led to criminal acts. However, that would be an extremely difficult case to make unless one of the defendants turned against the others. More plausible is that, like Bill Clinton and Scooter Libby, they could face disbarment, limiting their employment prospects.
The United Nations A range of observers, from former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan to überhawk Richard Perle, has acknowledged that the invasion of Iraq violated the UN Charter. In theory, the Security Council could sanction the United States or even authorize the use of force to expel our troops. But that's a nonstarter, not least because the Security Council signed off on the occupation of Iraq. Likewise, the United States could be tried in the UN's International Court of Justice and forced to pay reparations to Iraq. That's also doubtful, since the Security Council enforces Court rulings; the US could use its veto power as it did in 1986, when the icj found we had violated international law by supporting the Nicaraguan Contras. If the UN wanted to go after American officials for torture, it could set up a special tribunal like those for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda. But such courts are the creation of—you guessed it—the Security Council.
the International Criminal Court The Third Geneva Conventions, which the United States signed in 1949, as well as the UN Convention Against Torture, which Congress ratified in 1988, forbid torture. The International Criminal Court (not to be confused with the icj) was convened in the Netherlands in 2002 as a permanent venue to try crimes including violations of Geneva. But the United States hasn't ratified the icc treaty and has pressured 100 countries to agree never to extradite American citizens to the court, so Dick Cheney's unlikely to wind up in the dock at The Hague.
The Garzón Factor Not that George W. Bush & Co. shouldn't be worried about international laws that they once sneered at. There are hints that they already are: A 2002 State Department memo cautioned officials about the "risk of future criminal prosecution," and the Pentagon's 2005 National Defense Strategy warned of enemies who might "employ a strategy of the weak using international fora and judicial processes."
The biggest threat comes from European magistrates like Baltasar Garzón, the Spanish "superjudge" who nearly brought Augusto Pinochet to justice. In 1998, Garzón issued an arrest warrant for the former Chilean dictator for the deaths of Spanish citizens who'd been tortured by his regime. Days later, the unsuspecting 82-year-old was picked up while visiting England.
In many European countries, most notably Spain and Italy, judges can initiate prosecutions and—as in the case of Pinochet—may do so independently of the executive branch. Peter Weiss, vice president of the Center for Constitutional Rights, says such a court might be the most plausible venue for a case against Bush. "The prime minister of Spain was completely against going after Pinochet," he points out, "but a judge lower down was able to do it." The approach might prove especially effective in pursuing torture cases. As signatories to the Convention Against Torture, most European nations are obligated, theoretically, to investigate violations by other signatories, such as the United States. Sure enough, human rights advocates have filed complaints in Germany, France, and Sweden against former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld for authorizing the torture of Iraqi and Saudi citizens in Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib. The ccr claims a pending case convinced Rumsfeld to alter his travel plans to Germany.
"Believe me, people from the top of the administration will be consulting with lawyers for the rest of their lives," says Christopher Simpson, a professor at American University and an expert on international law. "They will have to coordinate very, very closely with the State Department's specialists whenever they leave America. This is something they cannot take lightly." Larry Wilkerson, who served as former Secretary of State Colin Powell's chief of staff, has warned that former Bush officials like Gonzales, Yoo, and Addington "should never travel outside the US, except perhaps to Saudi Arabia and Israel."
What about a truly objective 911 investigation?
Anybody who didn't sleep through college physics and chemistry classes,
and happened to, at least somewhat, understand the subject matter, knows the
official story doesn't make sense, on so many basic levels.
Let's look into the details of so much of what happened that day, which was
"excused" and "glossed over", using BS and made up science, to quickly put an
end to the issue.
Otherwise whose that got away with it, will be even more emboldened to try again.
911
According to information from builders and architects and from those in the towers that distinctly heard blasts from the inside of the buildings, the investigating committee lied and never questioned individuals who heard bombings in these buildings that should never had collapsed from the initial attacks, especially the third tower that was not attacked by outside forces. Tyranny and treason exists in DC, especially those who are in bed with the BinLaden oil wells in Quwait.
We can only hope that someone steps forward to do the right thing.
Tim Fleming
eloquentbooks.com/MurderOfAnAmericanNazi
http://leftlooking.blogspot.com
Absolutely! I agree that this should be top priority.
Unfortunately, it seems a verylow probability until the public opinion that 911 was an inside job is greater than say 75%. But..welive in a nation of kneejerk nationalist idiots (both parties) who are so close minded that they rules out for instance explosives bringing down the towers when ALL the evidence is consistent with that theory, opting instead for bogus armchair handwaving BS...unbelievable.
There has to be a way to push forward an investigation/prosecution - or he'll be back (or someone worse). As it is, his smiling calmness during the transition is making me nervous. It's like his smile during the 2000 election after hearing he was loosing. He wasn't worried.
Now that OmombANation quoted the Oath of Office Correctly he can be Impeached Correctly and along with the Weenie God's Impeachment Fire the New Secretary of State Ice Queen Hag Clinton! That House which was once our Capital Stinks of Communism! Terrorism Abides within our Country and it Resides at our once used to be Capital now nothing more than the John for the John Doe's and Mary Jane's!!!!!
Throw the Book at MotherJones
Well, I may start by mailing a shoe to the opening of his library. Though, it may be a waste of a shoe and postage...
And we're going to let them walk? I think I'm gonna puke...
Just because Bush didn't announce pardons, does not mean he didn't issue them, in secret.
Will any of Bush's administration be prosecuted for unlawful activities, I would have to say, very unlikely. Lawlessness is typical in our government and will continue, unless the American people act and demand a stop to it.
Any professional person who recklessly violates the canons of good practice, thereupon showing a depraved indifference toward human life, can be prosecuted for manslaughter. Example: An anesthesiologist who forgets to turn on the oxygen, and suffocates a patient. Another example: an airline pilot who flies drunk, crashes, and kills dozens of passengers.
Can't we apply the same reasoning to Bush / Cheney's geopolitical malpractice, and charge them with four thousand counts of manslaughter?
How about the U.S./U.K. Extradition Treaty? It was drafted by John Ashcroft; it applies retroactively, eliminates probable cause and political exceptions, and has no statute of limitations. It was held up by activists for three years before being passed unanimously by the Senate in 2006. Now, maybe we can use it--against Bush, Cheney, et all. All we need is a request from Gordon Brown, and we can hand over the whole crew.
You people are truly pathetic. Bush deserves medals. And nobody cares about your juvenile desire to punish him just because he protected the world from terrorists when nobody else could.
So the British comedy/satire movie 'The Trial of Tony Blair' (2007, with Robert Lindsay and Phoebe Nicholls) was not really that far-fetched after all!
poptoy: tell your "get a life" comment to the over a hundred thousand dead Iraqi's and the over four hundred dead American soldiers. they would no doubt appreciate the irony that their deaths have come at the hands of criminals for their own gain.
Legalities? Why not just an illegal extraordinary rendition to an unknown country? Would most American people even care? Water boarding to get the truth from Bush, Cheney, and any others that might be of use. Once the bar has been lowered, perhaps we should use it...in this one exceptional instance of course.
God help us. We know they committed treason and crimes against humanity as previous administrations have but they've made it so it's damn near impossible to do anything about it. It's obvious what it does to our nation and all of humanity. Those who have the power have the responsibility to do something about it. That includes all of us.
If any of this were truly likely Henry Kissinger would be a great candidate for arrest and trial. He travels and consults with many people and corporations.
I would like to see Rumsfeld as well as Addington explain that America's constitution permits the executive to be a dictator whenever he so chooses. That no laws apply when an executive does not wish to obey them. That no executive can be limited in any fashion when decides that the rest of the government lacks any power or authority to do its constitutionally mandated job. Only the imperial dictator can permit or allow obedience to the laws of the nation or not as he pleases.
You forget that the rule of law doesn't apply to rich, well connected people. When was the last time you even saw one of them in jail? Oh yeah, Martha Stewart, Paris Hilton, a few others, but not many. Bush will never be prosecuted because the supreme court will never let that happen.
Scott, you have a really bad judgement problem. Bush deserves the death penalty, in Texas, of course, for killing so many young people in a war of choice.
I think Dennis Miller says it best - "There is lethal torture and there is non-lethal torture (just like all immigration is ill-legal) ... and anybody who has "skin in the game" and an IQ over 100 - will approve non-blood-letting torture."
Please respect reality.
Dik Deerwood
Algonquin, IL
Scott...your love for Bush is only outshone by your ignorance of world events...why dont you actuall research how many terrorist events have happened in the "world" since your hero began "protecting us" and then rethink your ridiculously uninformed opinion.
Then you should double the tinfoil in your current hat and then go drown yourself and anyone who thinks like you in the nearest river.
Good ideas for writing a
Good ideas for writing a thesis. Can anyone help do my thesis paper on this topic please?
Torture
Dick Cheney hired Erik Prince's company Blackwater to find and question suspected terrorists in Iraq. Video's of the inhumane torture of innocent Iraqis were inflicted by Erik's employees. Both Cheney and Prince need to be prosecuted for these war crimes.



























