Washington Post columnist David Broder respectfully disagrees with Attorney General Eric Holder’s (in photo) decision to have a special counsel look into CIA interrogations, viewing it as the “first step on a legal trail that could lead to trials” and a dangerous precedent. He writes: “Obama’s argument has been that he has made the decision to change policy and bring the practices clearly within constitutional bounds — and that should be sufficient. In times like these, the understandable desire to enforce individual accountability must be weighed against the consequences. This country is facing so many huge challenges at home and abroad that the president cannot afford to be drawn into what would undoubtedly be a major, bitter partisan battle over prosecution of Bush-era officials. The cost to the country would simply be too great.”
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- ProudMan on Too many exemptions
- ANTI on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/23
- SolDevVB on Open thread 11/23
- donndublin on Open thread 11/23
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/23
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/23
- CapnAmerica on Open thread 11/23
- donndublin on Open thread 11/23
33 Comments
Washington columnist, David Broder is right. Drop the matter like a hot potato. It will become another tremendously expensive Washington lawyer enrichment program for many years. As it is, the stigma will follow the perpetrators from now to eternity.
I dunno.
The “stigma will follow” the Carr brothers, too. And I’m okay with that.
These were pretty serious crimes.
It’s a cryin’ shame CONs have turned everything into a partisan issue.
There has to be accountability.
It must be investigated, if crimes were committed the preps should be punished.
Some Republicans are calling for cheney as president in 2012! Is that the ’stigma’ you speak of, JWink?
Let’s get to the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth!
When you circumvent oversight because of cost you open the door for abuse and corruption beyond the imagination especially with an agency that uses secrecy as it’s mantra. Secrecy will now have no limits and nothing can prevent it from using it against it’s own government. That’s how governments are overthrown.
It remains totally political, a pay-back for a bunch of extreme lefties. The practices saved lives, and anyone who says they would not have done the same thing to save a friend or family member is a liar and/or a traitor.
What about the cost of ignoring illegal behavior? Damned if you do, damned if you don’t. Thanks George W. Bush.
I’ve often wondered about the Holy Sch!t moments every incoming president has to face.
“Uhm, yeah. There really were aliens who crashed at Roswell.”
Or…
“Uhm, yeah. The real Neil Armstrong died at blast-off and we faked the moon landing. It’s the whole ‘Paul is dead’ thing, but we sold it.”
Or…
“Well, yeah, it turns out Saddam Hussein really did have weapons of mass destruction but shipped ‘em FedEx to a suburban Tulsa Store-It-Yourself warehouse.”
“It’s a cryin’ shame CONs have turned everything into a partisan issue.”
———–
Waking up to Monkey accusing others of doing what he does. Good thing we don’t have hypocrite police. They’d be looking for you.
I think that most folks can see that this is little more than a bone thrown to the far left, who have been having a rough time with political reality smashing their dreams.
Another Obama political blunder.
They ain’t got nothing…
Adhering to international law is a bone thrown to the far left? You people…shaking my head. That mindless remark just says it all. Returning to where there are people who at least pretend to make sense…
“outlander” –
By this time you should have realized I’m a counter-puncher. I’m Bugs Bunny to your Elmer Fudd.
I wouldn’t bother you CONs if you didn’t first attack.
Here’s some advice to CONs if I’m such a troubling presence here:
“Be vewwy, vewwy quiet.”
#
Boxlock20
Posted September 7, 2009 at 7:47 am | Permalink
It remains totally political, a pay-back for a bunch of extreme lefties. The practices saved lives, and anyone who says they would not have done the same thing to save a friend or family member is a liar and/or a traitor.
_______________________________
It didn’t take long for a Con to break out the “Traitor” tag.
Yes the cost either way is too costly to this country, to face it will take far more they anyone is truly willing to face. To ignore it is to admit we are liars and only deceive ourselves, that this country is a sham in what is said and what we say to stand for.
“You would have done the same thing if it was your family member involved!”.
Yes, far worse in fact and it would be questionable if there would be a body found.
But see I am me, not the United States of America, my actions are not policy of a land of laws and respect for human rights. Defending me is not worth the blood and suffering that is called for in the defense. This country is worth that blood and suffering in it defense BECAUSE OF IT BEING A LAND OF LAWS AND RESPECT FOR HUMAN RIGHTS!
Sometimes that defense calls for it to be hampered by those laws and respect for human rights.
To sacrifice either in its defense is to be defending nothing at all.
“they an’t got nothing!”
Sadly more then can be ignored and still be the United States, there can be the question of was it illegal or not covered by the existing laws. As it might be, if you accept that even the twisting of a understand of existing laws. There were those who did violate the twisted understanding of the law. The sham of yesterday it was torture but today with the re-naming it is not today. Withstanding, there were those who took it beyond to using torture. Such a serious crime that a simple slap on the hand can not stand.
We already stand like two rival Klan with our banners waving and the war shouts being heard.
A indictment will serve as the swords raised and the call to war shouted. This nation may not stand either by facing the sins or ignoring them.
“It didn’t take long for a Con to break out the “Traitor” tag.”–XXX
Okay, if you don’t like the ‘traitor tag’, you must fit the liar tag.
Sigh. . . I actually sent an email to Broder and suggested pardoning them all. Seriously. Scroo it.
An investigation that honors Marquis de Gonzalez’s “standards” is worse than doing nothing at all. It says that the Executive branch can operate by its own private, secret rules, in direct violation of written law and international treaties.
Fortunately, most courts are soundly rejecting this totalitarian idea:
In a ruling that said Ashcroft could be sued for prosecutorial abuses, a three-judge panel of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals denied the former attorney general immunity from liability for how he used the material witness warrants in national security investigations.
Members of the panel, all appointees of Republican presidents, characterized Ashcroft’s detention policy as “repugnant to the Constitution, and a painful reminder of some of the most ignominious chapters of our national history.”
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-ashcroft-rights5-2009sep05,0,2169737.story
Can we do nothing? No: in addition to ignoring domestic law, it also violates our obligations under the Geneva Conventions, if we do nothing.
So too much of a distraction? Fine. Pardon the bassturds. All of them. For “any crimes they may have committed.”
It’s nothing close to justice, but at least assorted heinous felonies and manslaughter won’t be ignored with a collective shrug.
And the rule of law won’t be turned into a total joke.
P.S. Mr. Half-a-loaf Broder is a moron. He obviously must believe that following the existing law “sets a dangerous precedent.”
Maybe spending two years and millions of dollars to prosecute Tim McVeigh set a “dangerous precedent” too.
Maybe spending two years and millions of dollars to prosecute Tim McVeigh set a “dangerous precedent” too.
So Rage thinks CIA agents and Tim McVeigh are the types of people.
So Rage thinks CIA agents and Tim McVeigh are the types of people.
No, I think those who commit violent felonies are a “type of people,” though I will allow that the Nuremberg defense at least should put far more culpability to those giving the orders.
. . .which is my second gripe with Holder’s approach.
P.S. The “type of people”? Those who commit violent felonies.
So what type of violent felonies did the CIA commit?
Your source and proof…
SUPREME COURT OVERTURNS NINTH CIRCUIT RULING IN MURDER CASE
In a 6-3 per curiam decision announced on December 2, the United States Supreme Court has overturned a federal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling which had voided the conviction of a San Mateo man found guilty of murdering a gas station clerk. The issue in Hedgpeth v. Pulido was the standard used by the Ninth Circuit to overturn a conviction when there was an error that was unlikely to have made any difference in the case.
“Once again, the Supreme Court has had to rein in the Ninth Circuit for ignoring established rules,” said Kent Scheidegger, who authored an amicus curiae (friend of the court) brief for the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation.
——————–
Rage did you get that ‘once again’ in reference to the 9th district rulings. Look for that same thing to happen in the Ashcroft affair. The most overturn circuit is the 9th. Californians are just a little crazy.
Your source and proof…
There’s this thing called “Google News” but you may also google my posts on WEBlog. . . .
If you’re asking for which statutes cover keeping people awake for 11 days at a time and torturing them, I don’t recall the specific portion of the USC.
But that’s not my job either. From what we already know from our own government, there is at least reasonable suspicion to act, and I have little doubt probable cause exists as well.
Rage did you get that ‘once again’ in reference to the 9th district rulings. Look for that same thing to happen in the Ashcroft affair. The most overturn circuit is the 9th. Californians are just a little crazy.
Heh, how lame. Even if the two W.-appointed and one Reagan-appointed judges were actually from California.
But also predictable too. It’s all you got.
keeping people awake for 11 days
Your source for this or is the Justice Department relying on Google as well to answer their legal matters?
Your source for this or is the Justice Department relying on Google as well to answer their legal matters?
The ISG report, of course.
9th Circuit Activist Judges Overturned
We are glad to report that the United States Supreme Court has again overturned another liberal activist judge’s ruling from the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. This was the sixth time (out of eight) where the Supreme Court reversed the 9th court.
This case involved a man sentenced to death for murder. During the appeal process a federal judge rejected his appeal. Then a 3-month appellate panel rejected his appeal. Then the liberal, anti death-penalty judges on the 9th Circuit agreed with his complaint.
This is another example of the critical importance of appointing judges who wish to uphold the law, not make it.
————-
6 out of 8 overtutned. That is all I need.
The ISG report, of course
So operations that were classified are allowed to be viewed by the general public. Does this include all classified documents related to the case?
Holder is going down this same path. Trying to put the lefts political views into the law.
Okay, just to sum up the extreme silliness before I depart:
1) Regular is playing his usual game of demanding documentation of well-worn facts confirmed by multiple reports, the latest being the CIA Inspector General’s report on interrogations.
2) Okie is hilariously bashing three Republican-appointed judges (two by W.) as “liberal activists” based on conservative propaganda that says the 9th circuit is a bunch of “liberal activist” nuts and, apparently, because one of the largest federal circuits in the country just happens to hold hearing in San Francisco (maybe something in the air, is that the idea?).
I now return you to your regularly scheduled program.
Rage I am a conservative. You lose track of that in your haste to label others. These judges no matter who put them in place are reversed more often than any other circuit.
Maybe it’s the air. Maybe their ideology. I really don’t know the answer to that one. I do however know that this ruling on Ashcroft won’t survive the Supremes.
Take that as you will.
I do however know that this ruling on Ashcroft won’t survive the Supremes.
Heh heh, bookmarked for future amusement!
Rage
Posted September 7, 2009 at 9:38 pm | Permalink
I do however know that this ruling on Ashcroft won’t survive the Supremes.
Heh heh, bookmarked for future amusement!
————————-
Of course, the Supreme Court doesn’t have to hear the case if they deem to do so.