There should unquestionably be a DOJ investigation of Chalabi, "Curveball," and the other forces that induced us to go to war, and the investigation should go where the facts lead.
I don't think starting with a criminal investigation is the way to go. I think it should start as a thorough investigation of the subversion of proper intelligence gathering, and only turn into a criminal investigation as circumstances indicate. If it looks like a Democratic administration is hellbent on payback, that won't be nearly as effective as an inquiry into our flawed military intelligence that just happens to turn up an insidious conspiracy.
Posted by dj moonbat at June 8, 2008 11:35 AMAssign the Congressional whores for a dollar Nancy "Princess Sparkle Pelosi" and Harry "My boys are lobbyists" Reid to look into it. They'll know what to do! And I bet it involves cash.
Posted by phidipides at June 8, 2008 11:43 AMNixon resigned and Watergate was swept under the carpet ...
so Ronnie could do Iran Contra which got the small fry pardoned by Bush
Which was swept under the carpet ...
So Bush junior could run riot through the constitution.
And go scot free?
If the ideology behind the Republican anti-democracy program is not thoroghly exposed and discredited, then the next time will be the start of the American Empire.
Always assuming it hasn't begun already.
--ml
Negotiate re-entry into the international courts and delegate.
We will see how strong the Bush lobbyists are there as the enablers begin to fall.
Posted by wilson rivers at June 8, 2008 01:32 PMJohn Kerry told us four years ago that this was nothing but a bunch of "crooks and liars". Well, by then most of us knew that anyway (he was slammed in the Media for saying it, btw). The problem is a simple one: the same Supreme Court Justices (plus a couple new Bush Appointees) that gave him the White House to begin with would, eventually, kill any attempt to bring him and his hoods to justice.
Posted by T2 at June 8, 2008 01:48 PMWithout an appeal to courage from our leaders, without insisting on justice and full disclosure, and a full airing in court of the Bush administration's crimes, there is no guarantee that we can rely on democracy or the rule of law in the future. We cannot hand over the corruption that exists now, in hopes that future generations can fix the system. The repairs require immediate attention; and we will be judged harshly by those to come, if we don't insist on accountability from administrations that betray the public trust, subvert to rule of law, and commit the most despised crimes against peace.
We would become accomplices ourselves, after the fact, in some of the most horrendous and officially sanctioned crimes in our country's history; if we agree to forget.
Posted by Copeland at June 8, 2008 01:55 PMIn the name reaching the other side of aisle President BO will forget all the crimes that Bush has committed and Washington will move as usual. The present democratic congress could have stopped the war many ways but didn't and I do not believe a bit thats coming from either of the party.
Posted by hh at June 8, 2008 02:12 PMIt's going to be tough sledding. The MSM will be misinforming all along the way. And go back to the seventies and see how politicians were handled when they ran committees to investigate government agencies like the CIA and FBI overstepping their charters.
It's not just one guy washing someone else's hands. It's a whole stadium of corporations feeding at the military trough, media interconnected to those corporations, the military, the intelligence agencies. A huge system of handwashing. Thousands of pairs of hands.
It's a system that took hold at the beginning of our empire, at the end of WWII. Eisenhower warned about it. JFK didn't realize how powerful it was or who would work against him. RFK didn't have to say anything for them to know he was dangerous to him. Nixon thought he was bigger than them but found out otherwise. Carter's Administration was filled with them, and anyway, they could push him out. Smooth sailing since then. Now there's someone in line for President that they view as a threat. Let's get him across the finish line before we're disappointed with his first hundred days.
Posted by Bob In Pacifica at June 8, 2008 03:49 PMI wager Obama will usher in a "let it mostly slide" episode. He is movement leader and he will seek something symbolic to focus upon, but there will be no net cast. I think the reason is pretty simple. He has to do something that appeases The Movement mentality which he depends upon and which he has organized so well. But as a practical matter, he has to govern, and I do not see "movement" candidates filtering into down-ticket offices in sufficient numbers to give him an edge in manipulating incumbents. He will have only modest leverage and Washington Insiders will again have the upper hand. If Obama wants to govern, he will compromise to get along. And he will likely compromise too much.
Posted by gtash at June 8, 2008 04:09 PMDo you favor prosecution of US citizens in internation court? How about in International War Crimes Tribunals?
Do US citizens get a waiver?
Posted by wilson rivers at June 8, 2008 04:10 PMDo you favor prosecution of US citizens in internation court? How about in International War Crimes Tribunals?
Sure, if they've committed war crimes.
Posted by dj moonbat at June 8, 2008 04:38 PMJust curious, do you guys really sit in your basements in your underwear...dreaming these things up?
Have you looked at the list of close friends, mentors, business associates and so forth of B. Hussein Obama? Racists, bigots, hate-America, domestic and foreign terrorists, major connections with the Chicago Outfit (aka underworld, mafia, whatever) and this is the best you can do?
What a mess.
"Sure, if they've committed war crimes."
What are the political costs of starting with war crimes? Can't we outsource that?
Posted by wilson rivers at June 8, 2008 05:09 PMWhat are the political costs of starting with war crimes? Can't we outsource that?
I have no idea what this means.
Posted by dj moonbat at June 8, 2008 05:15 PMit wont happen because you would have to indict almost 80% of the media - if not more - for colusion.
Posted by the young Judith at June 8, 2008 05:24 PMWhat are the political costs of starting with war crimes? Can't we outsource that?
I have no idea what this means.
---
What would it take to become a member in good standing of the international courts?
Wouldn't they be happy to have our cooperation?
Posted by wilson rivers at June 8, 2008 05:24 PMFor some strange reason some you seem to leave out some of the felonies of a previous administration, a real record setter!
STARR-RAY INVESTIGATION
- Number of Starr-Ray investigation convictions or guilty pleas (including one governor, one associate attorney general and two Clinton business partners): 14
- Number of Clinton Cabinet members who came under criminal investigation: 5
- Number of Reagan cabinet members who came under criminal investigation: 4
- Number of top officials jailed in the Teapot Dome Scandal: 3
CRIME STATS
- Number of individuals and businesses associated with the Clinton machine who have been convicted of or pleaded guilty to crimes: 47
- Number of these convictions during Clinton's presidency: 33
- Number of indictments/misdemeanor charges: 61
- Number of congressional witnesses who have pleaded the Fifth Amendment, fled the country to avoid testifying, or (in the case of foreign witnesses) refused to be interviewed: 122
SMALTZ INVESTIGATION
- Guilty pleas and convictions obtained by Donald Smaltz in cases involving charges of bribery and fraud against former Agriculture Secretary Mike Espy and associated individuals and businesses: 15
- Acquitted or overturned cases (including Espy): 6
- Fines and penalties assessed: $11.5 million
- Amount Tyson Food paid in fines and court costs: $6 million
CAMPAIGN FINANCE INVESTIGATION
- As of June 2000, the Justice Department listed 25 people indicted and 19 convicted because of the 1996 Clinton-Gore fundraising scandals.
- According to the House Committee on Government Reform in September 2000, 79 House and Senate witnesses asserted the Fifth Amendment in the course of investigations into Gore's last fundraising campaign.
-James Riady entered a plea agreement to pay an $8.5 million fine for campaign finance crimes. This was a record under campaign finance laws.
CLINTON MACHINE CRIMES FOR WHICH CONVICTIONS WERE OBTAINED
Drug trafficking (3), racketeering, extortion, bribery (4), tax evasion, kickbacks, embezzlement (2), fraud (12), conspiracy (5), fraudulent loans, illegal gifts (1), illegal campaign contributions (5), money laundering (6), perjury, obstruction of justice.
Translation: Since we have neutered the international courts, they are powerless.
Posted by wilson rivers at June 8, 2008 05:42 PMIt will be rendered moot prior to Jan. 20, 2009.
POTUS Bush will follow the family tradition of pardoning all the felons, so they may do further damage to all Americans in a future GOP led Executive Branch. My only question is ... who will pardon Bush.
Of course, I'm still of the opinion that the Cheney/Bush Junta will not leave office peacefully. Some "national emergency" will "necessitate" a state of martial law. At least, that's my suspicion.
Posted by endgame at June 8, 2008 05:45 PMIs the US a global citizen or a rogue empire?
Posted by wilson rivers at June 8, 2008 05:54 PMObama said quite a while ago that he would immediately review potential crimes of Bush-Cheney Admin.
He has also said that he would set his justice department to immediately go through every executive order and signing statement and if they were unconstitutional he would immediately reverse them.
Posted by Anjha at June 8, 2008 05:57 PMEven the Great Purge had to wait until Stalin was Supreme Leader.
Posted by onar at June 8, 2008 06:06 PMOne of Heschel's famous lines:
"Some are guilty but all are responsible."
Posted by Judith#1 at June 8, 2008 06:22 PMWe don't do anything about our political criminals because we don't WANT to do anything about them.
Our extreme jingoism make us think it would "look bad" if the country's leaders were demonstrated in the courts to be common criminals.
And most Americans don't actually belive in the rule of law anyway, especially Repubs. They just want to use "law" as a partisan weapon, and can;t be made to accept that their movement's leaders are simply criminals.
The best that can realistically be hoped for is that the gub'mint investigates and reveals what crimes were committed. It's highly unlikely in our degenerate republic that any Bushco felon can really be brought to account.
That would indicate a vital, healthy country, which, after decades of "conservative" mind pollution and mental filth, we surely are not.
Posted by euzoius at June 8, 2008 06:38 PMIt is our responsibility to see that Bush and all the other nefarious criminals are brought to justice. If we wait for someone else to do it, it will never come to pass.
I didn't realize until I read this post how much I really want criminal convictions for the Bush administration. I was hiding my desire for this under a cloak of cynicism until your post came along accepting the cynicism.
Gahhh! I want this administration is jail so bad. Why did you have to peel away my blinders? Why?!!
Posted by Ha at June 8, 2008 09:08 PMlike with pinochet and the generals in argentina etc, it'll be 20-30 years before any of the Bushivite war criminals are brought to justice. or perhaps like in mexico where i live, it'll never happen...the Elites get away with murder and mayhem all the time and the american elites tend to get away with the most because they have the biggest most brutish Empire.
i really wish it were otherwise, but unless there was a genuine mass movement demanding justice (and i don't just mean something that some pollster is going to ask a question about from time to time, like with 'impeachment'), i won't hold my breath.
I think gtash got it correct: "...He(Obama) will have only modest leverage and Washington Insiders will again have the upper hand. If Obama wants to govern, he will compromise to get along. And he will likely compromise too much."
and like i said i really wish it were otherwise. maybe heroic bloggers like paradox, digby, jane, and joan at dkos will continue to write on this critical issue and it will make a difference.....
Posted by michael72 at June 8, 2008 10:38 PMI'm certainly not interested compromising "to get along." I guess I would never have made a good abused wife.
Posted by Judith#1 at June 9, 2008 07:21 AMRepack Rider, I like the way you think. Excellent idea.
Posted by Judith#1 at June 9, 2008 07:45 AMWhew, are you guys going to be disappointed.
Have a great fantasy!