Exposing Bush's historic abuse of power

I wouldn't wait. do what you have the power to do today because you might not have it tomorrow is the way I look at things.

Well Obama has already said he won't go after all the Administration crimes, just the egrecious ones. I guess some crimes by the President are acceptable!

Recently, Obama legal advisor (and University of Chicago law professor) Cass Sunstein said that as president, Obama won't prosecute crimes that Bush and his confederates committed while in office. Sunstein dismissed these crimes, comparing them to the "crimes" that Bill Clinton was impeached over.

I'm not sure we even have the power today winsome. It may already be gone.

How could anyone, liberal or conservative compare what Bush has done...the vast wasteland of death and destruction, economic collapse, flagrant disregard for international law, etc etc to getting head in the oval office.

Come on, people....this goes beyong party lines.

Obama should be ashamed of himself. and so should every other Democratic congressmen who has decided that impeachment is "off the table."

"Obama won't prosecute crimes that Bush and his confederates committed while in office. Sunstein dismissed these crimes, comparing them to the "crimes" that Bill Clinton was impeached over."

I thought Clinton was impeached for lying. What the article reveals are crimes several degrees more serious. I'm still hoping that the recent activities of the International Criminal Court are precedents for war crimes trials of this administration. This is far more serious than I had believed. Thank you for bringing this article to light.

How about an independent council to investigate both parties and all questions of illegality? How about accountability as seen by "throw the *&^% out" Only a revolution of that magnitude will result in changes in policy. Revolution as in major elective change.

There are hearings - saw one committee (not sure which as I tuned in late) on Cspan last week questioning Feith about the torture memos, etc. For what it's worth....

Eric Albert: But the question still lingers. With what we know today, and they are serious crimes, why has Congress, especially the democrats failed to impeach, investigate? It has made them complicit in these crimes and coverups.

I think you almost answered your own question. They could already be complicit, which could be why they are dragging their feet.

Maybe our mistake is assuming that the lines are clearly drawn between the good guys and the bad guys in Congress. Maybe most of them have, to greater or lesser degrees, enabled the committing of the crimes we know that most everyone in Bush's inner circle has committed.

It's not quite the fox guarding the henhouse in every case, but it's close.

capitalK: There are hearings - saw one committee (not sure which as I tuned in late) on Cspan last week questioning Feith about the torture memos, etc. For what it's worth....

The hearings are encouraging. When the Democrats pulled out their slim majority in November of 2006, it removed the shackles from Waxman and Conyers especially, and the good work they were already engaged in became much easier to do. But I'm very troubled by the brick walls they seem to keep running into. I remember Patrick Leahy shouting on the floor of the Senate about the emails they'd subpoenaed that turned up deleted, and that's as far as it went. He roared and raged that it wasn't possible that they were unrecoverable, he was 100% right, and they haven't been recovered. That was over a year ago.

They take testimony from Gonzales, he lies his head off, resigns and that's that. He gets replaced with someone a million times worse than he is without a hitch. They subpoena Karl Rove, he leaves the country, and that's that too.

Meanwhile a handful of kids from trailer parks in West Virginia dumb enough to think the people who told them to do what they did might be at least as responsible as they are for what they did, get hung out to dry over Abu Graib, and that's pretty much the extent of accountability for the appalling things that have gone on since George Bush took office.

I watch eagerly when Doug Feith testifies, or any of them, and plenty of them have testified. He's absolutely the closest thing to a real live Benedict Arnold most of us will ever see, he lies, he dissembles, he dodges responsibility and shifts blame, and he moseys on home, putters about in his garden, writes books, teaches at Georgetown University and that's that.

But still, the hearings are encouraging. I cling to them like a drowning man. If they disappear well, we'll drown. They may be nothing but crumbs somebody is throwing at us, but they will reveal things we need to know in spite of themselves. And one of the most telling things they've revealed so far is the fact that they aren't doing anything but having hearings.

There's something chilling about the way that the Karl Roves and Doug Feiths of the world thumb their noses at Congress, and at We The People's collective outrage. It's as if they know something we don't know -- something that means they will never, ever be held to account for their crimes, and their hand-picked successors will be equally free to do whatever they want no matter how wrong, immoral, or illegal it is.

And that's something I would really, really like to be wrong about.

great post, prospero.

Prospero:
"There's something chilling about the way that the Karl Roves and Doug Feiths of the world thumb their noses at Congress, and at We The People's collective outrage. It's as if they know something we don't know -- something that means they will never, ever be held to account for their crimes, and their hand-picked successors will be equally free to do whatever they want no matter how wrong, immoral, or illegal it is."

I have never before understood what the results of repeating a huge lie would be. The big lie I refer to is that, "This all happened because we were fighting a war on terror." No one can bring themselves to look squarely at the problem at hand because the realization of what has happened is too dire.

Eric Albert,...Is making me aware of something I thought would never happen in America.
The whole idea of this administration and the third Reich showing similarities makes me sick. What can anyone do? It feels like checkmate.

We can still vote for a candidate not vetted by the two major parties. That's it. Join me.

Worse than that perhaps is the 1948 TICOM Report classified in 1948 covering up the crimes of the OSS, predecessor to the CIA. It was to be opened in 1992 and Bush I added a dozen years to the classified status, then Dubbya lucked into office and added another dozen years. I know because I worked on the Hill in the post Watergate era and knew someone who was hoping to live until 1992 when it was opened so the criminal core responsible for Kennedy's killing to protect the FED banksters would finally see justice done. We see how that's gone, Bonesmen rule instead!!

The idea that this operation has been in for some time is upsetting. That in the event of a "national catastrophe" citizens could be surveilled, rounded up or detained because of years
of stored personal data makes me curious to know who's on the list. With Cheney involved as
"shadowy over-lord" we could be in dangerous waters. Pelosi's involvement is apparent. Why though would Obama not call them to account? If he's bringing change, the change I want is for those responsible for these violations tried and punished.

I tend to take your view.. governments don't give up power unless it is at the barrel of a gun.
OOO I see the dems making a lot of noise.. they will scream criminal and reform.. but when the echos die out.. all you will hear is "criminal"

many of the criminal powers bush has, were sought for by clinton.

"This is all just a farse to get votes. They wait until the last minute, then pretend to take action."

Of course it is, they have nothing on the President. He has committed no crime that they can prove, and they are scared to try and get him.

Right Winged Eagle: Of course it is, they have nothing on the President. He has committed no crime that they can prove, and they are scared to try and get him.

You poor man.

"You poor man. "

Since when is "poor" a euphemism for stupid?

"You poor man."

I'm rich with patriotism, unlike you, Frenchie

LET THE EEEEEEEAGLE SOAR!!!!!!

That is the dumbest putdown I have ever heard.

he is a troll

his posts are designed to get a reaction nothing more

he gets off on pissing people off

My posts aren't designed, this is from the hip.

My posts aren't designed

that much is obvious ;)

#9.5 He's channelling Ashcroft. He's making reference to Monty Python. I fart in your general direction.

Or maybe too ripe for ingestion..

this is from the hip

Right then. Who let 'em out?

He has committed no crime that they can prove,

Why was retroactive immunity a top priority? Just for kicks and giggles and Congressional love!

The Administration insistence on retroactive immunity applied, of course, to the telecoms that implemented spy programs. There were civil suits against them alleging illegal data collection. The suits were filed against the telecoms in hopes of revealing the government agencies that hired them to do the spying. It should not be inferred that the immunity granted to the telecoms also applies to those who asked them to do the spying.

The existence of the spy programs has been revealed but the details of who hired them and the ways the data was collected and used is still classified. The telecoms are but accomplices to government instigated crime. The big spy fish to fry are the government agents that ordered the programs. We can still do this. Will a new administration declassify the programs? Will the telecoms reveal the source of the orders so charges against the spying, that would uphold the 4th Amendment, can move forward?

Though hopes to get info from the telecoms in court has been dashed we can still go after the actual instigators.

Exactly, Mach. We need to join together and vote against the incumbent--period. Forget left wing, right wing etc. they are them---in power---we are us--no voice in government. Help the US before it is too late. We need to join together, survelillance or not.

He seems unaware that he has become the personification of Shame.

Oh and P.S there appears to be a tracking cookie attached to pamela drews link to this article. but not mine, it redirects the link cache.ultrmercial.com/start.um.html?

i reported the second comment as inflammatory because of the name he used is obviously racist

takemetoyourneeger

who knows why the first one was deleted

my ability to pour the salt of my limited freedom to delete on the slug of his personality

LOLOLOL! I think you get away with it because you're so funny. I mean, you can't delete that kind of creativity, no matter how evil:-)

This thread couldn't be a more perfect mix of brains, lack of them, elooquence, lack of it, wiseass and gravity. For me, that particular recipe is blogosphere heaven. I mean it. And call me crazy but the crap is an essential part of it.

And winsome is absolutely da man.

There's no doubt that he abused the respect he got from the 9-11 events and ran with it, but we have to remember to hold responsible those people that followed him like sheep. He wasn't the only one screwing up. How about EVERYONE that voted for him?

He wasn't the only one screwing up. How about EVERYONE that voted for him?

Clinton was screwing (up) big time. He didn't vote for Dubbya. Blame Clinton.

Would this include the Democratic members of the Congress as well? I, as said before, am all in favor of actually voting these, both sides of the aisle, out. Work with me here.

JLTpa: There's no doubt that he abused the respect he got from the 9-11 events and ran with it, but we have to remember to hold responsible those people that followed him like sheep. He wasn't the only one screwing up.

This is along the lines of blaming those low-level people that got blamed for Abu Graib instead of the people at the top -- the ones who set it all in motion.

The ordinary citizens who followed Bush are the least culpable -- had the least access to the facts of anyone. The elected officials who followed him are much more culpable of course, but when you call them all sheep, you're right. They were mindless followers -- not leaders.

The person with the actual power, in his actual hands, to send people to war to die, to destroy someone else's country and kill only God knows for sure how many innocent people, not to mention to do violence to the Constitution with the stroke of a pen is only one man. Dick Cheney has arrogated an enormous amount of power to himself but he couldn't have done that without the president's approval. Karl Rove might have come up with plans to rob us of all we've ever held dear in this country, but only in his dreams could he have executed them. George Bush is the only guy who could have allowed it all to proceed. All the fawning and going along other people did is important, and culpable, and secondary. Some of them actively encouraged him and some of them just let it happen. I personally think it's more disgusting to look the other way when you see horrible things happening. But he's the president and he didn't have to do any of the things he did. If he had just once, stood up to somebody and said "Screw you I'm not doing that. Nobody is going to die for oil on my orders," or "Screw you I'm not signing that signing statement you jerks wrote" none of this ever would have happened. He's the only one who could have not only brought it all to a screeching halt, he could have prevented it from getting started in the first place -- nobody else. It's a little scary to think of one person having that kind of power, and we should fix that if we get the chance, but right now, for accountability purposes, he's accountable long before anybody else is.

How about EVERYONE that voted for him?

I've heard Europeans say that the fact that we elected him twice proves Americans are incapable of critical thinking. Always makes me want to punch someone -- not sure why. Must be because I'm an American. I'm aware how that makes us look and it makes me uncomfortable so I want to get rid of that discomfort by pretending someone else needs a punch in the nose. Not very admirable. So in my travels to understand how we did manage to elect him twice, imagine my amazement when I find out it didn't happen.

We elected Gore in 2000 and Kerry in 2004. I say this all the time so I apologize to those who've heard it before. But I'll say it again: we elected Gore in 2000 and Kerry in 2004 and look who's been president for the past 8 years.

It's wonderful to find out we're not quite as stupid as we look. It's wonderful until you realize the implications of the fact that someone we didn't elect is president. Is it because of some sort of massive incompetence, or just some big mistake somehow? Just a terrible accident?

It doesn't look accidental. It looks extremely intentional but either way, we're in a lot of trouble, and it's not just because because Bush has been so destructive. We're in trouble because we have no control over who gets "elected."

. We're in trouble because we have no control over who gets "elected."

Welcome to ZimbabUSA.

*blinking my eyes rapidly*

Could it be?

A man has said this?

We elected Gore in 2000 and Kerry in 2004. I say this all the time so I apologize to those who've heard it before. But I'll say it again: we elected Gore in 2000 and Kerry in 2004 and look who's been president for the past 8 years.

Awesome.

True, dat.

"Windmill." Hehehe, what a perfect name for Congress.