Not good
Remember those 10 signs you’re living in a Banana Republic? Well, if there were 11, it would be that the new governing power prosecutes the former governing power. No good can come from this:
President Obama left open the door Tuesday for charges to be brought against Bush administration lawyers who justified harsh interrogation techniques, though he continued to argue that CIA agents who used those tactics should not be prosecuted.
Update: It does occur to me (based on Nomen’s comment) that there are instances in which prosecution may be acceptable. But it’s a line that, once crossed, can lead to all kinds of bad.
April 21st, 2009 at 2:37 pm
because letting your predecessor get away with the felonies he committed while in office simply because he was an elected official is the acme of civilization. gotcha.
…screw that all to hell, with a chainsaw, and no lube. i don’t care if Nixon’s dead, dig the felonious motherfucker up and indict his rotting ass!
April 21st, 2009 at 2:51 pm
Might be a valid comparison if it weren’t just for political posturing. And they were going after the decision makers instead of lawyers.
April 21st, 2009 at 3:18 pm
There’s a question of who is responsible for the wrong. I get the idea that if you are relying on legal info from a lawyer that ends up being bogus info, that yes you probably shouldn’t be punished for following legal advice. Which then says that did the lawyers act criminally or were they pressured into making those opinions and who pressured them and how do you get the lawyers to squeal (presumably by charging them and then offering a deal for testimony in return for amnesty).
April 21st, 2009 at 3:20 pm
Slight Problem there Nomen, That’s not what is happening in this case. If it had been the legislative branches would have had reasons for impeachment at the most.
But since a DEMOCRAT led house couldn’t seem to find any evidence there of, I don’t suppose there is much to speak of. Now attacking all the little guys who gave opinions based on the law is justified how?
April 21st, 2009 at 3:33 pm
If the goal is to destroy the effectiveness of the CIA the FBI and the various military intelligence agencies, this will do just fine. Remember the Church hearings on the CIA under Carter? Remember the complete end to all useful information about our enemies for about a decade or more, after that little dog and pony show?
Tdestroy the utility of an intelligence agency, just make it clear that when you do things that you are told are not only effective but also squeaky clean legal, nevertheless you can still be prosecuted for your successful activities later. CYA becomes the rule of the day.
April 21st, 2009 at 4:30 pm
i usually try to avoid Godwining myself, but… if Mikee’s argument held water, the Nuremberg trials could not have been held. the prosecutions here at issue are for torture, and Mikee is arguing that “i was told these orders were a-ok legal” should be sufficient ass-coverage to get away with that. the slope he seems to be stepping out on, there, is historically known to be paved with greased ice.
moreover, Mikee is arguing — by implication — that torture produces good information, since how else could you “destroy” an intelligence organization’s efficiency by banning it? yet we’ve known since the freakin’ middle ages that it produces gibberish. i’m not even gonna mention where that slope ends up at.
finally, Mikee seems to think very little of our intelligence operatives if he doesn’t think they either can or would wish to tell their bosses, “screw this torturing bullshit. you’re asking me to do something that is (1) inhuman, (2) unamerican, and (3) an ineffective waste of time. bug off and let me go gather some actual intelligence instead.”
i would posit that if the CIA, FBI, whatever-TLS have institutionally devolved to where the agents cannot stand up for such elementary basics, then they need to be wrecked since they’d be far more likely to harm the USA than help it.
April 21st, 2009 at 4:48 pm
One solution is for gubmint types not to do illegal stuff.
April 21st, 2009 at 4:51 pm
Good one.
April 21st, 2009 at 7:16 pm
Nomen: No, the “torture” isn’t being prosecuted. As the post says, the agents are not going to be prosecuted.
Evidently the people who might (“door open”) be are lawyers, who wrote memos.
On the other hand, and to his credit, President Obama only said that he’d let AG Holder make the decision about whether prosecution was warranted.
The news report suggests an “internal ethics inquiry” regarding the lawyers, but that’s not the same as legal charges (thank God, what with the standards being so radically different).
(The claim is that it’s possible that the lawyers might be charged with “aiding and abetting”, but I’m not sanguine about the chances of that working in front of a real judge rather than as a PR stunt.)
April 21st, 2009 at 7:22 pm
Monty Python – Spanish Inquisition Torture Scene
Unacceptable practices according to Obie!
April 21st, 2009 at 8:04 pm
The CIA is effective?
April 21st, 2009 at 8:35 pm
Hmm, we’re speaking in code and trading derivatives.
Does the case hinge, in the end, on international protocols on the conduct of warfare, like the Geneva conventions? Or is it about a sense of the congress resolution, or about procedural matters like concealment and failure to testify “whole truth”?
Hearings about violations of US law will all have to do with memos, legal definitions and coverups, real or alleged. The Big Issue that many want to see prosecuted is not actually borne out by the text of international agreements, unless one party wants to argue the case that non-uniformed combat by subterfuge is ethically equal to infantry in the line of fire.
There’s no “name, rank and serial number” with people who have several names, and no rank or serial number.
April 21st, 2009 at 9:08 pm
So the Palin administration, in 2013, could largely pay off the debits run up by the Obama administration in the previous 4 years, by putting the hangings on pay-per-view?
April 21st, 2009 at 9:10 pm
I say employ the same methods on the usurper & let him speak the truth for once. Then he can have the traditional punishment for treason during wartime – death. I imagine there would be about 65 Million citizens or more that would cheer & those that don’t can just burn down their town & loot to their hearts content (remember Watts & other places when the disgruntled idiots destroyed their own nests?? It would solve two problems in one shot.
Defend the Constitution to the death!
April 21st, 2009 at 10:43 pm
Lawyers should never be held criminally responsible. As others have pointed out – they were just making arguments about what might or might now be legal- in their best analysis – under the law. Regardless of your reliance on a legal memo, the actor is still ultmatly respponsible for indidvidual actions. Sure, you can sue your lawyer for giving you wrong advice, but its ludicrous, and undermines the foundation of our legal system to hold the lawyer criminally responsible for the actions of someone else.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:25 am
Usurper? pops1911, if you want to talk about defending the constitution, you should probably get it through your head that George Bush wasn’t a king, and nothing was “usurped” when he stepped down after serving two terms.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:47 am
Sauce for the gander.
I’m sure we can drum up some charges with which to jail the democrats.
pops1911 and nomen: Two can play this game. Jail bush and I guarantee you we will return the favor on Obama the second we gain power.
Putting former Presidents in solitary would make the Secret Service’s job easier, mind you …
April 22nd, 2009 at 9:12 am
Some how I think “torture” of enemies of the state for actionable intelligence for the state does not hold a candle to gassing several million jews because you don’t like them.
April 23rd, 2009 at 3:15 am
What about the Congressional oversight committees? I don’t give a damn which opinion you hold on this issue, if your opinion of what is to be done to those involved does not include the members of the oversight committees in the Senate and House, then your opinion is worthless and is most probably loyalty to party more than any loyalty to nation or law.
To be frank, we just don’t have time for you, unless you really truly want to follow it WHEREVER it leads.