his indictment:
All of this underscores a crucial fact: a major reason why the Bush administration was able to break numerous laws in general, and subject detainees to illegal torture specifically, is because the media immediately mimicked the Orwellian methods adopted by the administration to speak about and obfuscate these matters. Objective propositions that were never in dispute and cannot be reasonably disputed were denied by the Bush administration, and -- for that reason alone (one side says it's true) -- the media immediately depicted these objective facts as subject to reasonable dispute.
and his (typically sarcastic) conclusion:
And besides, even if you want to get all technical about it and say that they "broke the law," everyone Serious knows that "criminal prosecutions" weren't created for high government officials. As Goldsmith so movingly points out, it's already bad enough that Good and Important People like John Yoo, David Addington, Alberto Gonzales, Dick Cheney and friends have suffered what Goldsmith describes as "severe criticism" and even "enormous reputational losses." Criticism and reputational damage! In the name of God, what more do you want to do to these people?
As Goldsmith pleads, these are people who have been so severely punished already. They are banished to toil in shameful, humiliating labor conditions -- as, say, tenured Professor at Berkeley Law School or Chief of Staff to the Vice President of the United States, with unimaginably grim futures involving millions of dollars in fees for giving speeches and writing memoirs and living in retirement off Halliburton stock. What kind of monster would want to heap still more punishment on these noble, suffering souls, just because they committed some so-called "war crimes" and other felonies? Haven't they suffered enough? Shame on those who want to keep harassing them, wringing what Goldsmith calls "further retribution" by holding them accountable under the law.
"people" should continue to pressure the Obama admin. to investimagate, and prosemacute the deciders....
4 comments:
i totally agree. i am worried we're not going to have any prosecutions of any impact whatsoever.
it's fucking bullshit, and it leaves the door open for the younger generation of bush staffers to COME BACK AROUND the way rumsfeld and the whole iran-contra squad CAME BACK AROUND with the W admin after being on hiatus (and making millions in the private sector) during the clinton admin.
boof!
how did I know that EZ and I might differ on this one?
and because I cannot let anything go...how would Hillary have done it any different? Or name me the electable (sorry Dennis!) who could/would pursue investigations and/or prosecution?
ok...lesseee where to start...
first I think candidates should take clear policy positions so that voters can make informed choices between candidates. by forcing them to be specific it strengthens the ability to hold them accountable later...that is one of the reasons I liked Hill in the primary, and I think BHO got away with being vague on a number of issues and I let it be known.... fast forward-->if hill had won the primary, I think she would have been forced to even greater specificity and would have probably had to promise to prosecute Bush and Co. to placate the base....that didn't happen obviously, Barack was vague on everything except his love for merit pay, and here we sit with no labor sec., a balloon about gates at defense, and likely no investigations into torture, rendition, and wirtapping....
still, could be worse, I guess...somehow...
as for Hill...let it go, Barack seems to have considering his rumoured offer of state....
lex is absolutely right about these weasels slinking away only to return washed clean by the vapid and short memoried press/establishment....Anyone in any way associated with this clusterfuk should never be allowed near government employment ever again, much less heavy machinery, or even a mechanical toothbrush lest they do more damage.....
bravo
Post a Comment