I Hate Dialysis Message Board
Off-Topic => Off-Topic: Talk about anything you want. => Topic started by: Bill Peckham on January 11, 2009, 11:45:35 AM
-
Should the incoming administration appoint a special prosecutor to independently investigate the alleged crimes of the Bush administration? The alleged crimes include torture and warrantless wiretapping.
On This Week With George Stephanopoulos, George put the question directly to President Elect Obama (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0jwrOVNRZ0U) (at 5:36 mark). He said (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/11/obama-leaves-door-open-to_n_156910.html)
We're still evaluating how we're going to approach the whole issue of interrogations, detentions, and so forth," said Obama. "And obviously we're going to look at past practices. And I don't believe that anybody is above the law. On the other hand, I also have a belief that we need to look forward as opposed to looking backwards. And part of my job is to make sure that for example at the CIA, you've got extraordinarily talented people who are working very hard to keep Americans safe. I don't want them to suddenly feel like they've got to spend all their time looking over their shoulders and lawyering up.
Some are interpreting this as saying Obama is not likely to prosecute torture but I think "no one is above the law" trumps Obama's personal preference. As pointed out by Think Progress (http://thinkprogress.org/2009/01/11/obama-special-prosecutor-torture/), Dawn Johnsen, Obama's choice to lead the Office of Legal Counsel, has said that the next president should avoid "any temptation to simply move on." Here is the relevant quote:
We must avoid any temptation simply to move on. We must instead be honest with ourselves and the world as we condemn our nation's past transgressions and reject Bush's corruption of our American ideals. Our constitutional democracy cannot survive with a government shrouded in secrecy, nor can our nation's honor be restored without full disclosure.
I think that is right. We need an honest accounting and the rule of law trumps political considerations. It's inconvenient at times have to follow laws but there is no alternative. Laws have to mean something, there is no good alternative.
-
Two interesting Op-Ed pieces in the New York Times speaks to some of these issues:
Where Is Our Ferdinand Pecora?
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/06/opinion/06chernow.html
Eight Years of Madoffs
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/11/opinion/11rich.html?ref=opinion
8)
-
IMO, Bush is an ass, it runs in the family. Thank God, they will be history in the near future, why waste more money?
-
I thought the country wants to move forward. Give it a rest...Boxman
-
Two interesting Op-Ed pieces in the New York Times speaks to some of these issues:
Where Is Our Ferdinand Pecora?
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/06/opinion/06chernow.html
Eight Years of Madoffs
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/11/opinion/11rich.html?ref=opinion
I thought the country wants to move forward. Give it a rest...Boxman
Reading the two article Zach linked makes it clear that giving it a rest would mean letting numerous crimes go unpunished. It would mean giving criminals a free ride ... a Pecora commission makes a lot of sense. Those who took advantage and profited from the Bush administration's lack of oversight should pay for their crimes. We need a full accounting before we can move forward. No rest for the wicked.
-
Two interesting Op-Ed pieces in the New York Times speaks to some of these issues:
Where Is Our Ferdinand Pecora?
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/06/opinion/06chernow.html
From the article:
Such was the furor over the Morgan testimony that Senator Carter Glass of Virginia shook his head and sighed, “We are having a circus, and the only things lacking now are peanuts and colored lemonade.” Seizing on the comment, a press agent for the Ringling Brothers Circus took advantage of a pause in the hearings to pop Lya Graf, a midget in a blue satin dress, on the lap of the portly and surprised J. P. Morgan Jr. The committee chairman, Senator Duncan Fletcher of Florida, pleaded with newspapers not to print the pictures, which only made them rush to do so.
The photo of Morgan with a circus midget planted on his lap became the signature shot of the hearings, emblematic of Wall Street’s fallen state.
What will be the emblematic photo of the Bush years? ... Maybe someone can get a picture of Cheney with Verne Troyer (http://weblogs.newsday.com/entertainment/tv/blog/mini_me.gif) on his lap.
-
Need we bring up that the current President Elect isn't even an American Citizen??
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=03_ZHGAJxSQ
Everyone hated Regan and now he is a hero. The same thing will happen to Bush if we are still alive after Obama gives us away to the Middle East.
People in glass houses or "huts" shouldn't through bricks.
-
Seizing on the comment, a press agent for the Ringling Brothers Circus took advantage of a pause in the hearings to pop Lya Graf, a midget in a blue satin dress, on the lap of the portly and surprised J. P. Morgan Jr.
-
Seizing on the comment, a press agent for the Ringling Brothers Circus took advantage of a pause in the hearings to pop Lya Graf, a midget in a blue satin dress, on the lap of the portly and surprised J. P. Morgan Jr.
I guess it is emblematic if you imagine she is a normal sized woman and she's screaming because Morgan is going to eat her.
-
You guys are PIGS. Making fun of people that are short. I'll wait and see who is sitting on Clinton's lap first! Only we'd need a vido because I'm sure she would be moving up and down too fast for a still shot.
I'm not going to even read this thread again. You Libs are just never happy! NEVER!
PIGS!
-
That was odd
-
What's that saying about life is like a box of chocolates ...?
8)
-
It will give you cavities? <snicker>
-
Let's just put Bush put to pasture and let things roll.
-
We didn't get attacked for 8 years.
Several attacks that the public are aware of that didnt happen were due to waterboarding
I guess all the bush haters would have preferred Seattle got blown to hell in the PLANNED MILLENNIUM ATTACKS that were interupted due to waterboarding.
Save one terrorist and kill thousands of Americans. Patriotic. Maybe for some not for me.
Wiretaps again have saved lives. Do you truly think the Bush administration is listening to your babbling. No they are after terrorists not little pot dealers and homebodies.
Obama has changed his mind on so many ISSUES and he isn't even in office yet?? Go figure
PS. If you haven't noticed BAD PEOPLE WANT TO KILL US>
WE SHOULD TAKE ALL MEASURES AVAILABLE TO PROTECT AMERICANS.
From a good american
P&K
-
Wiretaps again have saved lives. Do you truly think the Bush administration is listening to your babbling. No they are after terrorists not little pot dealers and homebodies.
They only complain now because of their hate for Bush beating their golden children gore and kerry.
Notice they never said a word when Clinton was doing it with Eschelon.
-
I think both your replies - pk and BigSky - point up why we can't just let this go. I think you're opposed to it because of previous political battles - you want to make this a red state blue state question. It isn't. It's a question of pure criminality, a question of accounting for actions, accounting for misdeeds.
As Zach's links outline there is the finical fraud, the billions upon billions of dollars, literally hundreds of billions of dollars, that is unaccounted for and/or misspent. Pure financial crimes that have no political justification.
And there are the Constitutional questions that go straight to the debate over we are as a people. Clearly this is an open question, so let's bring the facts forward and make a decision in the clear light of day. If warrantless surveillance is a good idea then lets hear that in open testimony.
I think the record is very clear that large parts of our government, entire programs have been operating with no accountability for years. Ignoring the outcome of no oversight is not the responsible way forward. People who abused this lack of oversight should be identified and removed from their positions of trust.
It isn't a question of red state blue state politics, I have not heard any rationals as to why we should let this all go. Why is it in the nation's interest to let this all slide? - the financial misappropriations, the constitutional questions, the legal questions - What is the upside of closing the books on 2001 to 2009? I haven't heard anything that trumps the idea that no one is above the law.
-
No bill it just shows that the left is nothing but a double standard.
The left cried foul over no bid contracts to Halliburton by Bush.
That was despite the fact it was President Clinton who instituted such contracts with them and Bush merely carried on with the Clinton policy.
The left cries foul over the evesdropping, again despite the Clinton administration being the ones who did this before Bush.
It plays out like this on subject after subject. The left says nary a word when they did it but somehow its a blow to the nations reputation and standing when Bush did it.
In fact lets put this out there now. A prediction or two on Obama
You have complained about how much Bush spent. Raising the national debt etc. etc.
I predict the very first year in office obama will raise the national debt far more than Bush did in his first year.
When he does are you going to be saying anything negative about your beloved obama or will it be excuses for him?
Second
He will come out with some second rate health care plan and not the one he promised.
-
This year's budget deficit is larger than the entire federal budget when Bush took office. The red ink, this year, just for this year is greater than the entire 1.7 trillion dollar federal budget in 2001.
The advantage Obama has is that Bush has set the bar so very very low. Not only has Bush run up tremendous debt he has nothing to show for the money. Check out today's piece in the Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/11/AR2009011102301.html?hpid=topnews):
President Bush has presided over the weakest eight-year span for the U.S. economy in decades, according to an analysis of key data, and economists across the ideological spectrum increasingly view his two terms as a time of little progress on the nation's thorniest fiscal challenges. The number of jobs in the nation increased by about 2 percent during Bush's tenure, the most tepid growth over any eight-year span since data collection began seven decades ago. Gross domestic product, a broad measure of economic output, grew at the slowest pace for a period of that length since the Truman administration. And Americans' incomes grew more slowly than in any presidency since the 1960s, other than that of Bush's father.
Obama has a very hard job ahead; so far his performance has been stellar and I think he'll do whatever is in the interests of the country. If Obama does run up the national debt to Bushian levels he will have a lot more to show for it, I'll make that bet.
Clinton operated under the FISA court, those were warranted searches. There is nothing inherently wrong or illegal in subcontracting government services - the problem comes when there is no oversight. People should be responsible for their actions. Even if no one was paying attention at the time a crime is a crime.
Even without a formal Pecora commission a lot of this is going to come out in whistle blower suits and civil cases. It would be better for the country to have it all out in the open at once where it can be properly dealt with.
-
This year's budget deficit is larger than the entire federal budget when Bush took office. The red ink, this year, just for this year is greater than the entire 1.7 trillion dollar federal budget in 2001.
The deficit went from 5.7 trillion first year to 5.9 trillion start of the second year. My prediction is obama will far exceed that.
The advantage Obama has is that Bush has set the bar so very very low. Not only has Bush run up tremendous debt he has nothing to show for the money. Check out today's piece in the Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/11/AR2009011102301.html?hpid=topnews):
Not sure where they got their information because GDP climbed higher under Bush than most in recent history. In both nominal unadjusted dollars and adjusted real dollars.
If Obama does run up the national debt to Bushian levels he will have a lot more to show for it, I'll make that bet.
bill, bill , bill, All I heard you touting was the excess spending done by Bush, Obama hasnt even done it yet and you are already turning your head the other way. You dems are so predictable. :)
Well obama will have to free millions of people and not let a terrorist attack happen at a minimum.
Clinton operated under the FISA court, those were warranted searches.
So was the NSA lying when they said that Echelon records virtually ALL electronic communications being made?
If you sent a email, made a call there is a good chance it was screened by the NSA and all being done without a warrant.
60 minutes did a story on this in 2000.
In it a former spy said that virtually all communications were being recorded no matter how innocent during the Clinton years.
Not to mention clintons political spying in your neck of the woods.
http://whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/ECHELON/apec1.html
If dems want to prosecute Bush they should be honest and be prosecuting Clinton first.
-
Careful with that whole deficit/debt thing. Why not judge deficit performance as a percentage of the year before ... that seems more telling. The economy was in a very different place in January 2001.
If all Bush did was continue Clinton policies he'd have nothing to worry about. Tenant testified that Echelon complied with FISA, I don't think anyone in the Bush administration can testify that their programs comply with the relevant laws.
After living through eight years of W I think you'll have a hard time getting people to go back to hating the Clintons.
So the answer is yes, go ahead and authorize a special prosecutor because there is no reason not to.
-
So the fact that thousands if not hundreds of thousands of people DIDN'T DIE IN AMERICA due to waterboarding makes no difference to you ? (three people were waterbaorded)
The fact that we had no other terrorists attacks makes no difference to you?
I understand you don't like Bush. But he did what he did to protect you. And it worked. Im sorry your so full of hatred towards him.
Maybe if Clinton had did something after the first bombing of the trade centers or after the attack on the USS Cole or after the attacks of our embassies overseas maybe just maybe 9/11 would have never happened. True it happened under bush but it was all set up and planned under Clinton.
Bush had the hardest 8 years of anyone in office. He kept us safe. He made mistakes this is true.
Obama has changed his position MANY times. Burris is just one example of him turning his colors.
Obama is saying he will close Gitmo. Do you want these people living in your town?? People in Europe are crying foul just like our liberals are. Yet Europe doesn't want to take any of these people in?
Why are some people in America fighting so hard for the terrorist? Just to get at bush?
I am glad to see Obama has or is trying to keep going forward by ignoring the left on some of the issues you pointed out he realizes he may have to do the SAME thing if things get tough for him...
Am i wrong in thinking that the president of the USA has on obligation to keep americans safe?
-
The President of the United States has a sworn duty to defend the Constitution. If he (or I am sure some day she) does that one thing everything else is suppose to work itself out. Defend the Constitution.
As far as waterboarding saving "thousands if not hundreds of thousands of people" that is a fairy tail. There is a lot of counter evidence already out. A truth commission could bring all the details to light, which clearly is required so that people get these crazy ideas - torture works - out of their heads once and for all. The idea torture works is a crazy idea.
No one is fighting for the terrorists. This has always been about us. Torture is about us. This is about saving us from ourselves.
-
i wonder how bush senior feels about fathering the worst president in american history?
:oops;
-
We have been defending the constitution for many years.
Didn't really help us with 9/11 did it?
Rules are made to be broken ever hear that one.
And once we are attacked after Obama takes office (and i hope we are never attacked again) will you also blame bush for that?
Is it bushes fault no one did anything in the Clinton administration to prevent 9/11.
I get you hate bush that is fine, but if you cant see he has kept us safe i dont know what to say?
Lean any farther left and you will end up on the right :-)
and i never said i agree with torture.
then again if i were to be tortured i would take waterboarding over having my feet and hands cut off or my head for that matter..
-
i wonder how bush senior feels about fathering the worst president in american history?
:oops;
Sheeesh you guys are amazing.
-
Careful with that whole deficit/debt thing. Why not judge deficit performance as a percentage of the year before ... that seems more telling. The economy was in a very different place in January 2001.
If all Bush did was continue Clinton policies he'd have nothing to worry about. Tenant testified that Echelon complied with FISA, I don't think anyone in the Bush administration can testify that their programs comply with the relevant laws.
After living through eight years of W I think you'll have a hard time getting people to go back to hating the Clintons.
So the answer is yes, go ahead and authorize a special prosecutor because there is no reason not to.
Because we always judge the national deficit in terms of its amount.
I believe you mean it was Tenet who testified and and it doesnt matter what he testified about because of two things.
The most important being
1. Tenet was in charge of the CIA, we are talking about the NSA.
2. Just because he testified doesnt mean he was telling the truth, especially in light of what the NSA said about the program and what a spook said about what went on with the program and the incident in Seattle.
What is done isnt exactly what ones would consider torture but for all intents every labels anything done as such.
What is done produces results and saves lives. This isnt the dark ages where they are relentlessly tortured to get any type of confession. When techniques are done properly pushing the individual outside their box it gets results.
Torture has saved thousands of lives despite claims otherwise.
Case in point was when it was used and the Bojinka plot was busted wide open. Stopping that plot saved eleven planes from being bombed in the sky and saved 4000 people.
-
I've been thinking about who the worst president was - I think Andrew Johnson or James Buchanan would win that title. As far as most hated - even John McCain got a larger percentage of the votes than Abraham Lincoln, who got only 40% of the popular vote in the 1860 election. Time has rehabilitated Mr. Lincoln's place in history.
Anyway, that's off topic. :sir ken;
-
now i see why i don't spend more time on this site.
too many rednecks.
proof that retards mate with apes.
:rofl;
-
Wow that's really funny :sarcasm;
You're always welcome to find another site LL.
-
WOW
Even if this was meant as a joke it is in pathetic form.
Many can have discussions and debates without acting like a four year old.
You are not in the MANY category i see.
I hope you feel better by TRYING to insult people.
P&K
-
Careful with that whole deficit/debt thing. Why not judge deficit performance as a percentage of the year before ... that seems more telling. The economy was in a very different place in January 2001.
If all Bush did was continue Clinton policies he'd have nothing to worry about. Tenant testified that Echelon complied with FISA, I don't think anyone in the Bush administration can testify that their programs comply with the relevant laws.
After living through eight years of W I think you'll have a hard time getting people to go back to hating the Clintons.
So the answer is yes, go ahead and authorize a special prosecutor because there is no reason not to.
Because we always judge the national deficit in terms of its amount.
I believe you mean it was Tenet who testified and and it doesnt matter what he testified about because of two things.
The most important being
1. Tenet was in charge of the CIA, we are talking about the NSA.
2. Just because he testified doesnt mean he was telling the truth, especially in light of what the NSA said about the program and what a spook said about what went on with the program and the incident in Seattle.
What is done isnt exactly what ones would consider torture but for all intents every labels anything done as such.
What is done produces results and saves lives. This isnt the dark ages where they are relentlessly tortured to get any type of confession. When techniques are done properly pushing the individual outside their box it gets results.
Torture has saved thousands of lives despite claims otherwise.
Case in point was when it was used and the Bojinka plot was busted wide open. Stopping that plot saved eleven planes from being bombed in the sky and saved 4000 people.
I think the clearest way to understand the federal government is to look at year on year performance. What does it being the first or eighth year of the Presidency have to do with the US deficit? Are you suggesting Presidents start off with budget constraint and then get better at running up giant debt as their term progresses? That does not make sense to me.
Just today the first Bush administration official has come out and said yeah we torture (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/13/AR2009011303372.html). It isn't even the 20th yet.
This idea that torture has saved lives has to be addressed in the open. Your post and PK's point up that it is an important question. As Obama said lets look at everything and give it a fair evaluation before we decide what to toss out. This was in response to a Cheney quote. I think Cheney was thinking of Gitmo and I think Obama has already concluded that Gitmo has to go but it applies just as well to all these new Bush techniques.
All 16 US intelligence agencies have said that US actions over the last seven years have made us less safe. Maybe there is some secrete body of evidence that would make your case but I do not expect that. We've had thousands of years of human history - torture has never worked. It has always signaled the decline and corruption of the authority practicing it. Absolute power corrupts, absolutely. I have no question that that is true.
I don't think the plot you describe as the Seattle plot helps your case. It was caught by an alert border guard doing her job. The plan was for the guy to stay at a Seattle Hotel before going down to LA to blow up the airport. That guy cooperated for years while he was treated under the previous approach to interrogation - he provided useful, accurate information. Recently as the techniques have changed he's stopped cooperating.
I've read nothing to suggest that it is a bad idea to lay this all out in the light of day. All I've heard is you preemptively concluding that it kept me safe and in any case it was legal. I don't think the facts will bear that out but why not find out the truth?
PK you wrote Bush had the hardest 8 years of anyone in office. That's just hard to accept. The disasters facing this country didn't just happen. The financial meltdown didn't just happen. The divisive politicization of the Justice Department didn't just happen. The total lack of fiscal oversight in rebuilding Iraq didn't just happen. It was not foreordained that OBL could never be caught. It wasn't a surprise to everyone that the reasons for going into Iraq turned out to be fairytales. In that link Zach provided there is an interesting quote (Where Is Our Ferdinand Pecora? http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/06/opinion/06chernow.html ):
On Black Thursday of 1929, the nation had applauded a seemingly heroic attempt by major bankers, including Albert Wiggin of Chase and Charles Mitchell of National City, to stem the market decline. Pecora showed that Wiggin had actually shorted Chase shares during the crash, profiting from falling prices. He also revealed that Mitchell and top officers at National City had helped themselves to $2.4 million in interest-free loans from the bank’s coffers to ease them through the crash. National City, it turned out, had also palmed off bad loans to Latin American countries by packing them into securities and selling them to unsuspecting investors. By the time Pecora got through with the bankers, Senator Burton Wheeler of Montana was likening them to Al Capone and the public referred to them as “banksters,” rhyming with gangsters.
I think a if we have a Pecora-like commission the actions that are being held up as heroic will be revealed as criminality.
-
Bill your very bright.
You make good points but that doesn't make them right.
I don't trust much of what i see or read in newspapers or newsstations. Let alone the NY Times. To much information is misleading or flat out false. Or the newscaster recently admit to being biased towards one candidate. While bashing the other. back and forth. I make conclusions form various articles and views of many commentators. Right or wrong they are my conclusions. The boarder guard you speak off. Are you sure she wasn't tipped off?
Do you truly think we the public have the right to know everything the CIA FBI or government in general knows or does? I am sure if the general public knew half the stuff many higher level members of the intelligence and armed forces knew there would be mass panic.
We may never know what was figured out from strick intelligence gathering from Terrorist out to kill us.
But i for one think it saved lives. you dont.
Look im neutral when i vote i vote my heart not a party line. This may make me different but i have no agenda so to say other then to speak what i feel. I voted Clinton twice and Bush twice. I feel Clinton dropped the ball.
I feel Bush has kept us safe. Only time will tell. I just dont feel we need to spend Billions of dollars to see if Bush did anything illegal when it comes to saving American lives.
If we had a terrorist in custody who knew that in one day five Americans were to be shot and killed at a specific place and at a specific time. And he said he wasn't talking for 48 hours. And you came to find out he was waterbaorded and the five Americans were saved and the terrorists holding them were all killed. This would be a bad day for you? you would be upset with your government. Cause it may come. And at a much higher expense then 5 Americans. Do you think terrorsits dont want to bring a nuke into our major cities. And kill as many people as they can. Preferably children and ladies.
I understand the constitution rules of engagement ect ect. I also understand this isn't a war like years gone by. New millennium new rules new threats. We are still the goodguys. We aim or bombs at specific targets. Terrorsits aim for our children. You have to put two and two together IMO and do what has to be done. If that means offending some terrorists or Americans at a time when so many can be killed by ONE person with a dirtybomb then i say offend a few to save the masses.
-
I think the clearest way to understand the federal government is to look at year on year performance. What does it being the first or eighth year of the Presidency have to do with the US deficit? Are you suggesting Presidents start off with budget constraint and then get better at running up giant debt as their term progresses? That does not make sense to me.
No I am suggesting that obama will add far more to the debt his first year vs Bush first year. Showing he was full of bs on the campaign trail when he kept complaining about the amount that was added to the national debt of this country and how he was going to do something about it.
But hey, remember its my prediction.
All 16 US intelligence agencies have said that US actions over the last seven years have made us less safe. [
How many terrorist attacks have occurred in the US in that time?
Yes the financial mess didnt occur overnight.
However the major thing that sent out the shockwave to the rest of the business sector was predicted and not only Bush but McCain wanted to have oversight of that trigger before it happened.
Just maybe if those top dems were stuffing so damn much lobbyist money in their pockets from that trigger and telling the American people that those corporations were fine and didnt need oversight we could have avoided the huge impact that occurred.