Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I agree torture is wrong, I am just not sure how much of this actually constitutes torture. I certainly would not like to be subjected to any of it but I am not sure it does any lasting damage.
You're really not thinking about this correctly. Your argument would mean that if the Executive broke any laws at all, so long as it briefed some members of Congress, then Congress is equally liable. That makes no sense. Congress appropriates money once a year. They can only withhold money for future acts -- they have no authority to change a budget mid-stream -- the President would have to sign off! So, no, they did not appropriate the money for these crimes.
But more fundamentally, there is no duty for Congress to stop crime... they don't enforce laws in this nation; that is the Executive's job. It is a basic tenet of criminal law that a person has no liability for the acts of a 3rd party absent a duty to act. There is no duty here so there is no liability. There is no criminal liability at all for member of Congress and to argue otherwise is just another example of ideological brainlock.
That is partisan nonsense and even the liberal media and mainstream media is catching on. There was no crime, there will be no charges. There will be congressional investigations, they will be a heat and no fire because they are in it up to thir eyeballs.But the thesis is still wrong
Obama managed to upset the left and right, both are angry with him and not the past administration.
Obama is following a well established, and wise, course of gradually disclosing/leaking damning evidence of public sector misbehaving in order to raise the public's ire over the behavior. After the public outcry for punishment reaches a certain level of intensity, Obama can step in and authorize hearings, indictments, etc., without appearing like a complete partisan. How could Cheney and his ilk not have anticipated this?
Raise the public's ire?
You hear that giant yawning sound?? That's the public's reaction to the officail confirmation that we waterboarded 3 AQ operatives.
Most Americans have little issue with these tactics. No one's "Comfortable" with them, but like watching a criminal get Tased on COPS or seeing police beat down an unruly suspect in grainy dashboard cam footage, it ain't pretty to see or dwell on, but people understand intellectually sometimes it needs to be done.
That is partisan nonsense and even the liberal media and mainstream media is catching on. There was no crime, there will be no charges. There will be congressional investigations, they will be a heat and no fire because they are in it up to thir eyeballs.But the thesis is still wrong
Obama managed to upset the left and right, both are angry with him and not the past administration.
Lets just sweep it under the carpet as if it didn't happen? Let send the message to all future presidents that they can break the law all they want as long as they can get through their terms..I have to disagree with you but we are a nation of laws and I believe in a government of the people by the people and for the people. We have all these teabaggers talking about taking our nation back....well...where are they?? Most of the teabaggers on this forum are defending torture and therefore proving that tea party protest are nothing but a partisan movement. The real movement to take our country back happened Nov. 4, 2008 and If Obama is going to bring the Change we (the majority) voted for then he needs to allow this to take course. We (the majority) are sick of the behind closed doors government we have had for the last eight years.
No, I never said that we should sweep it under the rug. We need to air it out. We need to release all of the information regarding the use of torture. As far as sending a message to future presidents, you're a little late for that. Off the top of my head, presidents who could have been tried for crimes committed during their tenure in office, and were not: Jackson, Lincoln, FDR, Truman, Nixon, Reagan.
Also, I love how you managed to bring the tea parties in to this. Does it really bother you that much that somebody would have the wherewithal to disagree with Obama and his merry band of legislators? And, the continued attempts by certain individuals and media outlets to portray the tea parties as some construct of the GOP is laughable. The folks at the tea parties were angry at anybody who supported fiscal irresponsibility, including the Bush administration, and some of the loudest boos were saved for Republicans.
In the signature neocon ways, Cheney was using pre-emptive strike by attacking Obama on every occasion and non-occasion. He was likely, hoping, that it will keep Obama administration off him as he could always point fingers back at him as the typical whiner and hypocrite that has defined his career.
I dont know where else he set up his soapbox besides Sean Hannity's show, but I know that venue was no accident. He could have gone on the Jim Lehrer News Hour, e.g. But by going on Faux he was aiming to rally the mass of Hannitized sheep who were already feeling momentum post-tea parties.
Obama is following a well established, and wise, course of gradually disclosing/leaking damning evidence of public sector misbehaving in order to raise the public's ire over the behavior. After the public outcry for punishment reaches a certain level of intensity, Obama can step in and authorize hearings, indictments, etc., without appearing like a complete partisan. How could Cheney and his ilk not have anticipated this?
It comes from not having a sense of Right and Wrong. Now that the Senate Armed Forces Committee has finally released their report I think that explains why we're hearing from this skunk so much. One thing the Report says is that Cheney was advised by his top people in both the Military and Intelligence that using torture was a terrible idea and not to do it. He chose to overrule them and "go to the dark side" as he put it at the time. (sounds just like their science policy, doesn't it?) Even polecat Rumsfeld emerged from beneath his rock today long enough to snarl at the human race. An investigation is inevitable at this point, as the lies begin to stack up. Obama isn't going to be able to prevent it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
