Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Extensive Complaint Being Prepared-Seeks Fed Prosecution For US Officials Who Ordered War Crimes

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
kpete Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-09-09 08:13 PM
Original message
Extensive Complaint Being Prepared-Seeks Fed Prosecution For US Officials Who Ordered War Crimes
Edited on Fri Jan-09-09 08:20 PM by kpete
Extensive Complaint Being Prepared-Seeks Federal Prosecution For American Officials Who Ordered War Crimes

1/9/09:
Preliminary Memorandum of the Justice Robert H. Jackson Conference on Federal Prosecutions of War Criminals

by Lawrence Velvel Page 1 of 4 page(s)


I. INTRODUCTION

An extensive complaint seeking federal prosecution of American officials who ordered, authorized, approved or committed war crimes is currently being prepared. While the complaint is in preparation, the Steering Committee of the Justice Robert H. Jackson Conference is issuing this preliminary memorandum setting forth several of the points to be presented more extensively in the complaint itself. Such points include the acts of torture and abuse which constitute war crimes, the high level individuals of the American Government who ordered, authorized, or approved these acts plus some of the lower level officials who committed them, and the warnings of illegality and immorality given to the culpable American officials -- as news of their secret actions slowly began to percolate within the Executive branch -- by persons ranging from FBI officials on the ground, to other executive investigative personnel on the ground, to military Judge Advocates General, to general counsels of the armed services. These warnings of illegality and immorality given by knowledgeable and experienced persons were ignored by the small group of high Executive officers who were determined that America would torture and abuse its prisoners and who had the decisionmaking power to secretly require this to be done.

The Steering Committee’s Report was drafted for the entire committee by the committee Chair, Lawrence Velvel.

The Report anticipates a more extensive, full scale complaint, currently being drafted, that will be presented to the Executive Branch after January 20th, urging prosecution of President Bush and those who aided him.

We note that the information in this preliminary memorandum on criminal acts, officials who authorized them or carried them out, and warnings of criminality and illegality which were ignored, has become available in the last four years in a host of investigatory books, investigatory articles, initially secret government memoranda which have now been publicly released, internal governmental investigations, statements of present and former governmental officials and generals (e.g., Dick Cheney and Antonio Taguba), investigatory television programs, legal complaints and other legal documents, transcripts of interviews, congressional hearings and congressional reports (such as the recent report of the Senate Armed services’ Committees).

Among the books which extensively detail the matters written of here are Jane Mayer’s The Dark Side, Philippe Sands’ The Torture Team, Jack Goldsmith’s The Terror Presidency (Goldsmith is a former head of the Office of Legal Counsel), and Steven Wax’s Kafka Comes To America.

more at:
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Preliminary-Memorandum-Of-by-Lawrence-Velvel-090109-803.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-09-09 08:14 PM
Response to Original message
1. K&R
x100
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CaliforniaPeggy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-09-09 08:16 PM
Response to Original message
2. Excellent news!
K&R

:patriot:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pleah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-09-09 08:18 PM
Response to Original message
3. K&R Bout f'n time!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LakeSamish706 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-09-09 08:19 PM
Response to Original message
4. That will relieve the minds of allot of DU'ers that worried these thugs would...
walk away unscathed by their crimes.... I am very happy to hear this news, Thanks for the post.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-09-09 08:21 PM
Response to Original message
5. Seems to me they won't be able to ignore all the outrage. Rec'd. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
okiru109 Donating Member (135 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-09-09 08:22 PM
Response to Original message
6. "Steering Committee of the Justice Robert H. Jackson Conference" chenney must be quakin
they probably ain't got much to worry bout.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bobd0 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-09-09 08:32 PM
Response to Original message
7. This ranks among the top of my most fervent wishes.
I've been searching Justice Robert H. Jackson Conference so I know who Justice Jackson was, lead U.S. prosecutor at the Nuremberg Trials for one. But does this conference have any real teeth or are we only going to wind up with just another impotent indictment to read?

Mukasey refuses to bring charges. Will Obama's AG?

I'm not sure anyone wants to try to bring that much change to Washington but it's definitely the change we need.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stillcool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-09-09 09:06 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. We need something in this country..
that 'we the people' can get behind, and prove for once and for all...that we either have a voice or we don't. If we can't garner support, and speak with one voice about this, what can we?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-09-09 08:40 PM
Response to Original message
8. We must have accountability.
Clinton was remiss in not pursuing prosecution of his predecessors. It was a bad precedent for Democrats. This time there can be no equivocation. America must reclaim its soul and this is one hell of a place to start.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stillcool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-09-09 09:08 PM
Response to Original message
10. I'm going to have to check those books out!!
Edited on Fri Jan-09-09 09:12 PM by stillcool47
The government officials and politicians who are guilty of war crimes, and violations of both international law and domestic statutes, include George Bush, Dick Cheney, Alberto Gonzales, David Addington, Tim Flanigan, Lewis Libby, Condoleeza Rice, Donald Rumsfeld, Douglas Feith, Stephen Cambone, John Ashcroft, Michael Chertoff, Michael Dunlavey, Geoffrey Miller, and to a lesser extent, because he sometimes tried to stop the torture in which he was complicit, Colin Powell. Gonzales, Addington, Flanigan, Feith, Dunlavey, Libby, Ashcroft and Chertoff are lawyers as well as officials and/or politicians. The CIA officials who are guilty of war crimes include George Tenet, Cofer Black, James Pavitt, Scott Muller and John Rizzo (who are lawyers), David Becker, and a woman whose name is classified and who is therefore publicly identified only as a spiky-haired, red-headed person who, as head of the CIA’s Al Qaeda unit, insisted on and for no apparent reason flew abroad to see the waterboarding of a prisoner. (She also was a CIA briefer of George Bush).

The lawyers who are guilty of war crimes, as well as those named above, include Jay Bybee, John Yoo, Jim Haynes, Robert Delahunty, Patrick Philbin, Steven Bradbury, Diane Beaver, Mary Walker and to a somewhat lesser extent, because he at least withdrew the professionally incompetent memo of August 1, 2002 authorizing war crimes, Jack Goldsmith. (Goldsmith did not withdraw the torture memo because he was in disagreement with the kind of actions it approved, but because he was appalled by its professional incompetence. He did not disagree with the recommended actions, and did not withdraw the second memo of August 1, 2002, which listed specifically authorized techniques of torture. Rationalizing his action regarding the second memo, he claimed, among other things, that he did not know if the techniques -- which included waterboarding -- were torture. Also, he authored a memo unlawfully authorizing prisoners to be removed from Iraq for interrogation in other countries, where they were tortured, and he participated extensively in authorizing illegal wiretapping.)


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ghost Dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 05:06 AM
Response to Original message
11. USA and the ICC
United States President Bill Clinton signed the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (‘Rome Statute’) on December 31 December 2000, the last day that the Rome Statute was open for signature. Shortly after the Bush Administration entered office and just before the 1 July 2002 entry into force of the Rome Statute, US President George W. Bush “nullified” the Clinton signature on 6 May 2002. Since 2002, the United States has launched a full-scale multi-pronged campaign against the International Criminal Court, claiming that the ICC may initiate politically-motivated prosecutions against US nationals.

For an overview of the United States’ opposition toward the ICC, please consult our factsheet on this issue.

This section provides information, analysis and documents on these US efforts to undermine the Court, including:

Bilateral Immunity Agreements (BIAs)
As part of its efforts, the Bush administration has been approaching countries around the world seeking to conclude Bilateral Immunity Agreements, purportedly based on Article 98 of the Rome Statute, excluding its citizens and military personnel from the jurisdiction of the Court. These agreements prohibit the surrender to the ICC of a broad scope of persons including current or former government officials, military personnel, and US employees (including contractors) and nationals. These agreements, which in some cases are reciprocal, do not include an obligation by the US to subject those persons to investigation and/or prosecution.

Many governmental, legal and non-governmental experts have concluded that the bilateral agreements being sought by the US government are contrary to international law and the Rome Statute. This section provides legal analyses, a list of signatories of these agreements, and other useful documents on BIAs.

/More... http://www.iccnow.org/?mod=usaicc


I recall that one argument deployed in defense of this policy was that the USA can be trusted to bring its own international criminals to justice at home...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fumesucker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 05:20 AM
Response to Original message
12. IMO anyone who thinks our current political system is capable of putting a former POTUS on trial
For war crimes is smoking some potent crack indeed.

Obama is "reaching out across the aisle", can you imagine the Republican reaction to putting bushie on trial for war crimes and what that will do to any chances of getting Obama's policies enacted into law?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vincardog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 02:56 PM
Response to Reply #12
17. Fuck the rePUBLIcon reaction. I want the congress to pass MY policies. Single payer Health care
Full employment at a living wage and equal treatment for all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fumesucker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-11-09 07:25 AM
Response to Reply #17
26. That was exactly my point..
War crimes trials of high level officials will suck every bit of oxygen out of the political arena, it will become all war crimes trials all the time and the Republicans will have a great platform to scream about whatever crap they wish to.

Obama knows that war crimes trials will become a huge distraction from his agenda so I suspect he will not push for trials out of a desire to stay focused on his domestic proposals.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vincardog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-11-09 01:38 PM
Response to Reply #26
29. That wasn't my point. Ever heard of multitasking?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fumesucker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-11-09 02:22 PM
Response to Reply #29
30. Indeed I have..
But war crimes trials of the highest officials will shut down Congress at least while Republicans scream and shout and posture to the media which will suck it up like a sponge the size of Gibraltar.

Not that I think we're going to get single payer health care, I still remember Hillary's quote during the primaries about "I can envision a day when you have to show proof of insurance at the job interview". IMO there's a very good chance something like that, mandated private insurance, will be the new health care policy.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oak2004 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-11-09 04:24 PM
Response to Reply #30
32. War crimes are tried in courtrooms, not in Congress
and if you think the rest of the world will see our failure to act as acceptable, think again. George Bush is perceived, rightly, as this era's Pol Pot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fumesucker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-11-09 05:39 PM
Response to Reply #32
34. I know where crimes are tried..
But if you think the M$M and the Repubs will take it quietly you are delusional, *nothing* else will get done while trials are going on.

And I agree with you about the rest of the world, but who cares what they think? /snark
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
malaise Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 06:07 AM
Response to Original message
13. Excellent
K & R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
byeya Donating Member (209 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 11:53 AM
Response to Original message
14. I'll believe it when I see it;
but I am afraid I won't see it. It is looking to me that Obama is Clinton II. I hope I am wrong.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vincardog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 02:53 PM
Response to Original message
15. There is a Gawd. Book em Dano
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bertman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 02:55 PM
Response to Original message
16. What Fumesucker said!! And if some international group tries to extradite any of these
war criminals you can rest assured that President Obama will send in the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines to protect them. The powerful protect each other. Been going on for millenia.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Independent_Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-11-09 05:25 PM
Response to Reply #16
33. Self-delete.
Edited on Sun Jan-11-09 05:34 PM by Independent_Liberal
My initial response to your post sounded too goofy. I was just gonna say you and fumesucker are entitled to your opinions. I'm just someone who believes in justice and is willing to fight for it no matter how long it may take.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
walldude Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 03:01 PM
Response to Original message
18. I was wondering if all this "I dare you to bust me" posturing
Edited on Sat Jan-10-09 03:01 PM by walldude
that Bush and Cheney were doing was going to bite them in the ass. I really didn't think they were going to be touched, then a few weeks ago they started doing these interviews where they basically said "yeah we ordered all the horrible shit that went down, and we'd do it again, what are you going to do about it loser" and I thought that someone might just decide that enough was enough. To publicly admit to war crimes, with the attitude that nothing could touch you might just piss off some judge somewhere.

Oh and K&R :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MasonJar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 04:03 PM
Response to Original message
19. Does anyone know about the clout of this organization? Who is Velvel?
Will this cause Bush to give blanket pardon? If so, would it be legitimate?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
davidswanson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 07:53 PM
Response to Reply #19
24. here
REPORT NAMES 30 BUSH OFFICIALS COMPLICIT IN TORTURE

President Bush and his aides repeatedly ignored warnings that their torture plans were illegal from high State Department officials as well as the nation’s top uniformed legal officers, the Judge Advocates General of the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines, a new published report states.

“These warnings of illegality and immorality given by knowledgeable and experienced (government) persons were ignored by the small group of high Executive officers who were determined that America would torture and abuse its prisoners and who had the decision-making power to secretly require this to be done,” said Lawrence Velvel, chairman of the “Steering Committee of the Justice Robert H. Jackson Conference On Planning For The Prosecution of High Level American War Criminals.” Velvel is a noted reformer in the field of American legal education.

“Far from American officials and lawyers authorizing or engaging in torture because it was lawful, they authorized and engaged in it because they wanted to (and) kept their actions secret from interested officials for as long as they could lest there be strong opposition to the torture and abuse they were perpetrating,” Velvel said. “They deliberately ignored repeated warnings that the torture and abuse were illegal and could lead to prosecutions, and they ignored these warnings even when they came from high level civilian and military officers.”

A preliminary Report by the Steering Committee seeking Federal prosecution of American officials “who ordered, authorized, approved or committed war crimes,” released January 9th, 2009, says they are guilty of “wholesale” violations of statutes that include Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, the Federal War Crimes Act, the Convention Against Torture, plus numerous other violations of U.S. and international laws.

The Report said prisoners were subjected to savage beatings, sleep deprivation, slow drowning, hanging by chains, being slammed head-first into concrete walls, temperature extremes, food deprivation, burial alive in coffin-like boxes for extended periods, and even threats against their families.

Among other things, the Report charges the General Counsel of the Central Intelligence Agency(CIA), knowingly approved of at least 117 renditions to torture and that such renditions were “personally encouraged by President George W. Bush…”

In addition to President Bush, those named for prosecution by the Steering Committee include:

Vice President Dick Cheney and his former chief of staff and legal counsel David Addington, former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice and her predecessor Colin Powell, former Attorneys-General John Ashcroft and Alberto Gonzales, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff and his aide Alice Fisher, former deputy assistant Attorney General; and Tim Flanigan, a deputy White House attorney.

Also named by the Steering Committee is I. Lewis (“Scooter”) Libby, former assistant to President Bush. Libby was convicted of perjury, obstruction of justice and making false statements to Federal investigators in the Valerie Plame affair. President Bush commuted Libby’s 30-month prison sentence. Additionally, Douglas Feith, former Undersecretary of Defense for Policy; Defense Undersecretary Stephen Cambone, General Michael Dunlavey, and Major General Geoffrey Miller, former commander of Guantanamo prison, Cuba.

CIA officials cited in the Report are former Director of Central Intelligence George Tenet; Cofer Black, head of the CIA’s Counterterrorist Center; James Pavitt, former CIA Deputy Director for Operations; General Counsel Scott Muller; Acting General Counsel John Rizzo; David Becker; contract officer James Mitchell, and an unidentified woman that formerly headed the CIA’s Al Qaeda unit and also briefed President Bush.

Among the lawyers guilty of war crimes are former Assistant Attorneys General Jay Bybee and John Yoo; Defense Department chief legal officer Jim Haynes; Robert Delahunty, special counsel with Office of Legal Counsel, Department of Justice; Patrick Philbin, deputy assistant Attorney General; Steven Bradbury, head of the White House’s Office of Legal Counsel; Lt. Col. Diane Beaver, a former Staff Judge at Guantanamo; Mary Walker, General Counsel of the Air Force and Jack Goldsmith, former head of the Office of Legal Counsel, Department of Justice.

“Torture and abuse were discussed at meetings of the so-called Principals Committee, where George Tenet presented graphic details of interrogations to a Committee which included some of Bush’s highest associates, including Rice, Powell, Rumsfeld, Ashcroft and Cheney and, at times, John Yoo.

The above-mentioned Bush officials were involved in shaping or carrying out torture policies despite written and/or verbal warnings given by high government officials in the Pentagon, State Department, FBI, and other agencies. Among these objectors were:

# William Howard Taft IV, the Legal Advisor to the State Department whose 40-page memo of January 11, 2002 warned Bush’s claim the Geneva Conventions were not applicable to prisoners held by the U.S. could subject Bush to prosecution for war crimes. State Department lawyer David Bowker further warned “there is no such thing” as a person that is not covered by the Geneva Conventions.

# The Defense Department’s own Criminal Investigative Task Force headed by Col. Brittain Mallow warned Haynes that tactics used at Guantanamo could be illegal. His warning were ignored by Haynes, whose position was based on statements of Yoo and Chertoff.

# FBI Director Robert Mueller barred FBI agents from participating in coercive CIA interrogations, “a warning-fact well known to many in the Executive,” the Steering Committee Report said. Also, Marion Bowman, head of the FBI’s national security law section in Washington called lawyers in Jim Haynes’ office in the Pentagon to express his concern but said he never heard back.

# David Brant, head of the Naval Criminal Investigative Service learned about the torture and abuse at Guantanamo and took the position that “it just ain’t right” and expressed his concern to Army officials in command authority over military interrogators at Guantanamo but “they did not care,” the Report said.

# A senior CIA intelligence analyst that visited Guantanamo in 2002 reported back that the U.S. was committing war crimes there and that one-third of the detainees had no connection to terrorism. The report alarmed Rice’s lawyer John Bellinger and National Security Council terrorism expert General John Gordon but their concerns were “flatly rejected and ignored” by Addington, Flanigan and Gonzales, as well as by Rumsfeld’s office.

# Navy General Counsel Alberto Mora carried his concern over Guantanamo torture to Haynes and to Mary Walker, head of a Pentagon working group that was drafting a DOD memo based on Yoo’s work that authorized torture. Mora said what was occurring at Guantanamo was “at a minimum cruel and unusual treatment, and, at worst, torture.” His warning was ignored.

“The Judge Advocates General of the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines are the country’s top uniformed legal officers,” appointed to Walker’s working group, “were appalled at what they were seeing, and each wrote a memo of dissent to torture and abuse,” the Steering Committee’s Report said.

“Their memos warned not just that what was being approved was contrary to the legal and moral training American servicemen have always received, and not just that there would be international criticism, but also that interrogators and the chain of command were being put at risk of criminal prosecutions abroad.” But these warnings by the nation’s top uniformed legal officers were ignored.

“If Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, and others are not prosecuted,” Velvel said, “the future could be threatened by additional examples of Executive lawlessness by leaders who need fear no personal consequences for their actions, including more illegal wars such as Iraq.”

Besides Velvel, members of the Steering Committee include:

Ben Davis, a law Professor at the University of Toledo College of Law, where he teaches Public International Law and International Business Transactions. He is the author of numerous articles on international and related domestic law.

Marjorie Cohn, a law Professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law in San Diego, Calif., and President of the National Lawyers Guild.

Chris Pyle, a Professor at Mount Holyoke College, where he teaches Constitutional law, Civil Liberties, Rights of Privacy, American Politics and American Political Thought, and is the author of many books and articles.

Elaine Scarry, the Walter M. Cabot Professor of Aesthetics and the General Theory of Value at Harvard University, and winner of the Truman Capote Award for Literary Criticism.

Peter Weiss, vice president of the Center For Constitutional Rights, of New York City, which was recently involved with war crimes complaints filed in Germany and Japan against former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and others.

David Swanson, author, activist and founder of AfterDowningStreet.org/CensureBush.org coalition, of Charlottesville, Va.

Kristina Borjesson, an award-winning print and broadcast journalist for more than twenty years and editor of two recent books on the media.

Colleen Costello, Staff Attorney of Human Rights, USA, of Washington, D.C., and coordinator of its efforts involving torture by the American government.

Valeria Gheorghiu, attorney for Workers’ Rights Law Center.

Andy Worthington, a British historian and journalist and author of books dealing with human rights violations.

Initial actions considered by the Steering Committee, Velvel said, are as follows:

# Seeking prosecutions of high level officials, including George Bush, for the crimes they committed.

# Seeking disbarment of lawyers who were complicitous in facilitating torture.

# Seeking termination from faculty positions of high officials who were complicitous in torture.

READ THE FULL REPORT:
http://afterdowningstreet.org/node/38811
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
davidswanson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 07:54 PM
Response to Reply #19
25. and here
There's a blanket pardon I want President Bush to issue and one I want him not to. Both would involve preemptively pardoning people before they're charged with any crime, much less convicted, and doing so without naming them. One would be decent, just, and Constitutional; the other would be none of those things. One would please people around the country and the world. The other would please the Washington establishment. Bush may very well issue neither of them, but to logically make any sense, without denying important facts, he would have to issue one or the other.

Bush is perhaps not quite the mental equal of Jimmy Carter, but there's no reason for him not to manage by his last day in office what Carter accomplished on his first. Carter issued a blanket pardon of those who had not registered for the draft and those who had left the country to avoid it during the war on Vietnam. I would like to see Bush pardon those members of the U.S. military who have refused to occupy Iraq or gone AWOL during the occupation, as well as anyone convicted of nonviolently exercising their First Amendment rights to oppose this war. Members of the military have a duty to disobey illegal orders. Any criminal charges for fulfilling their duty should be undone and prevented. As a reward for acting so magnanimously, Bush could -- as far as I'm concerned -- include a pardon for his own AWOL period just in case he's ever belatedly tried for it.

If Bush does not take this step, then he must maintain that wars of aggression, lies to justify them, usage of a wide variety of illegal weapons and illegal targeting of civilians, illegal detentions, torture, murder, warrentless spying, outing CIA agents, politicizing the Justice Department, etc., etc., is all actually acceptable, even while acknowledging its obvious illegality. In that case, he must either maintain confidence that our justice system will not be repaired for decades, or he must issue a different sort of blanket pardon, one pardoning all of his subordinates for these crimes. To be consistent, such a pardon would cover everyone from Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Ashcroft on down to even the lowly soldiers and mercenaries who actually have been convicted of such offenses. The problem, of course, if that this whole project would be inconsistent with maintaining a nation of laws. If a president can instruct a subordinate to commit a crime, and then pardon it, then there can be no more rule of law. A president could order murders committed and pardon those murders. And of course that's exactly what Bush would have done.

Now, to be consistent on our end, we would have to urge prosecution of every member of Congress, the military, and the media who assisted in Bush's crimes, but so would the prosecutors at Nuremburg have had to charge half the population of Germany. Instead, it is perfectly sensible to start at the top and prioritize by likely effectiveness in deterring future offenses. Which deters a future cabinet official more, locking up a former cabinet official or locking up a member of the National Guard? And, of course, if Bush tries to pardon himself for actions he has taken while president, he should be jailed immediately to await trial.

Now, even though there are pardons I'd like to see issued, I am very open to the argument that the pardon power is abused so consistently that it should be eliminated. I'm also open to compromises that would allow Congress some checks on abuses of the pardon power.

There has also been some discussion of late about the unpardoning power, the power of a president or his successor to take a pardon back. Apparently this can be done as long as the pardonee has not actually received and accepted the pardon. In the case of blanket pardons of nameless groups, this would seem to mean that the pardons can be undone at any time by future presidents. I think this makes a mockery of the whole idea of pardons, and that if you're going to have unpardoning you should not have pardoning at all. Nonetheless, it may be useful to point out the existence of the unpardoning power to President Elect Obama in case he lacks the nerve to do what he and Congress and our courts really should do: reject Bush's pardons of crimes he authorized (including the commutation of Scooter Libby's sentence) as not really Constitutional pardons at all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dkofos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 04:04 PM
Response to Original message
20. I will be truly surprised if anything comes of this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Independent_Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 04:11 PM
Response to Original message
21. Nice! Impeach, Prosecute and Incarcerate!
Kicked and recommended, btw.

:patriot:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
djp2 Donating Member (276 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 05:51 PM
Response to Original message
22. OIbama will hit hard AFTER inaugaration
I'm just hopin' that OBAMA has been soft pedalling this just to make sure Bush doesn't issue pardons, the will hit him hard after the inauguration!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Political Heretic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-11-09 07:53 AM
Response to Reply #22
28. That sounds pretty delusional given everything we've seen so far
But keep hope alive I guess...

As you can tell, I'm becoming quite skeptical.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-10-09 06:44 PM
Response to Original message
23. We now have more people in prison than China---!!!
Edited on Sat Jan-10-09 06:45 PM by defendandprotect
And no accountability for corrupt government ...for torturers --

This is the CHANGE we need --

Not more covering up of official crimes -- treason --!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madokie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-11-09 07:47 AM
Response to Original message
27. I have faith that the American people will demand prosecution as soon as they realize what has been
Edited on Sun Jan-11-09 07:49 AM by madokie
going on.

rec

Add: Couldn't recommend because of time constraints but I can thank you for this post and to me this good news so early in the morning. Guaranteed to make for a better day.

THANKS
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spanone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-11-09 02:24 PM
Response to Original message
31. knr
Edited on Sun Jan-11-09 02:24 PM by spanone
Error: you can only recommend threads which were started in the past 24 hours
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
goforit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-11-09 05:50 PM
Response to Original message
35. Well well well... If we don't do this....other, if not all other, countries will
Ashcroft, Gonzoles, Yoo, and Rumsfeld all need to be tried, in adition to all others mentioned.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 09:02 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC