Feingold: "Those At The Very Top Who Ordered Or Sought Legal Cover Should Be Held Accountable"

[slipslidingaway]

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/08/dems_urge_holder_to_allow_torture_probe_to_go_furt.php?ref=fpa

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6382341&mesg_id=6382341

...Feingold:

"I applaud Attorney General Holder’s decision to appoint a prosecutor to review the shocking violations of law that took place under the Bush administration. We cannot simply sweep these abuses under the rug. This investigation should not be limited to those who carried out interrogations or to whether the abuses they engaged in were officially sanctioned. The abuses that were officially sanctioned amounted to torture and those at the very top who authorized, ordered or sought to provide legal cover for them should be held accountable.”

[jannyk]

1. Kick! kick! kick! and Rec!!!

[AndyA]

2. ALL THE WAY TO THE TOP!

Start at the bottom and investigate all the way to the top. NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW.

[gordianot]

3. To the top of the dung hill, the top really smells. n/t

[ProSense]

4. I applaud Attorney General Holder’s decision to appoint a prosecutor..."

Who can argue with that?

[slipslidingaway]

5. ***Read*** Holder's statement at the DOJ site

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6381620&mesg_id=6381620

"...I want to emphasize that neither the opening of a preliminary review nor, if evidence warrants it, the commencement of a full investigation, means that charges will necessarily follow.


....Further, they need to be protected from legal jeopardy when they act in good faith and within the scope of legal guidance. That is why I have made it clear in the past that the Department of Justice will not prosecute anyone who acted in good faith and within the scope of the legal guidance given by the Office of Legal Counsel regarding the interrogation of detainees. I want to reiterate that point today, and to underscore the fact that this preliminary review will not focus on those individuals.

"I share the President’s conviction that as a nation, we must, to the extent possible, look forward and not backward when it comes to issues such as these. While this Department will follow its obligation to take this preliminary step to examine possible violations of lawe will not allow our important work of keeping the American people safe to be sidetracked..."

[sabrina 1]

6. So, when they say 'we were just following orders'

they are off the hook. And when the DOJ looks at the 'guidance given by the OLC', they wash their hands and say 'well we looked at it and it was 'legal'?

Does he really accept that what they did was either 'guidance' or legal?

And how is torturing people 'acting in good faith'?

What nice words these are, and how they conflict with what the world saw with its own eyes.

And there it is again, the admonition to not look back at these horrors. As if those images and the testimony of all the victims, will ever go away.

I wonder if they've noticed the reaction to any comment about human rights in other countries by an American is now received in the rest of the world?

Eg, the State Dept's list of countries that, according to the US, 'need to do more to clean up their human rights issues'. That was met with derision and outrage and Hillary Clinton had to acknowledge that we 'have our own issues' to deal with.

We have no moral authority anymore, until they stop dancing around these issues and start getting 'tough on crime'.

[slipslidingaway]

7. I think you have summed it up well and your point about losing

moral standing is spot on, how can we complain about others, when we turn our backs on our own criminals.

:(

[slipslidingaway]

8. kick nt