how did the torture debate go from bu$h*/cheney to nancy pelosi...?

[spanone]

if pelosi didn't rat on bu$h*/cheney, then somehow it's her fault and torture was then okay?

this is some seriously twisted logic imo

[OHDEM]

1. GOP tactic that much of the media...

...and many Democrats are falling for. They've always been good at deflecting blame and people have always been complicit in letting them!

As I've said their ridiculous tactic is "We didn't do anything wrong, but Pelosi knew about the wrong thing we didn't do."

[Buzz Clik]

2. And guess what? A whole boatload of DUers swallowed the hook.

[KharmaTrain]

11. Amen

Too many are getting "rope-a-doped" here.

Even if Pelosi knew, she had little power to do much about it. She WASN'T Speaker in 2002...not even Minority leader. She was a ranking member on the House Intel committee and compelled by state secrecy laws to remain silent. It is a classic tactic of a criminal enterprise...dirty all around so you either blame the whole lot or can't tell whose the muddiest.

So many are anxious for heads to roll (and it's hard to blame them) that they've lost perspective and why they're falling for the bait.

My hope is that cheney and his ilk are too smart by half and the more they try to negate and muddy the waters, the more it pushes for investigations. Honestly, trying to frame Pelosi could be their biggest mistake...if she has nothing to hide, then let Conyers and others do their thing....release all torture memos and hold hearings. Let crashcart and his goons stand in front of cameras and under oath and claim the shit they are saying. Turn the focus back on them.

[spanone]

13. great post!

[azul]

34. KT seems to have taken the smart coffee today. nt

[Bandit]

3. It was always the Republican's ace in the hole

Democrats went along with "everything" the Administration/Republicans wanted and because of that they would never prosecute. Out of fear of being found out if nothing else. It is THE reason Impeachment was "Off the Table" even though way more evidence of Impeachable offenses were available than with any previous President, yet she refused to even look at it..She is guilty as sin and the Republicans have every right to bring her into the equation..

[spanone]

5. to me it makes no difference if the pope knew....crimes are crimes

[nichomachus]

28. Which is why some of us

were screaming about the Dems not having the balls to stand up and say "no." We were looking down the road and saw that some day, the GOP could use this as a defense. The GOP knew what it was doing. Don't forget, the stock in trade of the Bush Crime Family -- starting with Poppy -- was to always create an alibi, even before you did something. Poppy's middle name is "plausible deniability."

The Dems let themselves be suckered into a trap.

[Captain Hilts]

4. People here do not know when they are being manipulated or motivated by personality.

They hate Pelosi and want to tar her with anything they can.

[Arkansas Granny]

14. And it's been going on here for a long time.

[OHDEM]

18. Exactly.

And they're playing right into the hands of the Republicans.

[The Magistrate]

19. Very True Of Some, Captain

[Captain Hilts]

49. I've certainly got my issues with Speaker Pelosi, but this isn't one of them.

People need to read about issues and policies and ignore all the proper nouns involved.

They also need to use the Washington strategies of asking for every event or news item: 'who benefits'? That, not the name or the party takes you where you want to go. It's another version of 'follow the money'.

'Who benefits' from this information about Pelosi? Well, the folks in the executive branch or CIA involved in this policy.

Was she frank with us? No.
Should she have been angrier? Yes.
Would it have accomplished something? No.
Should she have come out with the information? No, it's against the law for her to do so. Having a high security clearance has its obligations and responsibilities that have no relation to Freedom of Speech or Our Right to Know. Pelosi knew that when she took the job. Same for Harman. Ouch!

[Atman]

6. Good strategy and a complicite media

Pretty basic actually

[PufPuf23]

7. She took impeachment off the table and

gets to be a scape goat.

Torture torture torture

Flu Flu Flu

Nancy knew She knew Nancy knew.

Sort of anyway.

[countingbluecars]

8. It sounds like the Rove logic

that worked so well during the Bush administration.

[spanone]

9. it sure does...blame the blamer

[OHdem10]

10. The GOP play Hardball Politics! Have you ever noticed that almost

every Republican is well-prepared and ON POINT as they go on
TV. How many Democrats do you see on TV??? They leave everything
to Obama and this is not his fight.

Until the Democrats on the Hill, learn to stand and fight, as
sad as it makes me, the GOP win. The GOP play to win.

There is a life lesson being played here. People who live in
glass houses should not throw stones. The Democrats on the Hill
are vulnerable on anything to do with the war. They supported
GWB or never never spoke out against him until after the country
turned on the war. This gives the GOP an opening large enough
to drive a "Mac" truck through.

Please remember there is a disconnect between activists, rank and
file Democrats and the Hill.

[azul]

36. The lesson is that the media needs a new charter and rules.

Enough of this bought and paid for corporate control of what gets out to the public. The wealthy and corporations are selecting for sell-outs to represent the people in a greedy and deceptive mockery of democracy. Military-corporate Empire.

The media gets to frame all the issues, even that the press is liberal, and it has been mostly purchased by corporate partisans.

[MannyGoldstein]

12. She Calls Herself A Democrat So She Should Get A Pass?

Obviously Bush et al are guilty of war crimes - they've confessed already. But nothing can be done, because they're out of office and Obama has taken prosecution off the table.

Pelosi, on the other hand, still is in office. Clearly, she was cool with war crimes. This should be pointed out to her constituents, so the appropriate correction can be made.

[spanone]

16. no she shouldn't get a pass....she should be tried along with the cabal if guilty

[The Magistrate]

22. This Is Flat Nonesense, Sir

Speaker Pelosi bears absolutely no share of criminal liability for the Bush administrations crime. She had no authority over anyone who ordered the crimes, or followed the orders and executed the crimes. Calls for her prosecution are contemptible foolishness.

[MannyGoldstein]

24. I'm Not Calling For Her Prosecution

She knew it was happening, and did zero. People should know this about her.

[The Magistrate]

32. The Person Addressed, Sir, Said 'She Should Be Tried Along With The Cabal If Guilty'

That is a call for prosecution. We can leave aside the weird view that guilt is presumed before trial, and is even a condition of commencing trial, because that is simply a cry for a kangaroo court's ratification of a mob's or a dictator's desire to see a particular person punished on some selected pretext or other, beyond noting that to make such statement demonstrates an utter lack of awareness of what constitutes grounds for trial or finding of criminal culpability. There is entirely too much of that sort swill in circulation nowadays, and those who emit it are materially assisting the lione of defense the criminals of the Bush administration have chosen to press in the political theater.

Speaker Pelosi's degree of knowledge of the crimes of the Bush administration is irrelevant. She had no authority over the criminals. The criminals of the Bush administration bear sole responsibility for the crimes they carried out.

[OHDEM]

20. Wait a minute!

Being out of office doesn't mean that Bush et al can't be prosecuted nor does Obama have the power to make that call. He's the President not the King. Congress seems interested in investigating and they can get that going on their own.

Contrary to your assertions, it is not clear that Pelosi was "cool with war crimes" nor that she knew they were happening at all. If the people she represents in CA don't like the job she's done, they can vote her out.

As far as holding someone accountable, how about we start with the people that tried to twist and manipulate the law and language in order to commit war crimes?

[MannyGoldstein]

23. Congress Can Investigate, Not Prosecute, I Think

There's not much about BushCo to investigate: they've confessed. I'd love to see them in prison, but Obama has decided that won't happen.

Pelosi admits to being briefed, in detail, about torture techniques. But she claims that she didn't realize that they were actually going to be used on people. What the &^$% did she think that briefing was for then? A history lesson? Her denial is simply implausible.

[OHDEM]

29. Again, Obama doesn't have the power to make that decision.

Once Congress investigates, or more likely sets up an investigation, they would be prosecuted probably by a U.S. prosecutor or less likely, an international court.

Pelosi does not admit to being briefed in detail about torture - that's not correct. She says she was not briefed on waterboarding. She admits to being briefed ONCE on enhanced interrogation techniques which she was told they were debating using, but had not agreed on.

Perhaps the briefing was to placate her. Remember she was in the minority at the time and the GOP had the WH and Congress and were doing whatever they wanted.

I think a lot of people are letting their personal animousity towards Pelosi allow them to be distracted. Just as the GOP planned!

[msongs]

15. since dems did nothing about it all for years, finally the repubs wised up nt

[frogcycle]

17. people are stupid sheep, easily distracted by shiny objects

[Solly Mack]

21. Same way it went from "Does America torture?" to "Is water-boarding really torture?"

to "Is it OK to torture bad people who want to harm America?"


It's all meant to cloud the issue. (the issue being: The Bush administration tortured people - some of them to death)

All the while these little "debates" are(were) taking place, NOTHING is(was) being done about the war crimes committed.

There does exist a chain of events, and it is all a part of the whole truth - the facts - that outline what happened under Bush...and we do need to know those details...

... BUT...

This bullshit squabble going on in Congress is meant to create a diversion away from holding the Bush administration accountable for war crimes. The GOP are hoping people will be too afraid to hold anyone accountable because the shit flying from the torture fan might hit a lot of people in government, and they are counting on making accountability so unattractive that no one gets held accountable.

If you fear a Democrat might get a little shit on them from everything that happened under Bush, then you might be inclined to be against prosecutions. That is what the GOP is counting on anyway - that fear. (not saying this applies to anyone here - just saying this is what the GOP wants)

They are, in effect, having a tantrum in hopes to control the situation by having people react to what they say and do instead of paying attention to the fact that America's war criminal (former) executive is still walking around free.

What they don't understand is that people who are against torture and who seek justice don't think in terms of "how will this affect my party?" - party isn't even an consideration, justice is...enforcing the law is...it's about the country...what kind of country do we want to be?...it's about the kind of people we are...not what kind of party members we are... but what kind of people we are....

And - speaking for myself, I'm against torture and for prosecutions. Period.

So the GOP can shout "they're guilty too!" until the cows come home and I will still be for prosecutions. I won't be falling for the bullshit argument that if everyone is guilty then there's no practical way to prosecute anyone.

Let top-down war crime trials sort that out...the degree of culpability should come out then. Settle the matter in court. So bring on the war crime trials! (not the GOP would ever support such things)

[spanone]

26. yet, we are OBLIGATED to prosecute war crimes

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/04/what-reagan-signed.html

[Solly Mack]

27. Yep. The US is obligated to do so...but

Accountability isn't the goal of this current (bullshit) "debate" - avoiding any accountability is

[Greyhound]

25. Through her refusal to investigate and prosecute the guilty.

Media digs into it and finds her fingerprints all over the issue, and she's still in power, still protecting the guilty.

[OHDEM]

30. Where SPECIFICALLY do you see her fingerprints.

I want a specific situation proving that she knew Bush was torturing people.

Stop falling into the GOP trap! Why is the media talking about whether or not Pelosi knew about war crimes rather than the fact that the last President and his cronies COMMITED WAR CRIMES? And why are so many Democrats going along?

[Greyhound]

37. Basic principle of law, silence = consent.

She, and the usual coterie of DC power brokers, took it further by assisting in concealing and obfuscating the blatant criminality of the cabal.

If you want more specifics, read the innumerable sources that have documented this ongoing crime against humanity for the last several years.

This is not the fault of only one party, both have been complicit since the beginning. The republiks are no longer ion power, so the Democratic Party is going to get the brunt of it, just as I and many others predicted.

[The Magistrate]

39. This Is Nonesense, Sir: There Is Nothing In Law Even Approximating That

[Greyhound]

44. Qui tacet consentire videtur, ubi loqui debuit ac potuit. n/t

[The Magistrate]

46. Cute, Sir, But Not Applicable To Criminal Responsibility

If a person does not seek remedy of a breach of contract to which they are a party within a reasonable time after learning of it, then they can be regarded as having consented to that.

Not raising a hue and cry, however, does not subject anyone to any degree of responsibility for a crime. On a block where drugs are known to be sold, police do not simply arrest residents on a charge of not having identified the dealers to them, or alerted them to transactions they witnessed. The residents certainly are not responsible under law for the crimes committed on the sidewalks before their residences.

[OHDEM]

41. You're making assumptions you can't prove.

You assume she knew what was going on and you assume she concealed it.

There are no specifics and so far NO PROOF that Pelosi knew waterboarding was happening any sooner than we did.

I don't understand the logic of you and others who think that Bush being out of office gives him and his administration some sort of pass. Nothing could be farther from the truth! In fact, as I've stated before on this topic, it's possible that Pelosi and others took impeachment off the table because they didn't want Bush to have the opportunity to pardon those who might be guilty of torture or witnesses to the war crimes. (A trick his Daddy could have taught him.)

Why would the Democrats get the brunt of the Bush Administration's war crimes unless we let the GOP deflect the blame to those who might have known about torture rather than those that approved of and carried out torture? The media along with many here at DU are falling right into a Rove-style trap!

*IF* Pelosi was complicit, and that is not a given, she should be accountable. But we KNOW that war crimes occured so please stop giving them a pass on it!

Here's a link to a thread of Keith Olbermann talking about this very subject on Countdown yesterday...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x5622977

[Greyhound]

43. I don't have to prove anything, this is not a court, and right or wrong, that is the way it is.

The cabal is gone and, barring some miracle of sanity, they will never answer for their crimes. Just as Afghanistan will become Obama's war though he didn't start it, she and the others will bear the blame. When the Democrats gained the power to act they failed to do so, now they will take the blame and create the means for the Republiks to revive themselves.

It all comes back to the parasite class owning both teams.

[OHDEM]

45. Uh...once again - being out of office doesn't give you immunity PERIOD.

No this isn't a court, but repeating GOP talking points about Pelosi doesn't make you right. It's total bullshit to say that we can't investigate those that commited war crimes, but that we can invesitage those that *might* have know it was happening. WTF?

[Greyhound]

47. Not legal immunity, no. But we have seen this time after time after time,

the parasite class protects it's own, regardless of party. See Ned Beatty's speech in Network; There are no parties, no nations, etc...

By framing this in a "Democrats vs. Republiks" issue, you are perpetuating the illusion that keeps them in control. This is, as it has always been, about class.

Believe me, I would love nothing better than to be wrong.

[nichomachus]

31. Because the Dems -- by not standing up to Bush -- let themselves be put in a box

For eight year, they went along with everything he wanted. They had one excuse after another. They went along with the Patriot Act. They went along with the invasions. They went along with torture. They went along with spying on US citizens. They went along with everything they were told to go along with. Only a handful of Dems stood up and called Bush out for what he was -- and they were marginalized by other Dems.

The GOP wasn't stupid. It knew it was suckering them in -- and that it would provide cover if anyone tried to hold them accountable later on. It's the same way the Mafia works in corrupting cops and judges. First, they make them get their own hands dirty. That insures that the cops and judges will do what they're told later.

[Greyhound]

38. Meanwhile, we have mountains of bone dry, unused powder. n/t

[azul]

40. Yep, 2006 election was the mandate to start impeachment and get the truth out.

WTF happened that Pelosi came out in the elected position to do something and immediately took it off the table? She failed in her job, but most all congressmen failed too and let it slide.

What did they think that they had to put first, to shame and abasement of this country, over the rule of law? Armageddon?

[unblock]

33. yup. she's not even a prosecutor, so who cares?

at the absolute worst, it's a mild political embarassment for pelosi.

i'm fairly convinced that the republicans were blackmailing key people, and probably briefed them about torture in part to imply that they would do that to them or to a loved one if they were crossed.

people who torture WANT IT KNOWN that they torture, because the threat of torture is vastly more powerful and effective than actual torture.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

35. All who were involved, directly, or indirectly, should be held accountable.

Even the ones who stood by while knowing crimes were being perpetrated and by their silence gave consent.

[BeFree]

42. Oh?

Well, that's like half the country then. If you paid taxes to support the war, you are guilty. If you never spoke out about torture, Gitmo, or a thousand other things, you should be held accountable?

Strangely, I totally agree. Half the country maybe should be prosecuted.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

48. That's right. And, we're still accountable.

If we sit idly by and support our criminals who conspired with the authors of the torture and enabled them, then we are also culpable.

[mzmolly]

50. Republicans and their supporters? She wasn't allowed to rat, she

was bound by laws that prevented her from sharing "sensitive" information from what I understand? Also, there is debate about what she was told specifically.

Good question Spanone.

[Usrename]

51. All she has to do is recuse herself.

She is going to be in the hot seat because only she can initiate impeachment against Bybee. She should recuse herself from this mess and leave it up to others to take action. She only hurts herself and her party and her country when she continues to obstruct any of the positive actions that are required of her.