Barack Obama hints that George Bush 'torture lawyers' may be prosecuted

ericlp

Diamond Member
Dec 24, 2000
6,137
225
106
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/t...cas/article6143261.ece


President Obama today left the door open to prosecuting lawyers from the Bush Administration who drafted memos authorising the use of harsh interrogation methods on terror suspects.

Well alright! One step closer to getting bush and his cronies behind bars!

Mr Obama said the memos showed how America had lost its "moral bearings" during the Bush years, adding that "if and when there needs to be a further accounting of what took place" Congress should consider a bipartisan inquiry without the usual point-scoring.

Yup... I agree there.

Later last night, Dick Cheney, Mr Bush's Vice President, joined the fray by declaring that he found it a "little bit disturbing" that Mr Obama had chosen to publish only information showing what was done to detainees rather than the crucial information gleaned from such interrogations.

"I know specifically of reports that I read, that I saw, that lay out what we learned through the interrogation process and what the consequences were for the country," he told Fox News.

Mr Cheney has repeatedly accused Mr Obama of endangering America and being too soft towards it enemies by promising talks with Iran or shaking hands with President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, added that he was "concerned with the way that we've been represented overseas" by the President on trips abroad.

It will be interesting to see if Dick continues to keep blowing smoke. Keep it up and he'll be behind bars soon enough. He just keeps digging the hole deeper.

 

SirStev0

Lifer
Nov 13, 2003
10,449
6
81
Why would they be charged? They were under orders. The problem with this country is we have no problem beating up on the people doing their jobs, yet the people making the orders are old asshole buddies so we can't touch them.
 

GroundedSailor

Platinum Member
Feb 18, 2001
2,502
0
76
Originally posted by: ElFenix
i wonder what they will be charged with?

Violating the relevant sections of the Geneva convention to which US is signatory and has incorporated into CFR - for one.


 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
102,398
8,567
126
Originally posted by: GroundedSailor
Originally posted by: ElFenix
i wonder what they will be charged with?

Violating the relevant sections of the Geneva convention to which US is signatory and has incorporated into CFR - for one.

where in the CFR? is there a criminal statute involved? is there a part of the geneva convention providing for criminal penalties?
 

Harvey

Administrator<br>Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
35,057
67
91
Originally posted by: SirStev0

Why would they be charged? They were under orders.

Who was "under orders?" At Nuremburg, nazi war criminals were found guilty despite pleading that the were only "following orders" to commit their heinous crimes.

And who gave those orders? If you're talking about John Yoo, Jay Bybee and Steven Bradbury, the attorneys who wrote the opinions, or their boss, Alberto Gonzales who oversaw their work, the only legal orders their bosses, Bush and Cheney, could issue would be a request for their professional opinions about the legality of the proposed treatment of prisoners. They could not legally be ordered to contort reality to construct a fiction purporting to support such legality.

If that is the attorneys' defense, they are guilty as hell, as are Bush and Cheney for ordering them to do it. Their only alternative defense would that they're intellectually incompetent, and Bush and Cheney are still guilty for approving blatant acts of torture.

Originally posted by: OCguy

LOL! Get those memo drafters.

If they deny drafting the memos, and Bush and Cheney deny ordering them to do so, would that make them all memo draft dodgers? :p
 

ericlp

Diamond Member
Dec 24, 2000
6,137
225
106
I'm thinking if they go after the top lawyers they will quickly break down and tell who really was behind it all. we'll see. Tho I do doubt nothing will happen it would be cool if it did as other nations are calling for punishment. But it has to lead to the "Decider" hahaha fuck what a joke and his side kick. I'm thinking the rat hole is a deep one.

 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Let me know when Bush and Cheney are up for charges. Until then NOTHING has changed.

In news today, a constitutional amendment against torture as approved by the Bush administration was passed; John Yoo was sentenced to 50 years, Donals Rumsfeld was executed by firing squad, and David Addington is currently undergoing 'enhanced interrogation' with every technique he approved, last up 'walling', next up sexual humiliation.

PC Surgeon: "NOTHING has changed." (Dont' take it personally, it's facetious.)
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
Even though I do think the Obama approach is the basic correct one, if we try to domestically prosecute those rats that provided the very dubious legal justifications for torture, there will be so many legal slippery slope defenses that will complicate the issue. Which is why I still advocate those people be extradited to the Hague and let the Hague deal with something they specialize in.
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
174
106
Originally posted by: GroundedSailor
Originally posted by: ElFenix
i wonder what they will be charged with?

Violating the relevant sections of the Geneva convention to which US is signatory and has incorporated into CFR - for one.

A lawyer drafting an opinion paper is in violation of the GC?

There are tons of crappy legal briefs, I've never heard of an attorney being prosecuted for it.

Fern
 

SirStev0

Lifer
Nov 13, 2003
10,449
6
81
Originally posted by: Harvey
Originally posted by: SirStev0

Why would they be charged? They were under orders.

Who was "under orders?" At Nuremburg, nazi war criminals were found guilty despite pleading that the were only "following orders" to commit their heinous crimes.

And who gave those orders? If you're talking about John Yoo, Jay Bybee and Steven Bradbury, the attorneys who wrote the opinions, or their boss, Alberto Gonzales who oversaw their work, the only legal orders their bosses, Bush and Cheney, could issue would be a request for their professional opinions about the legality of the proposed treatment of prisoners. They could not legally be ordered to contort reality to construct a fiction purporting to support such legality.

If that is the attorneys' defense, they are guilty as hell, as are Bush and Cheney for ordering them to do it. Their only alternative defense would that they're intellectually incompetent, and Bush and Cheney are still guilty for approving blatant acts of torture.

Originally posted by: OCguy

LOL! Get those memo drafters.

If they deny drafting the memos, and Bush and Cheney deny ordering them to do so, would that make them all memo draft dodgers? :p

I think you missed my point.

I wasn't so much defending them for "just following orders" I was commenting on the fact that we get the underlings every time but allow the higherups to run free.

Let's use a little analogy. If you want to take care of a gang problem, you can arrest all the wiseguys and thugs you want, but you won't dismantle the gang until you actually arrest "The Don".

This just seems like one of the many times that a bunch of flunkies and toadies are going to get nailed and punished and all of the people who actually order the hits are going to get off scott free.

This is just like Abu Ghraib. It was unspoken military policy and the more people they cracked the more they were praised. The shit hit the fan and who was punished? The generals? The policy makers? The heads? The people in charge? Nope. Just the scrubs and one scapegoat Brigadier.
 

waggy

No Lifer
Dec 14, 2000
68,143
10
81
Originally posted by: Harvey


Originally posted by: OCguy

LOL! Get those memo drafters.

If they deny drafting the memos, and Bush and Cheney deny ordering them to do so, would that make them all memo draft dodgers? :p

booo! hiisss! jokes are not allowed in P&N!



actuallly i think it was rather good hehe.


ok. why the fuck go after the drafters? why not go after who told them to do it? if you are going to bother with this go after the people in charge.
 

JSt0rm

Lifer
Sep 5, 2000
27,399
3,948
126
Originally posted by: waggy
ok. why the fuck go after the drafters? why not go after who told them to do it? if you are going to bother with this go after the people in charge.

Shit rolls uphill. you have to take out the guys who can make a deal to get the bigger guys.
 

AFMatt

Senior member
Aug 14, 2008
248
0
0
If they are going to prosecute those who drafted up these memos, then they need to also prosecute all government officials who had intimate knowledge of the activities and failed to act on it. By his own words, they lost their "moral bearings." This should be interesting.

As far as crazy Dick 'blast you with a shotgun' Cheney's feeling on the release of info, regardless of what you think of him, he is right. You can't selectively release information that only backs your cause and call it "transparency".
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
Originally posted by: Harvey
Originally posted by: SirStev0

Why would they be charged? They were under orders.

Who was "under orders?" At Nuremburg, nazi war criminals were found guilty despite pleading that the were only "following orders" to commit their heinous crimes.

And who gave those orders? If you're talking about John Yoo, Jay Bybee and Steven Bradbury, the attorneys who wrote the opinions, or their boss, Alberto Gonzales who oversaw their work, the only legal orders their bosses, Bush and Cheney, could issue would be a request for their professional opinions about the legality of the proposed treatment of prisoners. They could not legally be ordered to contort reality to construct a fiction purporting to support such legality.

If that is the attorneys' defense, they are guilty as hell, as are Bush and Cheney for ordering them to do it. Their only alternative defense would that they're intellectually incompetent, and Bush and Cheney are still guilty for approving blatant acts of torture.

Originally posted by: OCguy

LOL! Get those memo drafters.

If they deny drafting the memos, and Bush and Cheney deny ordering them to do so, would that make them all memo draft dodgers? :p

Obama disagree's with you. He doesnt want the people who actually carried out the memo's to be prosecuted.

 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
These people more than merely wrote legal briefs, they knew their dubious opinions would result in human beings tortured, making them the primary perp.

Their stinking thinking is a crime and they are regarded guilty under the law, foreign and domestic.
 

Harvey

Administrator<br>Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
35,057
67
91
Originally posted by: Genx87

When the hornets nest erupts how long until he throws Holder under the bus?

Actually, Holder will be driving the bus as it rolls over the attorneys who drafted the memo, and continuing as it rolls over Gonzales, Cheney and Bush.

By law, Obama has no say in the matter. Among other charges pending against Gonzales and the Bushwhackos is that they violated laws prohibiting direct contact with the executive branch regarding active cases.
 

Fingolfin269

Lifer
Feb 28, 2003
17,948
34
91
I haven't read these memos but from what I understand the lawyers would simply write 'Based on THIS I believe you can legally do THAT'. Someone can go to jail for misinterpreting something they read? Disbarred? Yeah... but jail? Really?

I'm actually with Cheney for once too. If you're going to release one half of the story you might as well release the other half to show just what 'good' came out of this 'bad'.
 

Harvey

Administrator<br>Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
35,057
67
91
Originally posted by: Fingolfin269

I haven't read these memos but from what I understand the lawyers would simply write 'Based on THIS I believe you can legally do THAT'. Someone can go to jail for misinterpreting something they read? Disbarred? Yeah... but jail? Really?

Yes, really! As official legal authorities for the United States of America, if they intentionally concocted specious, fictitious, legalistic (not legal) justifications for criminal acts, they can be considered part of the conspiracy to commit those acts.

I'm actually with Cheney for once too. If you're going to release one half of the story you might as well release the other half to show just what 'good' came out of this 'bad'.

It's a political dance. Cheney knows he's in deep shit when the truth comes out. You're actually a sucker to believe he really wants them released.

There is no reason to believe anything KSM or any other tortured captive said while being tortured is true.