Can the next president use executive privilege to jail and execute Bush and Cheney?

[maddogchen]

Nothing serious, just thought it would be ironic. In the mode of Executive Privilege Trumps all. Its so powerful, I think it will work.

 

[dyna]

Originally posted by: maddogchen
Nothing serious, just thought it would be ironic. In the mode of Executive Privilege Trumps all. Its so powerful, I think it will work.

You probably just got added to the Homeland Security watch list.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: dyna

Originally posted by: maddogchen
Nothing serious, just thought it would be ironic. In the mode of Executive Privilege Trumps all. Its so powerful, I think it will work.

You probably just got added to the Homeland Security watch list.

I think we're all on it at this point. It's called the census. Everyone's a suspect!

 

[Jaskalas]

Originally posted by: maddogchen
Nothing serious, just thought it would be ironic. In the mode of Executive Privilege Trumps all. Its so powerful, I think it will work.

So it's violence you want then? A common pattern these days.

 

[feralkid]

Pointless:

Bush needs to live another 60 years to hopefully realize the evil he has become,

and if you kill Cheney, he will become stronger than you can imagine.

 

[Lemon law]

The next President may opt to jail Bush and Cheney on some sort of treason charges after facts come to light during their Presidency--or could in fact run on that stated platform and promise---leaving it up to electorate to decide. But the execute part disturbs me--to have value--a death sentence must come from an open and fair trial in an independent court of law. And not by executive order.

But this thread misses another possibility---that GWB&Cheney will get this country in such deep trouble, that we must go hat in hand to the international community for help. Or we may find ourselves under an economic embargo due to some past or future GWB&co. action finally hitting the fan---and then turning GWB&Cheney over to the Hague for trial on war crimes may be the minimum down payment required of the USA. Which would take execute off the table since the death penalty is no longer a sentencing option for war crimes at the Hague.

We will just have to wait and see how events play out---but there is certainly a significant chance that GWB&Cheney may be jailed after their term ends---and be precedent setting as the first US President to be openly courting that distinction--after all---whats that old saying----if you do the crime--best be prepared to serve the time. And by in large--there is no reasonable doubt about the former and a miscarriage of justice if the latter does not follow.

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

Originally posted by: feralkid
Pointless:

Bush needs to live another 60 years to hopefully realize the evil he has become,

and if you kill Cheney, he will become stronger than you can imagine.

Cheney can't be killed. Those heart attacks weren't heart attacks. Sometimes he has to see a Dr who is not in his group. The undead don't have a heart beat so you can't really blame the Dr's for thinking the worst. And the public can't handle the ugly truth... viola! Heart attack.

 

[JEDIYoda]

Originally posted by: Lemon law
The next President may opt to jail Bush and Cheney on some sort of treason charges after facts come to light during their Presidency--or could in fact run on that stated platform and promise---leaving it up to electorate to decide. But the execute part disturbs me--to have value--a death sentence must come from an open and fair trial in an independent court of law. And not by executive order.

But this thread misses another possibility---that GWB&Cheney will get this country in such deep trouble, that we must go hat in hand to the international community for help. Or we may find ourselves under an economic embargo due to some past or future GWB&co. action finally hitting the fan---and then turning GWB&Cheney over to the Hague for trial on war crimes may be the minimum down payment required of the USA. Which would take execute off the table since the death penalty is no longer a sentencing option for war crimes at the Hague.

We will just have to wait and see how events play out---but there is certainly a significant chance that GWB&Cheney may be jailed after their term ends---and be precedent setting as the first US President to be openly courting that distinction--after all---whats that old saying----if you do the crime--best be prepared to serve the time. And by in large--there is no reasonable doubt about the former and a miscarriage of justice if the latter does not follow.

No the next president may not opt to jail Bush thats just ludicrous dreaming!

 

[tomywishbone]

Originally posted by: feralkid
Pointless:

Bush needs to live another 60 years to hopefully realize the evil he has become,

and if you kill Cheney, he will become stronger than you can imagine.

 

[Deudalus]

Ya know it says alot about our mods when threads like this aren't locked.


No, exactly what does it say?

Anandtech Senior Moderator
Red Dawn

 

[Corn]

Originally posted by: Lemon law
The next President may opt to jail Bush and Cheney on some sort of treason charges after facts come to light during their Presidency--or could in fact run on that stated platform and promise---leaving it up to electorate to decide. But the execute part disturbs me--to have value--a death sentence must come from an open and fair trial in an independent court of law. And not by executive order.

But this thread misses another possibility---that GWB&Cheney will get this country in such deep trouble, that we must go hat in hand to the international community for help. Or we may find ourselves under an economic embargo due to some past or future GWB&co. action finally hitting the fan---and then turning GWB&Cheney over to the Hague for trial on war crimes may be the minimum down payment required of the USA. Which would take execute off the table since the death penalty is no longer a sentencing option for war crimes at the Hague.

We will just have to wait and see how events play out---but there is certainly a significant chance that GWB&Cheney may be jailed after their term ends---and be precedent setting as the first US President to be openly courting that distinction--after all---whats that old saying----if you do the crime--best be prepared to serve the time. And by in large--there is no reasonable doubt about the former and a miscarriage of justice if the latter does not follow.

Silly liberati wet dreams always make me laugh. This is good stuff LL, who needs evidence or a trial, they're guilty, no reasonable doubt about it!

 

[Arkaign]

Bush can burn in Hell with LBJ, they're the worst two presidents in our nation's history.

 

[Lemon law]

Continue to delude yourself Corn---the torture and rendition programs GWB&co are into up to their eyeballs in are provable. It may finally come down to a you and whose army will make the USA turn GWB over to the Hague, and it may finally come down to we choose to sweep this all under the rug, but you are totally delusional if you deny that there is a very strong probability of convicting GWB&co of war crimes should some subsequent President be willing to turn over States evidence.

And if that comes to pass it won't be---"This is good stuff LL, who needs evidence or a trial, they're guilty, no reasonable doubt about it" But rather that they get a fair trial and if they get convicted---it will be in fact be because there is no reasonable doubt about it after viewing the evidence. And that is always the alternative in any trial---that a jury will fail to convict the person accused of a crime.

Now comes the acid test---should the charge of war crimes against GWB&co. ever come before
a domestic or international court----what odds would you give towards getting an innocent verdict?

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Deudalus
Ya know it says alot about our mods when threads like this aren't locked.

The kitchen door is open, you can leave just as easily as you came in.

 

[Stunt]

You see...there's this thing called 'blow back'
If the next president jailed Bush and Cheney, I don't even want to think what the Republicans would have up their sleeve.

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: Deudalus
Ya know it says alot about our mods when threads like this aren't locked.

Not at all...but it DOES say a lot about our administration.

 

[Lemon law]

Originally posted by: Stunt
You see...there's this thing called 'blow back'
If the next president jailed Bush and Cheney, I don't even want to think what the Republicans would have up their sleeve.

I have two big problems with this post. (a) Who says the President allowing the those charges against GWB and Cheney must be a democrat---when a principled Republican or Democrat could equally understand the necessity. And after the forced Resignation of Nixon, Republicans
held a grudge against neither Ford or Carter. And any Republican problems Carter had, he at least well earned those all by himself.

And in the grand scheme of things--it would be a very healthy thing for all subsequent Presidents to learn that if they don't respect international law---they may well be facing war crimes charges.

But any President that advocates war crimes charges for GWB&co---and then in turn violates
the same set of international laws in their own right---can and should expect the same treatment.

 

[colonel]

bad weed never die

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: Stunt
You see...there's this thing called 'blow back'
If the next president jailed Bush and Cheney, I don't even want to think what the Republicans would have up their sleeve.

Exactly. The same reason that the GOP didn't go nuclear and get rid of filibusters during the last congress. It could have come back to bite them on the ass.

 

[heartsurgeon]

Continue to delude yourself Corn---the torture and rendition programs GWB&co are into up to their eyeballs in are provable...turn GWB over to the Hague...war crimes..

gee, I guess ol' Bill Clinton will be joining Bush at the Hague under your plan:
from ABC NEWS (a famously right-wing news organization)

CIA renditions began under Clinton: agent

The US Central Intelligence Agency's (CIA) controversial "rendition" program was launched under US president Bill Clinton, a former US counter-terrorism agent has told a German newspaper.

Michael Scheuer, a 22-year veteran of the CIA who resigned from the agency in 2004, has told Die Zeit that the US administration had been looking in the mid-1990s for a way to combat the terrorist threat and circumvent the cumbersome US legal system.

"President Clinton, his national security adviser Sandy Berger and his terrorism adviser Richard Clark ordered the CIA in the autumn of 1995 to destroy Al Qaeda," Mr Scheuer said.

"We asked the president what we should do with the people we capture. Clinton said 'That's up to you'."

Mr Scheuer, who headed the CIA unit that tracked Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden from 1996 to 1999, says he developed and led the "renditions" program.

He says the program includes moving prisoners without due legal process to countries without strict human rights protections.

"In Cairo, people are not treated like they are in Milwaukee," he said.

"The Clinton administration asked us if we believed that the prisoners were being treated in accordance with local law.

"And we answered, 'yes, we're fairly sure'."
[this is called plausible deniability...allows Clintoon to claim he never authorized anyone being waterboarded, all the while knowing they are "not being treated like they're in Milwaukee"]

He says at the time the CIA did not arrest or imprison anyone itself.

"That was done by the local police or secret services," he said, adding the prisoners were never taken to US soil.

"President Clinton did not want that," he said.

 

[Lemon law]

To heartsurgeon,

If you expect me to be your prototypical liberal and defend Clinton while demonizing GWB, guess again---I would have no problem with either facing war crimes charges.
But in any event---I would tend to guess that GWB would draw the far longer sentence and would also have far more criminal complaints lodged.

 

[Modelworks]

I would say deport him to iraq.
I think Bush and cheney meet the criteria for loss of citezenship.

 

[OrganizedChaos]

its about as likely as bush ordering the secret service to lock out congress.

 

[heartsurgeon]

If you expect me to be your prototypical liberal and defend Clinton while demonizing GWB, guess again---I would have no problem with either facing war crimes charges.

we don't really know how many people Clintoon "rendered" because as far as I know, it has never been investigated.....

but clintoon is smarter than Bushie, and i'm sure he has plenty of "plausible deniability" built into his "renditions", the exact response under oath is

"I have no independent recollection of that"


I'm pretty sure Hillary has used that line already...Probable learned it from Bill...

 

[imported_Equinox]

Try all of them that were involved, and hold them up for public scrutiny. Both the ones that got elected and stood idly by, and those that actively committed crimes. At this point, Washington is so polluted that they are all protecting each other as long as everyone keeps getting paid. A few get thrown to the wolves when they outlive their usefulness, but ultimately it is the same crooks and idiots getting recycled in and out of office.

That will never happen, of course, without a major intervention by a third party - and let's hope a few of them wake up and smell what they are wading in before that happens.