When Obama wins, is it a good idea to prosecute Bush & Co.?

[Theben]

Some officials should be indicted. Any that blew off a subpoena and those involved in torture, plus Gooding from the DOJ. I would offer Bush immunity for not passing out pardons like Halloween candy.

[Vesayen]

I think that is a very reasonable compromise.

Prosecute anyone who blew off a subpena or ignored a court order and send them to jail, for that. Do it for the clear, obvious things with no legal basis at all for challenging.

My gut says "Do the right thing, send these criminals to jail" but that is better than nothing.

[Wiglaf]

This is why preemptive pardons were invented. I already got one I think, and it was for something really bad I did by accident that did not involve any hookers.

http://www.truthout.org/article/bush-administration-does-not-rule-out-pre-emptive-pardons

Do some ****ing research.

[SlowwHand]

Holy crap! He's back.

[Wiglaf]

This ****ty site popped up on my firefox bar while I was plotting how Pennsylvania is going to bend over and bow to McCain's shrivelled wang. I'm out of here again. Don't cling to your guns or religion too close when McCain's wang implodes on Nov 4 all over you liberal pansies while cindy mccain is sleeping with your wife and Kieth Olberman's severed head...

[SlowwHand]

Vesayen, did we prosecute Clinton for banging hired help while ignoring terrorism? Move on. You are so tired.

[Vesayen]

Lying about a blowjob from an intern is not in any way I can imagine comprable to lying to congress, ignored subpenas revealing CIA operatives to the media, holding people in endless detention without charging them which the Supreme Court has stated is unconstitutional, violated the geneva convention, filling the justice department with political apointees and firing those who won't corrupt their station for partisan politics.

One threatens the very existance of a land ruled by laws and the other constitution. The other, is lying about a blowjob.

And you know what? The Republicans tried to impeach the guy who lied about a blowjob.

ALSO, since we are now discussing other people with no relation and not the criminals from the original post, Sarah Palin has had at least 1 affair and McCain cheated on the wife who waited for him while he was in Vietnam when he had an affair, then dumped her for a younger, hoter woman.

Clinton has nothing to do with this, despite attempts to confuse the issue.

This is about respect for the rule of law. Are we a nation of laws or a nation of men?

[SlowwHand]

That you can imagine, key phrase.

[Vesayen]

You ignored all of my valid points to insult me, 2 points.

Ignoring a subpoena alone is utterly unforgivable. The congress are the representatives of the people. You do not ignore their subpoenas, it is a huge slap in the face to the American people. If you ignore a subpoena, your next trip should be to a jail cell.

[Victor Galis]

Originally posted by Swissy
The House and Senate didn't do much about it in the past two years. For good reason, if they did there would be a backlash. They knew it and stayed away. I don't think Obama is that dumb, he pretty much threw the left-wing kook blog-o-sphere types overboard once he had the nomination pretty much sewn up. Those will be the only ones calling for Bush's head. Since Obama doesn't need them anymore, why rile up the rest of America.

To send a message to the next President that thinks he's above the law. The GOP impeached Clinton for lying about an affair and suffered a backlash. Now the Dems are afraid to go after people who lied to get us into a stupid war.

I think it's unlikely they'll ever manage to pin anything serious on Bush, but some aides could reasonably be prosecuted for various lesser things.

Vesayen, did we prosecute Clinton for banging hired help while ignoring terrorism?

They did. Senate voted not to remove him from office, there was a trial.

[SlowwHand]

You have no valid points if you ignore the one main points. If you were a manager in any company, you'd be fired for getting a blow job in your office by hired help. That's a fact. The terrorism that Bush has had to deal with is brought about by Clinton ignoring for 8 years, but you whine about Bush.
You accuse me of ignoring points, when you ignore points that put the situation as it exists for Bush.
My main question is, what are you going to do for entertainment once Bush is gone? Do you have an answer. Just answer that one question, and I'll forget Clinton being a whore dog do-nothing. Just answer that one question.

[Vesayen]

Since you have a reading comprehension problem, I removed the apparently confusing passage. Here.

Originally posted by Vesayen
Lying about a blowjob is not the same as having ignored subpenas revealing CIA operatives to the media, holding people in endless detention without charging them which the Supreme Court has stated is unconstitutional, violated the geneva convention, filling the justice department with political apointees and firing those who won't corrupt their station for partisan politics.

One threatens the very existance of a land ruled by laws and the other constitution. The other, is lying about a blowjob.

And you know what? The Republicans tried to impeach the guy who lied about a blowjob.

What will I do when Bush is gone? Rejoice and hope the country fixes 8 years of damage. You ask your question as if I am entertained that my country is on the verge of collapse, I am outraged and hoping it changes. That is not a difficult question.

[Bosh]

Well probably Bush will pardon most everyone so there's no too much that Obama can do.

If I were in Obama's shoes I would:

1. Write up a list of Bush admin people probably involved in Bad ****.
2. Offer all but the worst of the people on that list a pardon in return for a confession of said Bad ****. Offer Bush administration types the chance to ***** about old enemies and get their *****ing publicized. Hold threats of legal prosecution over the heads of Bush administration types who don't go along.
3. Spin #2 as being magnanimous and getting the truth out there while not holding grudges.
4. Prosecute the 10% who did the most unambiguously awful ****.

Might not fly but maybe worth a shot...

[Ninot]

I suspect Obama is smart enough not to actively prosecute anyone, or have them prosecuted, unless they broke the law outside of their respective duties. Since most of that gets swept under the rug in Washington anyway, there will probably be very very little done.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Now the Dems are afraid to go after people who lied to get us into a stupid war.

To be fair, it'd be somewhat hard to find evidence of out and out lies. There is definitely a TON of circumstantial evidence, but they can always say the intelligence said x, y, z... all these people believed it, etc. A decent argument can be made to put doubt in the minds of a jury.