Bush, top aides apparently home free

[Robbien]

By HELEN THOMAS
HEARST NEWSPAPERS

WASHINGTON -- Can Americans face the truth about the Bush administration's abuse of power?

I believe so, but clearly President Barack Obama and some Democratic lawmakers think they can't. Or possibly they don't want to be bogged down in a search which could be viewed as vindictive against the former regime. Too bad.

Obama -- a former constitutional law professor-- has ruled out a look backward, claiming that any review of possible illegalities by Bush and his coterie would lead to "politics that have made Washington dysfunctional."

Picking up on the last Bush mantra that we should move "forward," Obama with his don't-rock-the-boat perspective is not about to nail his predecessor. After all, Obama is now a member of the club and shows signs of fitting in very quickly and easily.

. . .

This double standard embraced by nervous politicians nourishes the perception that laws do not apply equally when politicians seek to protect each other.

more . . .

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/402617_thomas08.html

[vaberella]

1. The idiot author has the most misleading title ever.

I read the article and I don't see where it says that Obama is going to allow them to go free. He has always held the belief that what is in the past is in the past. However it was AG Eric Holder and with Obama's knowledge that previously secret emails are now made to the public and I'm sure there will be more that will come out. Where then are Bush and his peeps appearing to be off without penalty?! No where and even in her article she mentions Leahy and his truth forum/panel plan.

She targeted her article against Obama while all of this is going under Obama without any form of restriction or obstruction.

[Robbien]

6. I guess you didn't see this thread in LBN "Obama lawyers argue to drop Yoo torture suit"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=3772045

Source: San Francisco Chronicle

Obama lawyers argue to drop Yoo torture suit
Bob Egelko, Chronicle Staff Writer

Friday, March 6, 2009


(03-06) 18:08 PST SAN FRANCISCO -- President Obama's Justice Department defended former Bush administration lawyer John Yoo in a San Francisco federal court Friday, arguing that a prisoner formerly held as an enemy combatant had no right to sue Yoo for writing legal memos that allegedly led to his detention and torture.


"We're not saying we condone torture," department attorney Mary Mason said at a hearing on the government's request to dismiss a lawsuit filed by Jose Padilla. But any recourse against a government lawyer "is for the executive to decide, in the first instance, and for Congress to decide," not the courts, she said.

"You're not saying that if high public officials commit clearly illegal acts, a citizen subject to those acts has no remedy in this court?" asked U.S. District Judge Jeffrey White.

Not unless Congress has expressly authorized a lawsuit, Mason replied. She cited the argument the Justice Department made in Yoo's case last year, with President George W. Bush still in office, that courts should not interfere in executive decision-making, especially in wartime.

White did not indicate how or when he would rule.


---------------

Helen Thomas is right. Obama has no interest in going after crimes committed during the Bush Regime.

[vaberella]

7. Actually I did read it.

When it comes to law cases there are finer details we don't know about. I should know. It was one of the things that happened when I was a juror. People only heard about the case and jumped to conclusions on the information THEY know. We're not privy to all the details or the reasons why. As such, I'm not about to jump down Obama's throat because once again...he is a constitutional lawyer and I think that is more fundamental to him than protecting someone. If he really wanted to protect them, he could have easily gotten rid of the emails. The emails did not have to be released and they have a lot of damaging information. So that says a lot.

You chose to read things how you want, which I find is leaning to one side. I'd rather keep an open mind and see how things move along considering there is more information supporting Obama in his move to not support or deny a truth forum but give some nudging anyway.

[Robbien]

8. If keeping an open mind

means calling the very experienced Helen Thomas an idiot when she doesn't agree with your personal opinion

then I am very happy I "chose to read things how I want".

Today's article on Yoo is just one of many stating that Obama has no interest in prosecuting/investigating the Bush Regime.

But you go ahead and keep your "open mind". It must be very comforting.

[TheEuclideanOne]

16. I should know. It was one of the things that happened when I was a juror.

Are you for real? That is like saying "I know what Obama should do. I am not a laywer, but I stayed in a Holiday Inn express last night".

Okay, so you make the point that he clearly is not letting the Bush administration off, even though he is using his "Let's look forward, not backwards" reasoning. Then you argue that it is okay that Yoo is not being pursued, followed by some explanation as to why that is okay.

I don't know think that you are thinking through this too clearly. Perhaps your point is that he is letting off the administration, but you are viewing that with an open mind, so it makes it okay. Then again, what do I know, you are the expert. After all, you were a juror.
:rofl:

[Octafish]

15. Helen Thomas is no idiot.

She's one of the few who had the guts to speak truth to power over the past eight years.

Where were you?

[NRaleighLiberal]

2. This seems to be a night of particularly depressing posts...

[Name removed]

3. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

4. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[samdogmom]

5. Helen Thomas...once again speaks the truth.

I am so angered that the Obama administration thus far has refused to recognize that the Bush administration was corrupt and has silenced investigations into any wrong-doing! WOW!

Me...I'm now hoping that a number of people being convicted of crimes today use the "Bush" defense in their appeal. (Maybe it will finally get overturned if this is the case!) Meanwhile, when the leader of our country was able to ignore all laws and do whatever the hell pleased him, why can't the rest of the citizens follow suit?

(Why are a select few being punished when Bush and his cronies committed far worse crimes and are getting off Scot free?)

I supported Obama and worked very hard on his campaign. But his refusal to view Bush as a criminal really boggles my mind (and makes me EXTREMELY ANGRY!). Obama is a very smart man...what is his problem? Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeldt, et. al. committed great crimes against society. If our fricking country can't prosecute these things, I sure hope a world authority figure steps in and makes things right! I'm all for the U.N. arresting these crooks and bringing them to justice. Too, bad our own country can't set an example. We're wimps, apparently!

[midnight]

11. Where is everybody? Helen Thomas.

I thought Obama was in support of everyone needs to follow the law.

[TheEuclideanOne]

17. I feel exactly the same way.

Can't anybody do this on his behalf? If I commit a crime against the state. Let's say that I assault somebody and they refuse to press charges, the state will still continue to try to throw my ass in jail even if the other person doesn't want to.

Bush assaulted the constitution, can't our defense department press charges even if Obama doesn't want to? Maybe Obama is dropping hints that nobody is picking up on. Perhaps we missed a "wink wink" when he says '"I" believe in looking forward' and really wants somebody else to pick up the ball and run with it.

[Doctor_J]

9. I thought that Holder was leaking all that evidence of treason

to grease the wheels for aggressive prosecution

This makes me :-(

[acmavm]

10. I'd go register as and Independent but then I can't vote in primaries. If

this turns out to be a clintonesque "let's move on for the good of the country" crock of shit rerun, I will not be voting for this guy again. This IS make or break. It will say everything that needs to be said about these people and this administration.

And if you've been paying attention at all the last couple years, you will know that I won't be only one. I'll just be one of many.

[midnight]

12. You can do it Mr. President.

You can hold these law breakers accountable and move forward at the same time.

[kaygore]

13. Each profession protects its own--and the results are usually negative

If not punished, they will commit the same crimes again and again.

[MasonJar]

14. All they need to do is appoint a Special Prosecutor. They do not

have to be involved.