Impeachment ain't gonna happen but what about prosecution after they leave office?

[Kablooie]

Is there any chance of this?

Or do we just let them live a pleasant OJ life of ease afterwards with their nice pensions and perks all intact?

Signaling, of course, that future administrations can do any illegal thing they want without fear of consequences.

[thepurpose]

1. Has the bar been set so low that no president will ever be impeached again?

In my opinion the next president is going to have shoot someone in the face, in the oval office, on live tv while raping a goat before congress and the courts will be able to even say "hey that guy is out of control."

[rfranklin]

2. Only if the goat is an intern and the Prez is a Dem...

C'mon now, you know the rules!

[thepurpose]

3. I'm sorry. You are absolutely right ,the dem will only have to pet a goat and the

proceedings will begin.

[denem]

4. Or even read a book on goats, period.

[BR_Parkway]

6. My Pet Goat is obviously given some protected status though

[denem]

10. Special Privilage: It's the smoking gun. n/t

[emanymton]

5. Without A Presidential Pardon - Yes

.
shrub and Co leave office as private citizens. They are then subject to the law again and can expect to be open to the legal process.

Assuming shrub, prior to his leaving office in 2009, gives himself and or his minions, a presidential pardon, he is then beyond US law (criminal and civil) for his crimes (this applies to all recipients of pardons). He will be free to hide in Texas without fear of US law.

Do you think shrub and Co will want to leave themselves open to law suits?

--

Any nation can bring charges against shrub, the ex-VP or ex-Secretary of Defense (and others) in the International Court of Justice at The Hague, Netherlands. The new president could then render the accused for trial as a war criminal. This seems to be the only option open to the people of USA to hold the shrub junta accountable.

________

The idea of shrub pardoning himself seems to be giving many at DU trouble. Put _nothing_ beyond this group of criminals, I don't. Name one area that these miscreants have not tarnished with their actions!
.

[rjones2818]

9. The question is

will the Hauge recognize a pardon?

[emanymton]

11. Ex-Leaders From The Old Yugoslavia Learned - No.

[rfranklin]

12. Bush pardons Cheney, Bush resigns on Jan. 19, 2009....

Cheney becomes Pretzeldent and pardons Bush...no problem!

Oh yeah, and Prez Cheney nukes Iran in the early a.m. January 20, 2008, declares a national emergency and implements all the Bush directives to become Supreme Leader, answering to no one.

[emanymton]

14. This Could Really Work. And The People Will Sit At Home ...

.
And listen as Faux Noise Tells them it is Bill Clinton's fault.
.

[Kablooie]

19. But can he give pardons for actions that are not currently being prosecuted?

He would have to declare his own actions illegal in order to give himself a pardon.

Criminal prosecution probably won't be declared until after he leaves office.

[JI7]

7. that's what i'm hoping for and would be better than impeachment

as it has less of a political tone to it.

[indepat]

8. No impeachment and maybe they have no intent to leave office to face possible

prosecution at least at the Hague.

[emanymton]

13. You Are Not Alone Thinking This. ...

.
(I am realist enough to understand Bush and Cheney will never face justice for their actions. This just is not going to happen. Though I can fantasize about rendering your president and vice president to the International Court Of Justice in The Hague (Netherlands) for trial as war criminals and re-establishing the rule of law within USA.)

But think about it. As Bush and Cheney waltz into the sunset with their blood-soaked ill gotten gains, laughing at the rest of us, those who helped them to get away with their crimes are going to be feeling rather exposed. Don't you think?

The incoming administration will not have to be willing to take the heat and protect the underlings left behind. The underlings will watch as the bosses leave the office. Now what? The laws are quite clear. Giving an unlawful order is against the law. And oh so many orders have been illegal.

And Congress will be in the hands of the opposition political party. Now is the time to be planning for more investigations of the criminal activity and malfeasance. As example, Gonzales has shrub's protection. Hurrah. When shrub walks out the door for the last time and Gonzales will be on his own.

Like so many more underlings, no one will be there to protect them anymore. Maybe this is the time to be trying to make deals with the legal system for protection in exchange for higher ups. (Maybe F Thompson can play a scene in 'Law And Order.') The legal system will be coming for the lower order crooks. About the only way so many little fish n Washington can be protected to keep their mouths shut, is to cancel the November 2008 elections. I mean shrub cannot give blanket presidential pardons (can he?).

And if shrub does pardon himself and Cheney et al, they can be rendered to the Haag for war crimes!!
.

[Gman]

15. Thank you and that's what I have been saying since January!

And let's think about what John Dean said on impeachment. That is, focus impeachment on the lower level people that can be impeached and ban them from office forever:

Refocusing the Impeachment Movement on Administration Officials Below the President and Vice-President:
Why Not Have A Realistic Debate, with Charges that Could Actually Result in Convictions?

Focusing On Bush Administration Officials

Lowering the aim of an impeachment effort to focus on those who have aided and abetted, or directly engaged in, the commission of high crimes and misdemeanors, would have all the positives, and none of the negatives, of going after Bush and Cheney. It would not be an effort to overturn the 2004 election, but rather to rid the government of those who have participated, along with Bush and Cheney, in abuses and misuses of power; indeed, many among them have actually encouraged Bush and Cheney to undertake the offensive activities.

Many of these men (and a few women) are young enough that it is very likely that they will return to other posts in future Republican Administrations, and based on their experience in the Bush/Cheney Administration, they can be expected to make the offensive conduct of this presidency the baseline for the next president they serve. Impeachment, however, would prevent that from happening.

It will be recalled that Article I, Section 3 of the Constitution states: "Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States." (Emphasis added.) After any civil officer has been impeached, under the rules of the Senate, it requires only a simple majority vote to add the disqualification from holding future office.

In addition, it is likely that the impeachment process of any official in a position below that of the president or vice president, would be treated the same as the impeachment of federal judges. The work is done in both the House and Senate by special subcommittees, so it does not consume the attention of the full bodies until the final votes.

http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20061215.html

Had this been done after Watergate and after IranContra we would not have CHeney, Negroponte, and many of the batshit crazy nuts running the government today.

[Didereaux]

16. Obama has already pledged in a SC speech not to use the DOJ to investigate past administration!

and THATS a fact. said he was 'forward' looking guy!

I think Edwards could be trusted, certainly Biden, I am unsure of Clinton.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/didereaux/


..

[mtnsnake]

17. If an impeachment attempt doesn't happen, do you really think they'll be prosecuted at all?

If Democrats don't even try to impeach, that just about says that Nancy and Company don't believe Bush and Cheney are guilty. I guess in her eyes and in the eyes of the rest of gutless anti-impeachment Democrats, boys will be boys.

[mmonk]

18. No, this is about sweeping things under the rug

and carrying on bits and pieces of their legacy. For example, a huge bloated Homeland Security with private contracts is jingle in a politician's pocket. Permanent bases and privatization is jingle in a politician's pocket. Keeping the ATC and AIPAC money flowing is jingle in a politician's pocket. Golden parachute jobs after office representing foreign interests and corporations is jingle in a politician's pocket.