How to restore Justice at the Dept of Justice... and assure that

[salin]

the anticonstitutionality of bushco gets uncovered and prosecuted...

The next president (democrat - just don't know which one) needs to convince Al Gore to serve the public as Attorney General - at least long enough to get investigations going and place people of real integrity throughout the department.

Don't know that he would deign to do it - but I honestly can think of few who have become so 'unbeholden' to the powers that be that can really take on the job.

Thoughts?

[NC_Nurse]

1. He said he didn't want a position in the new admin. nt

[salin]

6. I can't say that I blame him. However, in this coming administration

I think this will be one of the very most important cabinet positions - as the administration of Justice has been turned upside down, AND there is much that needs to be more deeply/fully investigated and prosecuted from the Bush administration. The job requires incredible fortitude, and a lack of "owing" anyone or "needing support" in the future. I think that Gore is one of the few who fits that bill.

I am pipedreaming. I know he wouldn't take the position. But I fear so much that our system of government, our country and world have been so damaged and irrevocably changed, and that the next administration either not only turns back whatever damage can be turned back, but also is intrepid (i.e., not fearing media ridicule, not fearing for the next election/electability) in taking on, exposing and prosecuting the bad acts that have been perpetrated on us and the world. Only that way can we know "never again" will happen.

[merh]

2. Not Gore

John Kerry, the former prosecutor, he knows the law, how to prosecute and is VERY MUCH AWARE of the election law violations.

[notadmblnd]

3. sure he is, and he won't do a damn thing about any of it

just like he didn't do anything about the stolen election in 2006. He's one of them too, corporate democrat, neo-liberal, what ever you want to label "them"... he's one.


Am I bitter he didn't stand up and do the right thing back then? Not much:sarcasm:

[merh]

7. Get your dates right, it was the 2004 election

And you can't do anything without proof. You can't oppose an election based on suspicions and his campaign did file pleadings in Ohio. It was Richardson's that screwed the pooch when he stopped the recounts in New Mexico. Those numbers were vital to the "burden" that had to be met in Ohio.

If you knew enough about election laws you would know that your bitterness is misplaced, but hey, some folks love to be angry at the victims of crimes.

[notadmblnd]

9. I'm sorry, but it 's difficult to have any sympathy

when the victim refuses to confront the injustice. So belittle me because I got the date wrong. Tell me how I ignorant I am and how all knowing you are scholarly one (not stated, implied by your tone). I do know that Kerry won Ohio, there was and IS evidence. He could have fought, he chose to roll over, that makes him one of "them" in my book.

[merh]

11. There was no evidence at the time.

There were merely suspicions. The window to contest the vote is narrow and the requirements/proof very specific. Suspicions don't rise to the level required.

When Richardson prevented the New Mexico recount, it made the Ohio contest next to impossible to win.

Hell, even now there is not enough "proof" to bring charges (it is a felony to interfere with elections).

You anger is misdirected, both in this post and at Kerry.

Put your emotions aside and think about, who better to pursue the wrong doings than someone that has had the job in the past; that helped to uncover the Iran/Contra crimes; and, that has studied the election laws and ways to steal elections better than most anyone (especially you) having been a victim of such theft. No one asked to you vote for him for president, he isn't running again.

[madokie]

4. I'll vote for John Kerry to do the job

He's battle tested and true to form. What more need be said

[salin]

5. He would also be a good choice.

The story goes that he had to be taken off the Iran Contra/BCCI investigations as he was seen as too zealous and thus a threat to those who didn't want the apple cart fully toppled over.

[merh]

8. exactly

We NEED zealous - we need someone willing to follow the law, no matter who's apple cart is toppled.

Happy New Year! :hug:

[H2O Man]

10. I would agree

that Kerry would be a great choice. However, I think that he should stay in the US Senate, where he can provide real leadership, and that Patrick Fitzgerald should serve as the next US Attorney General, no matter which one of our candidates is elected.

I think Al Gore will provide a unique form of leadership from outside the federal government.