CNN.com |
|
Several judges are considering wading into the dispute over the videos. But U.S. District Judge Richard W. Roberts was the first to order the administration to provide a written report on the matter. The decision is a legal setback for the Bush administration, which has urged courts not to get involved. The tapes showed harsh interrogation tactics used by CIA officers questioning al Qaeda suspects Abu Zubaydah and Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri in 2002.
When they were destroyed, the government was under various court orders to retain evidence relevant to terrorism suspects at the U.S. detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. After it became public in December that the tapes had been destroyed, lawyers for several detainees went to court demanding to know more. “There’s enough there that it’s worth asking” whether other videos or documents were also destroyed, said attorney Charles H. Carpenter. “I don’t know the answer to that question, but the government does know the answer and now they have to tell Judge Roberts.”
While I applaud Judge Roberts, I’m betting this will never happen.
A lot of people thought that Gerald Ford was a great American for pardoning Richard Nixon.
I thought it was a huge mistake to set a precedent that Whitehouse crimes are dropped once out of office. And it’s proven to be true: not matter how terrible or illegal (Iran Contra comes to mind) the whole thing is dropped the day after the administration is gone.
And that is what the Bush Administration is counting on: they can break any law; commit any treason; raid billions of our tax dollars; lie to star wars; horribly bungle the wars they start and if they can run out the clock it will all be dropped.
Surely, they will be rewarded for this strategy.
Asking questions is still allowed?
The administration will ignore and delay as long as possible. We need some judges with spines. Judges who can’t be beaten down by neocon hacks and smear campaigns. Do they exist?
You try those excuses with your banker in making or missing charge card payments and see how far you get away
Uh-huh, and that’s not what people had in mind when they said a sitting President should answer to abuse of power, perjury, and fratinizing with supordinates while in office. “Wait until Clinton is out of office.”
But, Okay. You’ve convinced me to not vote for Bush in the next Presidential election.
Oh Please. They guy has 11 months to go and the last thing he needs is some judge expose more of his criminal doings.
The objective now is to help push Americans further into debt to prop the economy until his sorry ass is hauled to Wacko, TX. Give them $800 of their 2008 tax returns now to spend on shit they don;t need. Yeah, that’s a bold plan. I just hat that SOB.
#1–gregallen==your best post. I agree completely and its even worse.
Where are the perjury charges against Gonzo?
Where is the impeachment against Bushco for the signing statements and failure to follow the law in consequence?
Where is impeachment for Bushie Boy when he pardons a conspirator acting on his behalf? (aka Libby)
Where is impeachment for Cheney regarding the Plame outing, and failure to respond to Congressional subpoenas?
And Hilliary will take these precedents and be even more secretive and aberrant–except, just maybe the repugs are hypocritical enough to stop Hilliary when they wouldn’t stop Bush.
#Phillep,
Yes. Clinton lied about a consenting adult blow job. They impeached him but didn’t convict. There was no place to go with it after that.
Ever other charge ended up being a bunch of nothin’. Why can I say that? Because the Republicans spend MILLIONS upon MILLIONS of our tax dollars and ENDLESS hours of hearings investigating the Clintons and they would have convicted had they had anything. Heck, the GOP congress held hearings about his Christmas card list! Even so, the most they could get him on was lying about blow job. Big whopping deal!
But Bush? It is stark study in contrasts:
Bush could get caught red-handed selling crack out the back door of the Whitehouse wrapped in kiddie porn to Osama bin Laden and Congress wouldn’t hold hearings. If anyone dare mention the incident, the conservatives would label them “anti-troop Saddam lovers” for criticizing a war-time president!
Is anyone else getting tired of McCarthy ?
Do the majority of Amerikans really live in trailer parks today or is it simply the fact that they soon will have no other option if they want a roof over their heads ? Did Archie Bunker really clone everyone who voted in the last election ? Is lead paint in schools the real CIA operation from the 50’s that Eisenhower put into action or was it in-breeding for selected areas of this country ? What are the immigration rules in Russia ? Do little boys naturally gravite towrds repugnacants or is it the candy ?
Will anyone from the US ask these questions or should we continue to look towards our leaders to think for us ? Mavis in the trailer next to me is cooking some weird stuff she caught in her live trap and I’m invited over…Fluffy ? C’mere girl ! Where you at baby? Damm..gotta go find my dog…
Why are judges getting involved in military actions?