Daylife/Reuters Pictures
|
Republicans on Wednesday delayed a confirmation vote on attorney general nominee Eric Holder, some demanding assurances he would not prosecute U.S. agents for torture if they thought their methods were in compliance with the law…
With questions about torture and other matters, Republicans invoked their right to delay for one week the Senate Judiciary Committee’s vote on Holder, who had already been expected to endure one of the rockier confirmation processes in President Barack Obama’s new cabinet.
Holder still appears virtually certain to eventually win confirmation by the full Senate…
During his confirmation hearing before the Judiciary Committee last week, Holder broke with the Bush administration and said waterboarding, an interrogation technique that involves simulated drowning, was torture and thus illegal.
Asked if he would prosecute for torture, Holder said “no one is above the law.” But he also quoted Obama about the need to move ahead…
Holder said he would ensure that interrogations complied with treaty obligations and were effective. He pledged to review all Justice Department legal opinions on the matter.
I don’t recall Republicans defending the “Good Germans” who only “followed orders” while working in concentration camps.
Eideard said, “I don’t recall Republicans defending the “Good Germans” who only “followed orders” while working in concentration camps.”
I know. However, I wouldn’t be concerned if I were facing Holden. He “turns the other cheek” if you flash some cash his direction. Perfect M.O. for an AG. ROFL
Republicans need to move this process along as we have much to do in this country.
It is best this sore topic be left in the domain of any war crime trials at the Hague. I am sure President Obama will not allow Cheney, Bush and others to be extradited to foreign nations.
Let’s get our work done now.
“Republicans on Wednesday delayed a confirmation vote on attorney general nominee Eric Holder, some demanding assurances he would not prosecute U.S. agents for torture if they thought their methods were in compliance with the law…”
Isn’t it up to courts to determine if agents’ acts could be found to fit the definition of “torture”, and whether these acts were or were not in compliance with the law, and not the agents themselves?
Leaving this decision up to the agents would be like letting me be the one to decide if my robbing banks were legal or not.
Yes, we wouldn’t want the Republicans to have to comply with the law or common decency. That wouldn’t be fair.
#3, right, but courts don’t haul people in to be tried all by themselves; they have to be charged with a crime by somebody, i.e. the AG.
HEY !!!
Aren’t the Republicans the party that kept telling us they were in favor of law and order. Aren’t they the ones that constantly tell us “Don’t do the crime if you can’t do the time”?
If they didn’t break the law or were reasonably assured that what they did was legal then they have a defense. Sort of like those 200 people prosecuted under the Patriot Act for being on an airplane with a cranky stewardess.
[Removed by request of commenter. – ed.]
All the CIA agents need to do is consult the Dems thick book, vetted through the Supreme Court, listing what is and what isn’t considered torture.
Personally I find having a bullet go through your guts on a battlefield to be torture, but that’s just me.
RBG
[Removed by request of commenter. – ed.]
Democrats could have avoided this by nominating one of many better qualified people who are not terrorist supporters (I interpret green-lighting pardon of any legally proven terrorist as a support for terrorists, which should be obvious and common sense). But, each side has crooks of their choice and supports them. So much for Change.
Comparing the alleged torture that occurred at Gitmo to the systematic murder that occurred in Nazi death camps is precisely the sort of scatterbrained thinking that renders useless any discussion with the folks who make such comparisons.
# 2 Dallas said, “Republicans need to move this process along as we have much to do in this country. ”
Yes, it does need to get going. However, when you nominate a tax cheat (or someone too stupid to understand basic tax codes)for Treas Sec & someone for AG who does pay to play pardons, expect questions…
Don’t be so partisan that you are blind. We had enough bad cabinet choices from Bush. Let’s not repeat history in this area…
Paddy-0,
you bypassed again…Provide proof for your claims or don’t make claims at all
Cow-Paddy, Ignorant Shit Talking Sociopath, Retired Mall Rent-A-Cop, Pretend Constitutional Scholar, Fake California Labor Law Expert, Pseudo Military Historian, and Real Leading Troll Extraordinare,
However, when you nominate a tax cheat (or someone too stupid to understand basic tax codes)for Treas Sec & someone for AG who does pay to play pardons, expect questions…
Then vote against them on those principles.
Maybe you could enlighten us to these “pay to play pardons”. Are you claiming an illegality?
We had enough bad cabinet choices from Bush. Let’s not repeat history in this area…
WHOA !!! The Cow-Paddy is saying something nasty about Bush. How convenient, now that he is finally gone.
I won’t worry about bad cabinet choices though, it looks like Obama has found quite a few well qualified people.
# 13 Mr. Fusion said, “WHOA !!! The Cow-Paddy is saying something nasty about Bush. ”
You obviously don’t read enough of my posts if this one excites you..
#12 Paddy-O.. Agree in general that we should strive to hire those with pristine backgrounds and capabilities to satisfy everyone.
Let’s break the effort down to smaller chunks. This particular post is about Holder and the GOP on the inevitable -just to extract some under the table assurances he will not prosecute criminals.
The only reason this delay is ‘public’, is to assure the right wing nuts that the GOP is not totally emasculated. Fair enough.
We can ‘discuss’ the other cabinet objections as they come along.
# 15 Dallas said, “Agree in general that we should strive to hire those with pristine backgrounds and capabilities to satisfy everyone.”
I’m not looking for pristine. Just keep out the ones that have been proven to be corrupt and/or incredibly stupid. The two I mentioned fit one of those two categories.
Angry liberals continuing to whine dosen’t sound like the change that was sold during the election.
Another epic fail by the left.
#17 Glad to see James Hill has wireless internet to kill time while waiting to spray perfume on the next Macy’s customer.
James, no shame in being a perfume sniper. Follow your heart.
Find evidence on them, find them, prosecute them, put them in prison, all with public trials.
I’d love to see the trials in the world court but fat chance for that.
19,
James is a troll ‘bot, just look at the constant pattern of identical posts. No imagination.
#18, Ah Yea,
So, in a nutshell, the definition of waterboarding as torture, as far as the US is concerned, resides with the US Attorney General.
Wrong. The definition does not belong to a lawyer or even the Attorney General. The definition is done by the courts.
Any lawyer can give you legal advice, that advice does not have the force of law. A court’s opinion does. While an Attorney General’s opinion might have more weight, it is generally not considered law.
Courts generally have held that if a reasonable interpretation of the law was obtained, even if incorrect, that may mitigate any crime. BUT, an obviously false interpretation is not a defense. In your claim, torture has been stretched way beyond what any reasonable court would agree is acceptable.
Just as much as you wild-eyed liberals want to go after them, they legally untouchable.
Wrong again. Unless there is a Statute of Limitations, they may be charged. Finding a jury that will convict might be a different story.
# 22 Mr. Fusion said, “Wrong. The definition does not belong to a lawyer or even the Attorney General. The definition is done by the courts. ”
Wrong. The definition is done by statute, interpretation is done by the courts. If a statute says it is X & Y, a judge can’t instruct a jury to add “Z”.
I don’t know the statute that would be used though.
#17, F*ckup,
Angry liberals continuing to whine dosen’t sound like the change that was sold during the election.
Ya, isn’t great !!!!!
A fresh face to clean up the mess left by all the right wing nut shit from the previous eight years.
It really is too bad that asswipes like you have no appreciation for the great change that has swept the nation.
Another epic fail by the left.
I really have to disagree with you. We won. Look in your mirror. That is the face of a loser. An effen loser. Someone who wants us to explain what a “protein cell” is but doesn’t even know himself.
You’re a loser Hill. An effen loser. Oh ya, and your mommy wants you to quit pissing in the basement sink.
#22, Fusion.
As usual, you missed again.
Also, as usual, you didn’t read the links, because if you did you would find that waterboarding was legal under Bush. Therefore there is NO “statute of limitations” because no law had been broken!
Get it? No? Ok, let’s dumb this down, again.
Attorney General says waterboarding is not torture and is legal.
The President signs an Executive Order explicitly omitting waterboarding as torture.
Underlings therefore get the green light from the Attorney General and the President to waterboard.
No crime committed, no prosecution.
Oh, I can tell from you’re wild-eyed stare that you still refuse to understand.
#25, Ah Yea,
The Congress makes the law. The Executive carries out the law. The Executive does NOT make law. If they want to tell us that waterboarding is not torture then they can say that all week and it won’t change a thing. It is the courts that defines the law. If a court ruled tomorrow that waterboarding is torture then it is torture.
Torture is illegal for everyone. That includes some hillbillys torturing their feeble minded neighbor, a cop trying to get a confession, a parent punishing their kid too strongly, and trying to drown someone. There is no authority or “color of law” that allows anyone in the United States to break the law.
Fuck Ashcroft. It is not his decision to change the law to suit the sadistic minds in the White House.
# 26 Mr. Fusion said, “If a court ruled tomorrow that waterboarding is torture then it is torture.”
But, you can’t prosecute for something done yesterday that was made illegal today…
#25–Ah Yea==I read your links. You make a “basic” error. Congress makes the law and the COURTS tell us what they mean. Attorney Generals “advise” what the law means. The COURTS are not bound by Att Gen Opinions.
Your position would have us believe that a corrupt Administration just has to issue opinions to do what they will. Such is not the case.
Fusion has you here. Makes me wonder if your position/understanding of gun laws is similarly flawed.
#27, Cow-Paddy, Ignorant Shit Talking Sociopath, Retired Mall Rent-A-Cop, Pretend Constitutional Scholar, Fake California Labor Law Expert, Pseudo Military Historian, Phony Climate Scientist, and Real Leading Troll Extraordinare,
Torture has been a crime for many years. Nazis were prosecuted for it during the Nuremberg trials. Americans have been prosecuted for it. It is taught in Officer Candidate Schools that it is illegal. It is taught in every law school that it is illegal. Every police officer is taught it is illegal. Everyone and their dog knows it is illegal.
So what is your problem?
#27–Paddy==the Courts ruling would be based on prior existing law that would outlaw torture from BEFORE, DURING, AND AFTER, whatever subsequent advisory opinion, executive order or whatever was supposedly followed.
Another failed attempt by Fusion to educate the already convinced.
Why do gun nuts support torture?