Friday, January 23, 2009

John Conyers: Witch Hunter

Here comes the "witch hunt."

Money Q:

"Mr. (John) Conyers, the powerful chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, has spent years gearing up for a Bush administration witch hunt. Backed by a mob of congressional liberals, outside groups, and the New York Times, he's counting on this new president to play along with payback. Consider it the first test of Mr. Obama's promise of a new civility."

Just what the country needs: Soviet-style truth commissions.

In a new Pew survey, the public ranks concerns about "terrorism" third, behind jobs and the economy. (Global warming, by the way comes in last on the list.)

The surveyers apparently didn't think to include "Investigating the previous administration for alleged harsh interrogations of terrorists."

Wonder why.

10 Comments:

Blogger David Diano said...

What this country needs is some accountability for war crimes and unconstitutional practices of Bush administration.
The characterization as "Soviet-style" is the WSJ's editorial. However, Bush did engage in Facist-style detention, interrogation and torture. Torture methods were directed adapted from illegal methods used by our enemies.

The American people deserve to know the extent of illegal and immoral actions committed and authorized by the Bush administration (whether or not convictions occur). Hopefully, these revelations will be used to prevent similar abuses in the future by setting clear limits on executive authority and reestablishing the US as a fighter against war crimes rather than a participant.

Shows how you prioritize justice when you worry more about a BJ in the Oval office than secret prisons.

January 23, 2009 at 11:43 AM 
Blogger Spencerblog said...

The majority of the American people didn't approve of the impeachment of Bill Clinton either.

BTW, it was not for the sex in the oval office but his lying to a federal judge in a federal civil rights action... for which he lost his law licence.

But by all means, bring on the witch hunts.

And if Obama tries to stand in the way of them, or continues to voice his opinion that House Democrats shouldn't proceed with them, he should be impeached for participating in the cover-up.

January 23, 2009 at 11:53 AM 
Blogger David Diano said...

"The majority of the American people didn't approve of the impeachment of Bill Clinton either."
I wasn't talking about the majority of Americans, but rather the majority of Republican and neocon fools that beat there chests about the "rule of law" and then turn a blind eye to real abuses.

I suspect that not only will Obama allow the House to pursue this, but he won't put up any real resistance as Obama wants these crimes to come out so he can create laws to prevent their repeat.

What Obama won't do is be the one to lead the charge on the issue. He doesn't have to. Congress is an equal branch of government and its job is to investigate such matters.

One the extend of the crimes and abuse becomes public (Bush declared executive privileges that Obama will nullify) the public will clamor for justice and Obama can follow the will of the people.

Obama wants these crimes brought to light. The only thing he doesn't want is for it to become a circus, and that's the only area where Obama will try to slow down Congress.

January 23, 2009 at 12:04 PM 
Blogger Spencerblog said...

... rather the majority of Republican and neocon fools that beat there chests about the "rule of law" and then turn a blind eye to real abuses.

Conyers, Levin, Diano = partisan liberal fools who beat their chests about the rule of law and turn a blind eye to what the public and the country want the government to focus on; the economy, jobs, combating terrorism, crime, etc.

January 23, 2009 at 12:10 PM 
Blogger David Diano said...

The economy, jobs, etc. are long-term projects spanning years. However, as I pointed out, once the American people realize the extent of Bush's abuses, it will become more important to them to know what really happened.
You can't accept that your heroes are war criminals and you supported policies that are war crimes. Grow up and face it like an adult.

January 23, 2009 at 12:16 PM 
Blogger Spencerblog said...

Interesting the Diano refers to Gitmo detainees as "accused" terrorists but to Bush Administraiton officials and Americna military personnel as flat out "war criminals."

No wonder Diano won't criticize accused slanderer Murtha, they are both members of the hard anti-war left-wing of the Democratic party.

January 23, 2009 at 12:32 PM 
Blogger David Diano said...

Spencer-
We know that the Bush Administration approved tortures like waterboarding. They even bragged about it.

These were not only illegal but actual war crimes that the US has prosecuted in the past. So, I can say, without fear of contradiction, that they are indeed war criminals, by their own admissions.

Funny how you want to change the subject by trying to equate slander with admitted war crimes.

I'll just mark you down as anti-slander and pro-war-crime.

January 23, 2009 at 12:54 PM 
Anonymous e said...

Bush is gone. Get over it! He will not be charged for decisions made under the color of his office just because partisan politics didn't agree with him. Your idea of "war crimes" and the reality of what war crimes really are, couldn't be further from each other.

I know you need a "new cause" or something to keep you busy for the next couple of years until the next Republican presidential candidates start to emerge, but this is never going to happen. Bush is gone, you need a new whipping boy.

January 24, 2009 at 8:30 AM 
Blogger Pro Christ Pro Gun said...

Diano:

Hugging terrorists doesn't work, nor does therapy. Where has waterbaording ever been prosecuted as a war crime? At Nuremburg, there were many prosecutions for real "war crimes" and I still have in my possession what I think is the original memorandum for commutation of sentences for the war crimes committed. Nowhere in the document does it discuss waterbaording, and I have yet to see any prosecution of waterboarding as an atrocity or a war crime. Since you are so much smarter than everyone else on this earth, including Gil, show me where any government has prosecuted waterboarding as a war crime or a crime against humanity.

C. Scott Shields, Esquire
www.cscottshields.com

January 24, 2009 at 9:41 AM 
Blogger Pro Christ Pro Gun said...

Diano:

One other thing, I know that you consider wire tapping to be unconstitutional, and that FISA forbids wiretapping. I have researched this issue and I have done many interviews and television programs on this issue so I might know a little bit of what your vast knowledge base already knows. My question to you is this: How do you reconcile FISA with CALEA? In the event that you dont know what CALEA is, it was passed in 1994 when the democrats controlled Congress and the White House. I eagerly await your knowledge dump.

C. Scott Shields, Esquire
www.cscottshields.com

January 24, 2009 at 9:46 AM 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home