Making A Case For Bushco Prosecution

[BigRob]

But first I guess, they technically need to impeach Bush and Cheney...then they can go after them as the common criminals they appear to be.

As to complying with the World Court, it seems that there is a law morally compelling Congress to cooperate with regards to the Bushco trials:

No lawyer is going to take that passage to mean the United States cedes sovereignty to a World Court.

It says they have the power to, not that they must. But in order to protect the US citizenry en masse, from backlash of atrocities committed unjustly to other nations by the harbored-fugitives Bushco, Congress is really mandated to prosecute them, because Congress is in charge of maintaining protective services for the citizenry of the US.

The Executive is charged with the defense of the nation according to interpretations. The Executive will simply argue that the role as Commander in Chief supercedes the role of Congress.

Further, in terms of the Constitution, Congress has no power to "prosecute" anyone. That is the Judiciary's job.

Laws like these are somewhat broad and open to interpretation. It could be interpreted that Congress might choose to repel invasions (could be interpreted as "random acts of terrorism against the citizenry" ) by holding it's nefarious officers or former officers of state to prosecution for acts deemed to agitate compelling and well-founded worldwide hostilities towards the citizenry. So if the Hague finds Bushco blatantly guilty of acts of unforgivable and illegal atrocities within the World Court, Congress may then act on behalf of securing the safety of its citizenry from predictable backlashes by cooperating with extradition and sentencing of the criminal element responsible.

In fact, I would think it would be mandated?

No. The Hague can say whatever it wants, Congress will ignore it. Further, under US law, acts of Congress or Executive Orders supercede international law. Therefore, you can say Bush broke some international law, but if he did, it was done with an Executive Order or an act of Congress which automatically nullifies any international law. Therefore, the Hague has no case.

Therefore, you can only perhaps try him under domestic law if you can come up with a case. Since the OLC and Congress have pretty much backed up every action that was taken, there is no case to be had.

 

[BigRob]

In other words, if Congress has ample reason to expect, as a result of their actions, or in this case inactions, that US citizenry might come to harm as a direct result of these actions (or inactions) then wouldn't Congress be held culpable as to the harm that came to those citizens?

Might we not expect acts of terrorism to rise if we harbor criminals found so in the World Court? Might we also expect acts of terrorism to subside should we act as good world citizens and not protect nefarious individuals who have shown potential and in fact have caused great harm to a number of nations?

Do you honestly believe Bin Laden gives a damn if Bush is put on trial or not?

 

[Sihouette]

Which Bin Laden? Salem, Bush's business pal? Osama, his brother? Maybe the parents?? The various Bin Laden relatives who were whisked away at taxpayer's expense, on order of the Bush administration before the dust settled at 9-11?

The fact remains that Congress is charged with the safety of the American citizenry and the ability to ensure that. They also are the part of checks and balances that will examine with a microscope whether or not Bushco acted in good faith or not when it came to what they reported to Congress that led to the declaration of war.

The Congress must consider all things when weighing this situation. Paramount of which in these troubled times (the justification of the Executive Branch's pushing the limits of its authority- remember? ) is if the citizenry will be adversely affected when the World Court finds them guilty and their status becomes fugitive. Adding "harboring fugitives" to americans' already poor standing worldwide, in today's volitile times, most likely will provoke more assaults on americans. Prosecuting Bushco would most likely result in less, having shown the world that we are even players when it comes to handling terrorists of all nationalities and countries, including our own terrorists.

To not prosecute them will be bad, bad, bad for national security. It is at Congress's discretion whether or not they will cooperate with World Courts. Let's hope they choose wisely.

 

[BigRob]

Which Bin Laden? Salem, Bush's business pal? Osama, his brother? Maybe the parents?? The various Bin Laden relatives who were whisked away at taxpayer's expense, on order of the Bush administration before the dust settled at 9-11?

The fact remains that Congress is charged with the safety of the American citizenry and the ability to ensure that. They also are the part of checks and balances that will examine with a microscope whether or not Bushco acted in good faith or not when it came to what they reported to Congress that led to the declaration of war.

The Congress must consider all things when weighing this situation. Paramount of which in these troubled times (the justification of the Executive Branch's pushing the limits of its authority- remember? ) is if the citizenry will be adversely affected when the World Court finds them guilty and their status becomes fugitive. Adding "harboring fugitives" to americans' already poor standing worldwide, in today's volitile times, most likely will provoke more assaults on americans. Prosecuting Bushco would most likely result in less, having shown the world that we are even players when it comes to handling terrorists of all nationalities and countries, including our own terrorists.

To not prosecute them will be bad, bad, bad for national security. It is at Congress's discretion whether or not they will cooperate with World Courts. Let's hope they choose wisely.

If the World Court tries this case and then is simply blown off (and they will be) it will destroy the legitimacy of the UN even more. The world court will not want to do that.

Aside from that, their status will not change to "fugitive" as you claim. That is simply ridiculous. The World Court has no authority.

There is no case to be made in any court that has any legitimacy for anything you are saying. You can continue to dream about it if you like, but it is not going to happen.

 

[Sihouette]

If the World Court tries this case and then is simply blown off (and they will be) it will destroy the legitimacy of the UN even more. The world court will not want to do that.

No, I don't think so. Not anymore than any other court would be "destroyed" when it simply failed to convict a criminal. There is plenty of evidence to compell a case and them not trying it would be worse for their already bad reputation of caving under pressure.

In fact, to argue the polar opposite, I think they'd gain quite a bit of "punch" back to their authority if they tried Bushco and won. The gamble is clearly on their side. If they lose, then they're back to the same old reputation they already had. Should they convict, and there's evidence in spades to get that done, they'll regain some real potency in the eyes of the world...and respect too.

Bushco, if convicted, could not travel abroad except in countries not linked to Interpol. If caught by Interpol, they could be detained or even imprisoned abroad.

You are making a case for men who are up to their eyebrows in murderous and treasonous culpability to slide right off the hook...not even addressing nor caring how this would affect American citizens already ducking the brunt of world scorn..and needing that same world to lend us credit for a mess that Bushco's astronomically expensive illegal war has put us directly in.. Not very patriotic of you pal. The Country doesn't exist for its President. The President exists for country.

And I'll bet you're one of the ones who stood in the front of the line ready to stone Clinton for the Lewinsky affair...oh, the irony...

 

[BigRob]

No, I don't think so. Not anymore than any other court would be "destroyed" when it simply failed to convict a criminal. There is plenty of evidence to compell a case and them not trying it would be worse for their already bad reputation of caving under pressure.

Your opinion is that Bush is a criminal, the law says he is not. The UN showing the world that it has no authority will not enhance the power of the court.

In fact, to argue the polar opposite, I think they'd gain quite a bit of "punch" back to their authority if they tried Bushco and won. The gamble is clearly on their side. If they lose, then they're back to the same old reputation they already had. Should they convict, and there's evidence in spades to get that done, they'll regain some real potency in the eyes of the world...and respect too.

They cannot win. They could "try and convict" on some bogus charge and then be ignored by the United States. That is not a win.

Bushco, if convicted, could not travel abroad except in countries not linked to Interpol. If caught by Interpol, they could be detained or even imprisoned abroad.

Doubtful. No sitting President is going to stand by if a former President is detained in another country for a conviction (that you wont get) in a court that we do not recognize. No other country would honor it either. The precedence that this establishes is not good for anyone.

You are making a case for men who are up to their eyebrows in murderous and treasonous culpability to slide right off the hook...not even addressing nor caring how this would affect American citizens already ducking the brunt of world scorn..and needing that same world to lend us credit for a mess that Bushco's astronomically expensive illegal war has put us directly in.. Not very patriotic of you pal. The Country doesn't exist for its President. The President exists for country.

Perhaps you can make any legal case for a law that was broken. So far you have talked around vague interpretations of the constitution and said we have a moral obligation to convict. That means nothing.

The wars we are fighting are not the cause of our financial problems. If you think they are, that is your problem.

Now you accuse me of not being patriotic because I pointed out to you that you have no case? Pretty lame on your part there.

And I'll bet you're one of the ones who stood in the front of the line ready to stone Clinton for the Lewinsky affair...oh, the irony...

You are entitled to think whatever you want, however laughable your opinions are.

I stood in front of no line to stone Clinton.... but whatever fits into your preconceived notions of lunacy you are welcome to imagine.

 

[Sihouette]

OK, maybe you were one of the few GOP who weren't into impeaching Clinton for an affair.

That sets me to wondering how the GOP would handle the Clintons if they lied in order to justify war, tortured people and ruined our economy as a result of their lies.

I'm sure they'd all be lining up to defend old Bill from the World Court and ready to harbor him here if found guilty...naturally they would never dream of trying him here at home!


Perhaps "GOP" could also stand for Getting Out of Prosecution?

No, I think we should handle Bushco exactly as if the Clintons did what they did: throw the book at them.

 

[BigRob]

OK, maybe you were one of the few GOP who weren't into impeaching Clinton for an affair.

That sets me to wondering how the GOP would handle the Clintons if they lied in order to justify war, tortured people and ruined our economy as a result of their lies.

I'm sure they'd all be lining up to defend old Bill from the World Court and ready to harbor him here if found guilty...naturally they would never dream of trying him here at home!


Perhaps "GOP" could also stand for Getting Out of Prosecution?

No, I think we should handle Bushco exactly as if the Clintons did what they did: throw the book at them.

You will be hard pressed to find a conservative that would be willing to send anyone to the World Court, even if it was Bill Clinton, Obama, whoever.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Your opinion is that Bush is a criminal, the law says he is not.

Only BUSHCO's Dept. Of Justice would make such a claim. ​

 

[BigRob]

Only BUSHCO's Dept. Of Justice would make such a claim. ​

Perhaps you would like to make the legal case then?

 

[Sihouette]

Why bother. Members of Congress and key officials are already doing just that and have been for years now. Likely they're not going to walk into the hearings unprepared.

And, yes the GOP would shred and disembowel Clinton AT HOME if he'd done even a fraction of the things Bushco has done to our country.

If you're trying to get me to believe they wouldn't, you've REALLY got a case to make...


And, good luck with that!

In the interest of the Lewinsky setup/slam dunk and fairness, we simply MUST prosecute Bushco. Our hands are tied. We are a country founded on equality..

 

[BigRob]

Why bother. Members of Congress and key officials are already doing just that and have been for years now. Likely they're not going to walk into the hearings unprepared.

And, yes the GOP would shred and disembowel Clinton AT HOME if he'd done even a fraction of the things Bushco has done to our country.

If you're trying to get me to believe they wouldn't, you've REALLY got a case to make...


And, good luck with that!

In the interest of the Lewinsky setup/slam dunk and fairness, we simply MUST prosecute Bushco. Our hands are tied. We are a country founded on equality..

So now you simply want to try to Bush to enact revenge on the GOP attacks on Clinton?

 

[Sihouette]

Yes and no. First and foremost I want them prosecuted for american safety...showing the world we can keep our own house in order before we demand that they do at gunpoint...

Second yes, I want equality. To demonstrate that no criminal act by anyone will go unpunished. Again, going with the theme of keeping our own house in order and equal before we demand that of other nations..

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Perhaps you would like to make the legal case then?

It's BEEN made....over-and-over!!!!!​

 

[Mr. Shaman]

So now you simply want to try to Bush to enact revenge on the GOP attacks on Clinton?

....You mean, like....how "conservatives" have been trying to get SOME Dem....ANY Dem....to exact revenge for NIXON??!!!

Why don't you "conservatives" grow-the-Hell up? ​