Bring it On

There is an article in today's New York Times about the way Michael Mukasey has been hedging on waterboarding. The difficulty, according to many experts is, as "Jack L. Goldsmith, who served in the Justice Department in 2003 and 2004, wrote in his recent memoir, The Terror Presidency, that the possibility of future prosecution for aggressive actions against terrorism was a constant worry inside the Bush administration." Another expert points out that future prosecutors "...would ask not just who carried it out, but who specifically approved it. Theoretically, it could go all the way up to the president of the United States; that's why he'll never say it's torture."

I have to say that I am both glad and amazed that the Bush administration is with it enough to worry. That is a good sign. And they should worry, because they should be indicted, at least. I hope that they are, and that, indeed, it does "go all the way up to the president". One of the Attorney General's jobs should be making sure not only that the laws are enforced, but also that the laws are actual laws--not opinions by John Yoo or David Addington or some other
administration apologist. There is an exact definition of what a law is in this country, and it is not the same as a partisan legal opinion.

One of the enraging things about the Bush administration is the way that they have consistently written their own rules, as if governing the nation is like playing a game of stealing the flag, where the stronger team, when it finds itself losing, simply changes the score or the rules until they either technically "win" or wear out the other side (and in fact, George W. Bush, according to Gail Sheehy, was well known among his friends for changing the rules of a game until he could engineer a win -- and isn't that how they won in 2000?). To do such things is not "courage" or "resolve", it is tyranny.

Mukasey and other Bush administration officials clearly believe that they are going to put over the idea that they "might have gone too far", but that their "intentions were good" and they "just wanted to protect the country". In such a way, they plan to avoid paying the price for their choices and decisions. The law deals with this sort of defense. Someone whose car hits another person in a crosswalk might have been too frightened to stick around or might not have even
realized he had hit someone, but the law still prosecutes these crimes, because a responsible citizen is expected to conform to the laws no matter what his emotional state. Same with Cheney and Bush. You or I may suspect that they were indifferent to the idea of torture in their names, or possibly relished it, but we will never know that. We do, however, know that they explicitly and knowingly allowed torture. The law has no meaning if they don't have to pay for these crimes.

The number of times the Bush administration has skirted or broken or changed the laws to suit themselves is enormous and outrageous. We cannot hope to correct what they have done to our country without addressing their lawlessness. If this means retroactive prosecution, I say bring it on. The fact that they are worried means they know that they should have known better--in fact, they did know better. All of them.

Comments

[RobertPaul]

To paraphrase FDR:

"The only thing we have to fear" is this administration!

I'm no fan of any terror organization, but the one thing about them is you pretty much know where their coming from.

With BushCo, you never know weather you will be spied on, abducted, thrown in jail, lied about, placed on no fly lists, etc. etc.

Who are the REAL terrorist in this country. The CIA? DHS? GWB?

We should finally realize who the real enemy is.

[RobinLandseadel]

I just called the offices of Barbara Boxer and Diane Feinstein. I said it was a war crimes issue. If Mukasey can't answer up or down on waterboarding, then he is unacceptable.

I offer the suggestion that you do the same.

[ObamaEdwards]

I couldn't agree more. I'm with you, Ms. Smiley, and I think millions of people are.

The most morally corrupting action taken by a president prior to G. W. Bush was Ford's pardoning of Nixon. This country needed to heal, yes, but that healing required PROSECUTION. It would have shown the world that we mean what we say, and America is a place where every person must obey the same laws--even Paris Hilton, even Dick Cheney. Ford's action at the command of the GOP tainted all of us and made us cynical. That must not happen again.

You are so right.

Bring it.

[HarperKnight]

Here's an idea.

Next time anyone claims that waterboarding isn't torture they should be asked one simple question:

If waterboarding isn't torture, are you personally willing to experience the procedure?

[Sundialsvc4]

Well, get these words to any one of five hundred-odd people in a certain House:

"Articles of Impeachmen­t."

"Any Civil Officer" can be Impeached, and there is a very, very long dirty-laundry-list.

The world is watching us. And as well they should.

So are millions and Millions and MILLIONS and M*I*L*L*I*O*N*S of ...

AMERICANS.

[Picasso]

bloggers--

Check Carol Dweck's book Mindset: The new psychology of success,2006. Google: Amazon or her name to get the flavor of her thinking.

Her description of the fixed mindset person describes the Bush administration and his fellow travelers to a "T." Never try something new or different, it might show up your inadequacy. Never admit you were wrong or inadequate. etc.

In contrast a growth mindset seeks challenges and new ways of overcoming what isn't working.
We had better investigate the mindset preference of any presidential candidates.

Wake up America, there are 300,000,000 of us citizens and how many in the beltway calling the
shots so immorally?

They are our employees!!! Get with the voters'
program,resign or get voted out of office.

Picasso

[lovethesinner]

I completely agree with your post.

If congress confirms his nomination, they will effectively be re-instating Gonzales, because, as you point out very eleoquently, the whole purpose of Mulkasey's refusal to define waterboarding as torture is to protect...

a bunch of WAR CRIMINALS.
(Which, after all, is what Gonzales was doing.)

Either we are a nation of laws, or we aren't.

Neither Bush, nor congress gets to have it both ways.

And I'm really tired of Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi saying, "we tried."

The only "trying" left for congress is done in court of law.

[splamco]

Well said. We will get nothing constructive done in this country until we deal with the blatant criminal behavior of Bush/Cheney. Fifteen months is plenty of time to commit even more crimes.

[JD-28]

Ms. Smiley,
Does your phrase, "a responsible citizen is expected to conform to the laws no matter what his emotional state", extend to people who come into the country illegally? After all, these people, who supposedly want to be citizens, don't act responsibly and do not conform to the laws when called upon to account for their illegal actions. Off topic? You bet. Honest question? Yes.

[NickOhio]

No administration is ever above any law of the US. They all swore to uphold the laws of the US when they took office. If they have not done so, then they have given grounds for impeachment. We cannot be a country where a few are outside of the law. Bush has a cone of silence in-place in his administration and claims to have certain Executive Privileges that are above the law. This is wrong and is only allowing that office to be nothing more than that of a dictator.

By deflecting the charges to Pelosi one does not remove one bit of the blame Bush has for his actions. He has trashed our laws and trampled upon the Constitution with his brand of control. For Pelosi to round up the support necessary to issue articles of impeachment against Cheney & Bush, would require considerable bi-partisan support to not look like a railroading event by one party. Personally, I don't believe impeachment is the answer... indictment after they leave office is, though. No one should be pardoned or given immunity from prosecution. If we would have stood up as a country to the antics of Reagan-Bush with the Iran-Contra affair, Lawrence Walsh (a Republican, no less) would have had his wish of taking that case to its ultimate end and we may not be in the mess we now live each and every day.

[NickOhio]

It cannot be disputed (with any accuracy, logic or morality) that if Mukasy were to admit that "waterboarding" is illegal, that if he were then made AG, that he would then have to prosecute those who issued the orders and those who were complicit in the torture. Thus, Bush standing by Mukasy is not unusual.

If Mukasy is not approved, then we will just have to sit tight and wait for the next administration to go after those who were in charge of the orders for issuing torture. My only fear is that somehow these people will be pardoned by Bush or given immunity from prosecution just before he leaves office. That would not be a bad thing, since the responsibility would then fall on his shoulders and he'd be the one left holding the bag, so to speak.

I don't know how anyone considering themselves to be a Christian can agree to something as horrid and immoral as torture and/or "waterboarding". It is against all international law and is disgusting to just about everyone in the world.

If we don't condemn torture, then we are allowing it occur to our own troops or general citizens should any be captured. We need to take a stand on the high moral ground on this issue and not let those who were responsible for the use of "waterboarding" and other means of torture, to get away with their crimes against our laws as well as on humanitarian principals.

It doesn't matter if we are at war or not. The use of torture is abhorant to our religious and moral views. The people that allowed it to occur should be prosecuted.

[LiberalLo]

george bush POSSIBLY relished torture? You give him too much credit for humanity. This guy is an out and out sociopath. One of the first signs of the sociopath is abusing animals. This is a guy, who, as a child, blew up helpless frogs sticking firecrackers in their cloacas. He more than RELISHES torture, he lives by it.

[Sandy23]

Thank you Jane Smiley. You said what I have been thinking for months, and might I add, in a much clearer manner. Now all we need to do is to get the Democrats (my life long party of choice) to take some action.

Recently I have gotten calls from the Democratic Nationl Committee and DCCC to donate, which I have done in the past, but I can't now. I usually tell the poor soul on the phone that until the Dems find their backbone I won't be contributing. They tell me they have been hearing that alot.

Who is going to step up and save the Constitution and laws. Bin Laden doesn't have to make another move. Bush, Cheney and their cronies are doing what Bin Laden couldn't do, destroying our country from within.

[gardengoddess]

Absolutely agree! The best thing that could happen for America - and the world for that matter - would be to see Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice (at least) marched out of their offices in handcuffs and stuffed into a paddy wagon. The message would be so loud, so clear, that no one could miss it: The United States of America IS NOT a rogue nation, is not an agressor, but IS a nation of laws, and NO ONE is above those laws.

[mpgarr]

Things have always gone that way for Bush, Cheney and the whole lot of these cretins---they had family money and connections to get them out of jams, from having to go serve in Vietnam or whatever--and it has been that way in their adult lives----and what else is becoming President and Vice President good for but to turn it towards your advantage----they can rest easy because they have little chance they will ever really have to answer for their actions----