John McCain hints to Sean Hannity that Bush sanctioned torture with his approval of waterboarding
By John Amato Friday May 01, 2009 5:00pm
Sean Hannity is so upset that Barack Obama believes waterboarding is torture. He's dumbfounded that one of the great intellects of the conservative movement, George Bush committed war crimes by breaking the Geneva Conventions:
McCain: I believe torture is unacceptable and a violation of the Geneva Conventions. I believe however that these memos were not necessary to be released. We cannot criminalize people giving bad legal advice which is what some in the Congress want to do and it's time to move on.
Hannity: Do you think that what President Obama said the other night, what I believe the waterboarding that was used was torture, that President Bush was sanctioning torture?
McCain: I believe it was wrong to waterboard. I think it was wrong to do it because it's in violation with the Geneva Conventions, but I think we've got to move forward. We must move forward.
Giving advice that allows our country to torture is not criminalizing politics, but enforcing laws and treaties we faithfully signed on to. "Just turning the page" is Beltway talk for "getting a free pass."
I'm not sure why Hannity even bothered bringing this up with McCain. I guess he figured that if he brought it up in the context that Bush sanctioned torture, he would get McCain to change his tune. I know math isn't one of Hannity's strong suits so I'll give him a little math equation. If 1+1=2, then if waterboarding=torture and Bush approved of it, then:
Bush+waterboarding=the sanctioning of torture.
Login or Register to post comments.
Bill Moyers is doing a piece on Bush torture now on PBS, it just started.
hhhhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.....*sniff*....bwaaahaaaaahaaaahahaha....
..."...one of the great intellects of the conservative movement, George Bush..."
oh, bloody damn i think i just wet myself laughing.....
A McCain administration would have "moved on". I think appropriate word is "coverup".
Ya, i can just imagine how president McCain would deal with this. Fortunately for everyone president Obama says the DOJ is back up and running - I think it still needs to be de-loused though - so McCain doesn't need to woory about a thing, except Hannity's endless confusion about how America works.
yes, and mccain probably would have just
slapped bernie madoff's hand for all the
embezzling he did and say that was the past,
let's just move on.....
mccain and the gop would still be trying
clinton for lying about a blowjob and let
the criminals in the gop pass. what a bunch of bastards.
John McCain asummes our enemies 'within' the system are not real enemies? John? I'm surprised and dissapointed in you. What a sell out statement.
George Bush and Dick Cheney are very real enemies of the state, and don't ever forget it John.
Hannity's boy Bush depleted our military, bankrupted the treasury, pushed us into deep recession, alienate our allies, emboldened our enemies....oh, and 911 and Katrina happened on his watch too.
But its Obama's release of those memos about Bush torturing and lying about it that has made America weaker!
Yes, 911 happened on Bush's watch, because the dems delayed seating his cabinet, Clinton and dems had refused the NSA and FBI and other agencies from communicating with one another, all of which toed the hands of agencies trying to decide where attack would come from. many agencies duplicated work and wasted time. The weakened military and spy network was responsible.
katrina was a natural disaster, coupled by the democrats in local and state government who ignored Bush and administration warning to evacuate. Dikes were weakened by local politics moving money from dike system repairs to other areas. The mayor and governor refused Bush's offer of federal help. The mayor refused to send supplies to the dome becasue he did not want peopel staying there. The facts point out that while Bush was not perfect in his response, the dems were worse, and their delays were deadly. Same afterwards. When FEMA offer4ed enough trailers for everyone, Mayor refused to locate them in parks, etc. because he thought it would look like a slum. And before you criticize Bush, did you offer help? Did you offer housing? I did , so I have more right to speak than anyone who did not. I was there and saw the dems react politically instead of saving lives. And what did dems in washington (they were in control last two years) do to stop next disaster. maybe if people did not chose to live 20 feet below sea level, this would have cost nothing but money.
Hi John,
Love your blog. I'd like to very respectfully suggest that before you (or anyone else) post, you double and triple proof read your posts. As a general rule, people use any excuse to dismiss their opponents, I think. Any blog that purports to have intelligent thought but is filled with misspellings and grammatical errors (as this post is) is too easily dismissed as being written by someone who's not very bright. Think, for example, about how infuriating it was to hear GWB say "Nuculer."
If Progressives are going to insist that we're smarter than conservatives, we have to demonstrate it.
Cheers.
perhaps thier should be a test taken to see whos educated enough to express an opinion on here! would that meet your approvel? its the american way! only college grads need apply , god help us the douchbags are takeing over!
I agree that grammar is important! However not to the point of overlooking the essence of communication because of bad grammar. I have never pick apart Bush usage for the word Nucular. I didn't get my hearing aid until I was almost 7 years old, and consequently had a very late start in learning how to talk, and yet I made it to college and excel in math and science. Failed English twice, and yet score high on the Intelligence Quota test from the Psychologist specializing learning disabilities. Being good at grammar doesn't equate with being superior to a opposing party faction, it just mean you are good in using grammar. There are people with all types of learning disability, and yet can demonstrate amazing intelligence in spite of the handicap. I think counting somebody out for their ability to use proper grammar shows severe lack of compassion, that I would have equated with the Bush administration.
.
Hi Liberalicious,
Welcome to C&L. I can tell you're new from your response.
tyree,
LOL...
.
What do she did?
you am so right...grammer am very important
much more important than noting a sitting senator, who was himself tortured, admitting that a former president sanctioned torture...yet should not be punished
i wonder...did mcfeeble say the same about his former torturers?
btw, if i go to washington, meet with the senator, kick him in the balls, can i get out of being prosecuted by saying that we must move forward?
Actually, Uncle Joe, I had to go look up the term on Urban Dictionary.
And that's definitely not me.
Anyway, my point is similar to the point one of my advisors made to me many years ago about my personal appearance. He said that, right or wrong, people will judge you on your appearance. And if your appearance causes them to shut down, then you have no chance of reaching them. (I was studying for the ministry at the time--so you can imagine that this issue would be somewhat important.)
That was my point to Mr. Amato. I'm not suggesting anything about the relationship between grammar and intelligence. I'm just saying that by being sloppy, we give our opponents one more reason not to take us seriously.
One more point: When I read posts (here or anywhere) that are filled with errors, I don't assume that the poster is not intelligent. What I tend to believe, though, is that the poster did not take the time to reread his or her post (otherwise, the errors would have been caught, theoretically). And THAT makes me think that that person may just be typing off the top of his or her head, that that person might not have given the issue much careful thought.
And FINALLY (no, seriously, and then I'm done), I don't think there's anything wrong with striving for (unattainable) perfection in all things. We can always do better, be better. Why not proof read? If you're a writer, the first thing you need to know, of course, is how to use the language. Without proofreading, it's too easy (to bring this all the way back around) to give your opponents the opportunity to dismiss you without ever hearing your ideas.
I'm just sayin'...
I'm sorry I missed all of the subsequently deleted comments. I had no idea my original post was so provacative. Truly, I never meant to offend anyone. I would be toast without spellcheck, myself.
'a violation of the geneva conventions'.......sean get it through your thick head. it was a violation of the geneva conventions. BUSH/cheney/rumsfeld decided to interpret/write the law how they saw fit. the country can handle the truth at least 50% of the country can that is.
John wore his broom out trying to sweep that one under the rug.
Hannity kept dragging it back out.
It seems to be a common affliction with the repug revisionists.
An ugly result of their making is brought to light and they question why you disturb their reality with such unsettling facts.
Please, things like that just aren't brought up in civil discourse.
It's like they're in a continuous '24' episode where the heros can do no wrong and they always have to win.
So what if the rules had to be broken once or twice, there were extenuating circumstances and the free world depended on it.
Keeping themselves in this constant state of delusion prevents them from even considering any responsibility for their actions.
From the suppression of the pictures from Abu Ghraib to the coffins of the KIA being smuggled in to Dover to the sanctioning of torture.
Don't allow yourself to even think about it.
Wouldn't want to sully your beautiful mind.
... they don't even mind making public statements that amount to accusations or even admissions of torture.
going to strap on a pair, put his money where his mouth is and be waterboarded like he said he would? The money would be donated to charity, and that idiot would be forced to recognize how terrible it is.
Hey hannity! While you are being waterboarded just keep repeating the following three things in random order:
"waterboarding doesn't hurt me"
"So?"
"go fu@k yourself"
It will be a piece of cake buddy!
As it would NOT be torture, as he would not be in fear of his life. It might inflict a small amount of pain on his part, but nothing more that what you see on fear factor. No danger. Plus, it's a crime. It'd be like asking Virginia Foxx to be tied up to a pole out in the wilderness and beaten and left for dead or Ann Coulter to be brutally raped for charity. Ick...need the mind bleach there. But you get my point.
Oh ya.. you're right about legalities.
But as to the waterboarding session, i'd suggest a duration of two minutes - that would give Sean a good idea of what is to come after twenty minutes time, the normal duration. they might be able to get a permit for that... not that there's anything right about that!
Suggesting a minimum of 2 minutes....the prisoners we had, did not get to say: Okay, but only for 2 minutes. I could stand it for that long. Sean is a gooper, the point would not get through that bone head of his. All we would get out of it, is maybe getting to have some physical pain inflicted on a gooper. And we would be no better than the those who instituted this.
Hahah. Ya, you're right of coarse!
Two minutes is easily enough to cause permanent damage to Sean's brain and heart.
Once he's tied down, just tell Sean that he's going to be waterboarded until he admits that it is torture and that he feared for his life.
even if he has a safe word, there will be that split second where he would indeed be fearful for his life....ask hitchens, who stated that waterboarding does not simulate drowning...it is drowning
i believe that all the liberal blogs should take up a collection to match ko's challenge
lets offer 500k to the charity of his choice of hannity undergoes waterboarding for a full 5 minutes
he will be dead...and it will be worth the dough
How McCain could possibly be a torture apologist. Talk about selling out your principles.
These jokers who are trying to justify torture are lying to you and/or themselves. They are trying to change the premise. Their argument is that you need to torture somebody to find out where they are going to attack next or what their plans are. The problem is and this is really really important, the problem is YOU DO NOT KNOW IF THE PERSON IS TELLING YOU what he thinks you want to know or what he actually does know. So they water boarded Kahlid Sheik Mohammad 182 times!! How do they know that what he said is true? He probably said at least one thing that was true. Something that Al Qaeda was planning. Let's say he told about 3 plans. WHAT ABOUT THE OTHER 179 lies or untruths or what he thought would get him out of the torture? Did Cheney act on those 179 wild goose chases?
Another thing is that the enemy is using the fact that The United States is torturing as a recruiting tool. There is NO DOUBT about that! That in and of itself is MAKING THE UNITED STATES LESS SAFE!! That is a fact. The Dickster (Cheney) keeps saying that he and Bush kept the country safe for 7 years. No, they made us less safe. There are many many many more Al Qaeda out there now trying and planning and wanting to hurt you and me and the country than there would have been if the United States never tortured anybody. Bush and his cronies hurt this country worse than any Al Qaeda asshole ever has.
Did I say that torture is also morally unacceptable? Well it is. Ask George Washington.
It's seldom mentioned that part of the stated case for going to war against Iraq, that Saddam had trained al Qaeda in chemical weapons, was nonsense elicited under torture.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibn_al-Shaykh_al...
So, there's tangible evidence of what torture has wrought to put up against whatever "24"-inspired fictional scenario the Right might throw out. Every death related to the Iraq invasion is a murder at the feet of George W. Bush and his fellow conspirators, for which they should be prosecuted, just as bin Laden et al should be prosecuted for 9/11.
If I hear one more conservative use the "we cannot criminalize ____________ (insert name of crime here)" meme I'm going to scream. If something is against the law it is NOT criminalizing it to investigate and prosecute the criminals. And not ONE media bobblehead can grow the cajones necessary to point this out to America? Pathetic!
they really are pathetic, and they will furl their brows and ask if we should criminalize torture again tonight. Just watch. Cooper Anderson is the worst offender. He should explain his behavior.
.
I'd like some responsible journalist to ask McCain why he considers perjury to be a more serious crime than authorizing torture. Consider his position on impeachment of Clinton...
McCain's statement on Clinton impeachment
Senate vote on Clinton impeachment
He admits it was illegal and immoral, he just doesn't think his colleagues should be subject to the law.
He knows better than that. He knows nobody thinks their colleges should be subject to the law. He will come around.
very simple...its cover your ass time
if there is a real independent investigation, many heads will roll
could very well bring down the entire government
VIVA LA REVOLUTION!!!!!!!!!!!
LETS TEAR THIS MOTHER UP
BURN BABY BURN
This is such a childish way to escape responsibility. I will not accept this from the "right" or the left. War criminals must be brought to justice. All of them.
Corporate media is a disgrace in this country.
the Right is working very hard on suggesting how people should think/feel about this torture issue. they
keep telling us we can't handle it and we need to move forward as a country. sounds like code for those of you that voted for BUSH and supported BUSH /doctrine are afraid of those that did NOT buy his B.S. you don't want to hear from liberals/dems we told you so. they want to forget the whole BUSH legacy and count their money instead. it's way too early to forget and let BUSH off the hook.
What exactly then is unacceptable? If the Bush admin and memos said that murdering these people is okay (yes I know, some did die), would Insanity and fellow asswipes be outraged or on board with it? Where do you draw the line? And if it's okay, then can other countries do it? Can we do it against our own citizens? Oh, I'm sorry, all of this requires intelligent thinking and discourse. Neither of those matter to the GOP and the goopers.
if I ever get arrested for anything. "We have two wars going on, the economy is trashed, there is so much to focus on, so your honor I plead 'let's move on' to these charges."
People get sent to prison all the time for making mistakes and following bad advice from others, when those things result in breaking the law. I guess it would be kinda inconvenient for McCain to say the actual words "laws don't apply to us like they do to you."
If I pay a hack lawyer to say robbing banks is alright for me,then I shouldn't be held responsible for robbing banks,my lawyer shouldn't be trouble for telling me that it was alright,and the people at the banks should just move forward?
I've always heard IGNORANCE of the law is no defence.
.
I'd like to know where I can hire a Lackey Lawyer to write me a "LEGAL" memo granting me permission to drive intoxicated, even just a little bit. This way, WHEN I'm driving under the influence, ever so slightly, IF I hit and kill someone, at least I'll have a "LEGAL" memo saying that what I did, was "LEGAL" and can not be prosecuted.
Great idea... YES?
.
Did you have a staff doctor onboard to ensure you remained lucid enough to navigate without becoming a danger to yourself or to others? If so, it looks like you won't even be prosecuted. Way to go!
Oh, and the 'accidents', well, they were obviously just accidents then. [HaHa! added for satirically challanged conservative troll minds]
McCain wants to "look forward" and Obama wants to "look forward" and Pelosi wants to "look forward" and Harry Reid is looking senile and forward and Timmy Geithner is looking inward and forward to his next bank robbery-err taxpayer robbery and Hillary is promising Iraq that the US is going nowhere fast as Obama tells them to stand up and look forward. Damn, all this forward thinking is making history just disappear. Poof! Gone.
Can't we all just hope real hard, chant "yes we can" repeatedly and look wayyyyyyy forward???
cant we all just get along ? and do as our president wants? overlook bushes crimes! surely the time wasted on seeing justice done is not worth his time!
johnny boy Johnny boy, join the real world for the remainder of your career. Prosecute bush and cheney and take your party back. Make the next eight years happy years.
'WE' (I guess meaning the American public or press or??) are not trying to Criminalize Torture! Torture is a War Crime - the US is party to the treaties and conventions that say so! There is not any question about this - it is illegal.
There needs to be an investigation - prosecution - conviction - and incarceration of the guilty folks - up to and including all the muckety-mucks in the Cheney/Bush administration.
Bruce Fein and the NY Times reporter who broke the torture story about the Red Cross files had a very informative discussion on Bill Moyers show tonight on PBS. Worth your time to watch/listen - I'm sure it's up on the PBS.org site by now.
Thanks! for the tip.
Its a license to break the law. Want a big screen tv? Can't afford it? Write a legal opinion saying why its ok to steal it. Then steal it! It doesn't matter how wrong the legal opinion is, we can't criminalize bad legal advice! Whoohoo! Joey Bagadonuts' Legal Acadamy, here I come!
Lock their asses up and throw in McLame for being PATHETIC!
... once all the facts are out, we need to move forward and send them all to prison, not jail - PRISON.
authorization paper trail and all the bloviating about it being about criminalizing politics can be countered with this.
It is not criminalizing politics which is occurring, but politicizing criminality.
"We cannot criminalize people giving bad legal advice...."
Yes WE Can!
...and it was sooo much more than "bad legal advice"
Too bad he's such a partisan cheeseball that he doesn't have the guts or integrity to just come out and say it: waterboarding is torture and Bush, by approving waterboarding, approved the use of torture.
Note to Johnny Cheeseball: Next time just say the following -- waterboarding is torture and Bush approved the use of torture in violation of the Geneva Conventions and US law.
There, that wasn't so hard now, was it?
Now, Cheeseboy, if you need to suck up to the crazies in your party (i.e., all but about three or four Republicans), you can add the following:
Of course, torture isn't any more serious than, say, jaywalking, so I don't think anyone who authorized or performed torture should receive more that a $25 fine and even that seems extreme to me. Now that we've held people accountable, can we please move on?
Jeebus, John, you would have been a terrible president. I'll bet Bush is sorry you lost, since a McCain presidency might well have replaced the Bush reign of incompetence as the worst in American history. Instead, George has to wait until the next Right Wing wacko gets in before he has any hope of losing his title: Worst President Ever.
... but it's apparently more serious than perjury, which McCain thought was sufficient reason to impeach Clinton just a decade ago.
But insanity is so mind numbingly boring I couldn't get past 30 seconds of the introduction.
Does he really have people that listen to him?
Are there people that ignorant? People that would waste their time hearing lies and missleading statements of Ill founded loyalty and lies designed to enhance hannities ratings with the boss?
I don't see how fox gets any viewers at all.
What a pack of morons!
> McCain: "We cannot criminalize people giving bad legal advice..."
Perhaps not for "giving bad legal advice," but it is within the law to prosecute lawyers who knowingly participate in criminal activity.
So now there is "bad" legal advice, which is the opposite of "good" legal advice. But it seems that according to McCain, "bad" legal advice is still legal, right?
And per McCain the Geneva Conventions were violated, yet Bush said they don't apply because the detainees were not members of a particular country's military. If Obama violates the Geneva Conventions during his 2 terms in office, you can be sure that the Repubs will be screaming for his impeachment.
Clinton got impeached over a blowjob... we couldn't "move on" from that.
If I broke into McCain's house and trashed it, would he say "let's just move on"?
But, a Republican administration sanctions torture and suddenly they're all about "moving on". What we're seeing is simply an unwillingness to face facts and their own ugliness. They have no excuses, no defense, so the only thing they can do is hope it goes away.
I have to wonder if any of the Republicans get the irony of their repeated us of "move on" in discussing the torture issue? (i.e. MoveOn.org was founded by citizens in an effort to communicate to the Legislative branch that they should "move on" from the petty impeachment assault against Clinton)
all the left-leaning commentators on radio and TV should be pounding on.
The Congress (mostly made up of Repugs at the time) and the American people went ape-shit and moved to impeach because Billy couldn't keep it in his pants and told a little lie to keep from feeling Hillary's wrath. The country was at a standstill for months on end worrying about what 'is' is.
Now, we have actual proof that US laws and international conventions were violated and many innocent people were Incarcerated, Tortured and Murdered!!!!!! This wanton criminal activity doesn't even deserve an investigation??!!
Blow job ....Torture/Murder >>>> does not compute.
If there was a giant pile of documents showing that McCain hired you to break into his house, and he knew the cops would find said documents if they came out to investigate, he might just be a tad reluctant to pick up the phone.
I wonder if Hitler's lawyers said the holocaust was ok, too?
I'm sure Pol Pot's legal team gave him the green light... so did Stalin's.
Is that really the standard we want in our democracy?
politicize crime and like so many, becoming accessories after the fact.
That they asked for to justify "enhanced interrogation" (torture). The
perpetrators of these war crimes are going to be allowed to walk around with this load in their pants for all the world to smell. It needs to be exposed for what it is; war crimes. McCain is such a chickenshit.
Waterboard Hannity.
Why not?! After all, Bush and Cheney have 'admitted' using torture (after Bush adamantly insisted: 'we don't torture')....they are all admitting it now...like just who's going to do anything about it! I have always said, this past administration was the "I'll do WHAT I want, WHEN I want, WHERE I want, and IF I want...like who's going to make me do otherwise...or do anything about it!"
just saying.
Login or Register to post comments.