Greenwald: What's the Point of Having Laws That Presidents Retroactively Change?
By Susie Madrak Wednesday Jun 03, 2009 10:40amGlenn Greenwald on Obama's support for the new Graham-Lieberman Secrecy Act:
It was one thing when President Obama reversed himself last month by announcing that he would appeal the Second Circuit's ruling that the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) compelled disclosure of various photographs of detainee abuse sought by the ACLU. Agree or disagree with Obama's decision, at least the basic legal framework of transparency was being respected, since Obama's actions amounted to nothing more than a request that the Supreme Court review whether the mandates of FOIA actually required disclosure in this case. But now -- obviously anticipating that the Government is likely to lose in court again (.pdf) -- Obama wants Congress to change FOIA by retroactively narrowing its disclosure requirements, prevent a legal ruling by the courts, and vest himself with brand new secrecy powers under the law which, just as a factual matter, not even George Bush sought for himself.
The White House is actively supporting a new bill jointly sponsored by Sens. Lindsey Graham and Joe Lieberman -- called The Detainee Photographic Records Protection Act of 2009 -- that literally has no purpose other than to allow the government to suppress any "photograph taken between September 11, 2001 and January 22, 2009 relating to the treatment of individuals engaged, captured, or detained after September 11, 2001, by the Armed Forces of the United States in operations outside of the United States." As long as the Defense Secretary certifies -- with no review possible -- that disclosure would "endanger" American citizens or our troops, then the photographs can be suppressed even if FOIA requires disclosure. The certification lasts 3 years and can be renewed indefinitely. The Senate passed the bill as an amendment last week.
Just imagine if any other country did this. Imagine if a foreign government were accused of systematically torturing and otherwise brutally abusing detainees in its custody for years, and there was ample photographic evidence proving the extent and brutality of the abuse. Further imagine that the country's judiciary -- applying decades-old transparency laws -- ruled that the government was legally required to make that evidence public. But in response, that country's President demanded that those transparency laws be retroactively changed for no reason other than to explicitly empower him to keep the photographic evidence suppressed, and a compliant Congress then immediately passed a new law empowering the President to suppress that evidence. What kind of a country passes a law that has no purpose other than to empower its leader to suppress evidence of the torture it inflicted on people? Read the language of the bill; it doesn't even hide the fact that its only objective is to empower the President to conceal evidence of war crimes.
That this exact scenario is now happening in the U.S. is all the more remarkable given that the President who is demanding these new suppression powers is the same one who repeatedly vowed "to make his administration the most open and transparent in history." After noting the tentative steps Obama has taken to increase transparency, the generally pro-Obama Washington Post Editorial Page today observed: "what makes the administration's support for the photographic records act so regrettable" is that "Mr. Obama runs the risk of taking two steps back in his quest for more open government."
Login or Register to post comments.
... what is the point of having laws, if the president does not have to comply with them in the first place?
Evidently this would add weight to the Military Commissions Act of 2006 Congress no refuses to REPEAL.
"If the President does it, it's legal"
Military Commissions Act of 2006 says so retroactive to 9-11-2001!
The President "Defines Torture" nothing is illegal he says we can do. Forget Geneva and all those treaties and laws against Torture. If the President says it's legal, it is, and the MCA of 2006 granted him that authority.
Screw the 'ex post facto' Constutional Obligation against such laws.
is in control. Money buys power. Dems and Repubs are just two
different factions of the Money/Power Party. "Constitution be Damned"
is their motto.
x
In other news:
The man who Bush and Cheney "kept us safe" from on 911, and who Bush and Cheney "kept us safe" from by letting him get away at Tora Bora, and who Bush and Cheney "kept us safe" from by starting a war in Iraq instead of focusing our resources on him, resurfaces with more threats against America http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/03/bin-...
I know you all question my mental perspicacity, but with various dolts in your own party attempting to further muddy and conceal whatever remaining principles you hold dear that they haven’t trashed by now, how’s your sanity picture right now?
Sanity never was an issue with me, having abandoned for pragmatic reasons any false hope of an improvement in any given mental status possessed by left, center, right, or first door on the left down the hall. I rely solely on intestinal fortitude as I step out on the tight rope of media fueled uncontrollable ambition, keeping in mind that there’s no net and the absurdity of what I’m doing at any given juncture, considering the average attention span of various idiots who want to argue the indecipherable. Huh? Yes, I rely on that and little post-it notes of sanity, serenity, and delight from some erudite, and what I’m sure is well intentioned people such as yourself. I mean everybody’s a little cracked, right? Sounds impressive but I wouldn’t plagiarize and hand it in to my semantics teacher, not unless you’re basing all your hopes on the certainty of being head fry cook in six months at your local Mickey D’s. People I meet and engage usually come away with the impression that I haven’t a care in the world, which not only is diametrically the opposite of my true nature, but is a rather clever subterfuge, wouldn’t you agree? Cause in the poker game of life, you can bluff everybody at the table except yourself. Heavy, huh? Yeah, all that Sartre, Camus, and Nietzsche, as well as an empty glass (of water), is starting to pay off.
But as far as politics go (such as is the sad state it is in), the die has been cast, the dog has been hung, the bell has been poured as a strange looking Russian walks around mumbling some kind of enigmatic gibberish and the subtitles flash by too quickly to give most educated people a clue. But not to worry, as recently the worm has turned and, yes, what was only a pipe dream of cryptic scrawls rendered by the nubbins of a discarded Ticonderoga #2 pencil in some smoke filled opium den of iniquity is now poised to be a reality, whether it’s your nightmare or my comeuppance. It is my hope, even to you, the loyal opposition, that someday men and women who embrace the better angels of their nature will commence repair of the Washington shit pipe, whether for deluded do-gooders or livid uneducated poor sports, with final sealing and inspection instigated on some future date, with all of us (for the most part) being able to once again (if ever in the first place) look towards that city on the hill (or in the malarial swamp) with a modicum of respect, either for differences or collusion. The next step? The realization of a dream as seen through a smoky dark glass of tethered ambitions.
Don't try so hard! And remember, breath! Breath!
x
?
....and get some fresh air.
same as the old boss
at least the new one can *actually* speak in English, and gives pretty speeches.
Gotta find a silver lining somehow...
Good luck with that.
I keep thinking that, too.
The f'ers finally caved on this one
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/A...
What's next, putting his mug on Mt. Rushmore and on the dime? Can we have a Saddam statue moment for this one?
I still prefer my idea of digging up the sack of crap's casket and putting it in a public toilet with a cam showing the douchebag getting trickled on.
So are there statues of all the other Presidents as well??
If not, then why was this asshole given a statue? He was one of the WORST Presidents ever. And an idiot........
According to them, only 4 others
There are four statues in the rotunda which are part of the National Statuary Hall Collection:
* Dwight D. Eisenhower in bronze, from Kansas, by Jim Brothers in 2003.
* James Garfield in marble, from Ohio, by Charles Niehaus in 1886.
* Andrew Jackson in bronze, from Tennessee, by Belle Kinney Sholz and Leopold F. Sholz, in 1928.
* George Washington, in bronze, from Virginia, by Jean Antoine Houdon in 1934.
The four presidents will remain in the rotunda, indefinitely or until an act of Congress.
Link
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Ca...
and it only a freakin' statue.
if they got all the wrinkles in Raisin's (I mean
Reagan's face.)
Of the idiot that brought us the "greed is good" doctrine. Started the ball rolling on deregulation, murdered Chileans/Salvadoreans/Nicaraguans, founding father of "al qaeda", made it popular to use the word liberal as a pejorative etc.
"First off" if you actually READ my comment, I said Reagan was ONE OF the worst Presidents ever. (I certainly agree Dumbya was THE worst.)
And if it's "only" a statue, then I'm sure you'd have no problem with Dumbya having one there as well.
Plus, there's apparently no implied merit in having your statue in the Rotunda. I mean, look who they have there now. Garfield? He's a cat for Pete's sake!
that way the political establishment can really show their respect, fellatio-style
Prohibit that. Then you would have a long line of repub congresscritters and senators, Obama, the pedo pig, etc.
...perpetuating the lie that is Ronnie Raygun...
the fuck?
.
Whereas some people prefer to play "Follow the Leader"...
... America was founded on following "The Rule of Law".
It would be nice if America's leaders would get this through their heads.
.
What do you expect. The reversal of spirit from childlike exuberance of the 1960s to the senile sclerosis of today says everything about where America is at these days.
i wonder what other antics this trio will be up to...
those extra-legal scamps!
This is the same president that said he chose Sotomayor because she had the same respect for the Constitution he does. I wonder what type of surprises we'll get.
There's some real bipartisanship for ya. One cock meat sandwich, coming up.
.
AFTER THE FACT...
... Is still criminal TO the fact.
Q U E S T I O N:
What does it make a person, no matter who they are, when they hide evidence of onother's guilt?
.
An accessory.
It makes them an accessory after the fact. I have emailed the White House on this subject many times and not surprisingly I have never had a response.
.
Dear Trolls,
Hese's a nice cheat sheet for you...
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_akLbxNKanGc/SiVkthm...
.
.
Nameplates, underwear and a new dog in the White House...
... "CHANGE" complete!
.
How did that old saying go... "same shit different asshole...?"
Any way you look at Obama and his adminstration, he is equal to his Bush regime colleagues in every way. His treason against the American people for not sending any of the Bush terrorists to the ICC or the Hague for war crime trials is a steller fact that brands him no better than the Bush terrorists and traitors.
Nothing Obama has done is any different than the mass murdering terrorist Bush regime. Not one thing.
So much for "change."
He HAS only been in office for a few months. It's not like he could just throw them all in jail the second he walked in the door.
I don't like this new law. I don't like how much he's tried to placate the right. I still want Bushco brought to justice. But give the man some time.
He is down to 3 years and 6 months.
Time for what? To make sure all the evidence is "legally" secured from the public, evermore?
Time to deal with some of the other shitstorms before tackling this one. BushCo will all still be guilty next year. The economy and all these stinking wars and North Korea and Pakistan all need attention now.
Plus I think he IS still bowing to the right wing in a "can't we all get along" kind of way. Why? I don't know. I wish he was a little more Bush-like in seeing that with Dems in control in the house and senate, NOW is the time to push through everything he needs to. But I think he is trying to give consideration to the other side, which while may be how you organize a community, it's not how you deal with the Republicans.
.............. but this guy's really starting to piss me off!
I just love the feeling of the ol' stab in the back in the morning followed by a little "twist!"
That's how I feel having supported Obama, contributed $$ to his campaign and then I voted for him.
I drank the Democratic Kool-aid...AGAIN.
I actually believe I can say that THIS time I've learned my lesson.
It's high time for a Third Party. We are not a nation of LAWS, we are a nation of CRIMINALS and LIARS in our federal government.
When will we ever learn???!!
untill we can get some controll over our lying media,religious corporations,Somehow we have to force them to quit the lying
Truth in advertizing-"truth,justice and the American way" or corporations are not special people with special constitutional right's etc.
I did contribute to his campaign, and I even canvassed for the Dems. And I am not really *that* surprised about the current turn of events.
I was fully aware that we were choosing the least bad of two shitty choices. We narrowly adverted the tragedy that would have been a McCain presidency. And that is basically what I voted for, in a nutshell.
Now, Obama is pretty much doing what he set to do: stabilize the system, and try to preserve the status quo. Which may not be such bad goals, I don't really think some of the posters that advocate for "revolution" or "collapse" truly understand the ramifications of their "wishes."
Based on the relative stability (far from ideal, I know... but much much better than trying to do the same under McInsane), then it is time for progressives to really work on an alternative which is viable electorally, so that we don't end up where we always end up: with our pants down, and the Dems telling us how the sky will fall if we don't vote for them. Under the current system, the Dems can basically throw the liberal base under the bus, because they know they don't have to cater to us... who are we going to vote otherwise? The GOP, ha!
Those are just my $0.02
It appears Terry McAuliffe, the former head of the Democratic Party attempted to bribe Ralph Nader back in 2004 to "stay out of my 19 states and if you do I'll help you out with the other states.":
http://informationclearinghouse.info/article2...
Now McAuliffe is facing a primary in Virginia for Governor next week. I hope he loses. If Nader is correct, then McAuliffe is a criminal.
Time for a Third Party. "A Constitutional party of laws, not liars."
War crimes is an impeachable offence,And maybe it would keep Biden from comitting war crimes also
I'm all for a third party as long as it's not those ridiculous Libertarian people.
if your looking for a third party you haven't learned enough. Read and learn: http://www.strike-the-root.com/91/allport/all...
I can see the point of keeping the photos secret for a few years, but they need to use these as exhibit A in a war crimes trial. I don't want these coming out AFTER Cheney is long gone. That fucker belongs in Prison.
Complicity comes with the coverup.
bushco must be investigated, indicted, and incarcerated.
the first red flag on a bad bill proposal is when it is described as .... "a new bill jointly sponsored by Sens. Lindsey Graham and Joe Lieberman" . this worthless duo have really offered nothing over the past 8 years. and WTF is up with Obama on this one. Graham and Lieberman will through him under the bus any chance they get so i hope he does not think this will build bridges to some form of bipartisan good will in the future.
They are all on the same bus together!!!
Hello???
It's a great big corporate club up on the Hill and we ain't in it.
That ol' "who's the employer, who's the employee" thing has gotten slightly twisted over the years.
All these "leaders" took an oath to support the Constitution "so help me God" and part of the Constitution makes it clear that ALL treaties we have signed (Geneva Conventions etc.) become the HIGHEST LAWS OF THE LAND.
This latest incident with Obama is making me feel nauseous. We've all been taken, big time.
Wow...this is some bleak news. So, I guess laws don't apply to people in power then? What's next...Obama's going to tell me he has a "divine right" to rule the nation? I feel like we are regressing back to the dark ages.
If laws don't apply universally, then what is the point of having them?
Can criticism of Obama be considered legitimate now?
Or are we going to face our own version of the never-say-die 23% loyalty that the Republicans have?
(n/t)
You could have criticized Obama on his first day. It is your right. It is called 'patriotic duty'.
just after he won the nomination and he then started back peddeling on his promises
That is bring some human and civil rights to the dark under belly of local law enforcement and the thuggish antics of Sheriffs and steroided cops.
That and destroy the America gulag system, 2.3 million people in prison for petty crimes is ridiculous. This is America not some medieval style fiefdom of the law of the barons.
'The White House is actively supporting a new bill jointly sponsored by Sens. Lindsey Graham and Joe Lieberman . . .'
The fact that someone, including the White House, would consider any bill that was conjured up by these two anti-democratic corporatists (the hate-filled, Evangelical right in the case of Graham and the support for Israel in the case of Lieberman) tells you a great deal about "someone". And it ain't comforting.
why are we even hearing these peoples names anymore.
Glad I wrote in Dennis.
I voted for Kooch in the CA primary. It's the only reason I maintained my Dem registration. Unfortunately it was necessary to vote for Obama in November because it was absolutely necessary to keep the Wasilla Hillbilly out of DC. So I'm not a bit surprised at this BS.
relying on the "just because the Executive says" doctrine.
At least Obama is working within the system (one party two faces) to achieve questionable secrecy goals.
its really sad to see Obama wasting time and effort trying to accrue for himself Bush-like secrecy powers. what is he thinking? why on earth would he do this? Joe Lieberman I don't expect any better from, and knowing our idiotic Congress they'll pass this in a flash. I just hope the inevitable court case goes before the correct judge and that both Obama and Lieberman get their asses handed to them over this.
this is outrageous.
to have voted for an agent of change turning his back on previous promises? Naomi Klein in her book " The Shock Doctrine" laid out the premise for all of us. Take any society going through some form of upheaval and then do the unexpected. Obama is no different than any other politician. A warm smile, a great talker and a figure head who takes his marching orders from controllers behind the curtain known as the shadow government. No doubt this won't be the last surprise that the agent of change has in store for us.
I don't post here often, but I do visit often.
I just have one question, if, when the Abu Graib photo's were released, people against the war claimed, rightly so, that the photo's and the actions portrayed in them were the best recruitment tool for the insurgents in Iraq. Why must the administrations decision to not release photo's; supposedly worse photo's, be met with derision.
I think the question has to be. Do we trust the Obama administration to not torture anymore? Not, can we see more examples of our own inhumanity.
I believe any photo's released will have the same effect of the Abu Graib photo's. Not something we need to do at the expence of our military.
It took a long time, but I finally learned the lesson of, just because you can doesn't mean you should
the failure to investigate war crimes,crimes against humanity,obstruction of justice etc. etc.
I agree with you about the photo's but they (photo's) may be what it takes to wake the world and American people up to what has happened.So we can put a stop to this insanity
Yup. I would say keep them under wraps if I knew that they were going to be used as evidence in an investigation. But unless Holder gets off his ass there will be the usual idiots who deny these acts, and allow the crimes to go unpunished. This is unnacceptable, and if it takes rubbing our collective noses in these pics to get some action, then so be it. They only bring it on because of their innaction.
It is insulting to the Iraqis to assume that they do not know that these acts occurred.
You might argue it's to save the troops, but I would find that weak, and not believe it. They already sent them into an illegal war against a country that was not a threat to you, and without armour. Even the contractors they employed did not care about them as some soldiers were nearly electrocuted because of cost-cutting construction. And then there was the disgrace called Walter Reed, the tip of the iceberg in VA care. If either party in Congress had cared, none of this would have happened.
I am convinced it is all to save their own lying asses.
America used to uphold the laws. Now, it seems, whatever you can get away with is good. If they can bamboozle anywhere near 50% of the public to not obstruct it is a victory. Rule by the Dick Cheney "majority"; 50 + 1, or close enough to it.
The whole idea of the Constitution is to prevent this very thing. To protect everyone, no matter their status, who falls under it's jurisdiction, including prisoners. Otherwise it is a kingdom, ruled by fiat; capricious powers.
well said Edwin
this is not about protecting the troops, it is obvious the elected leaders care little about the actual troops out there risking their lives. this is about protecting the political establishment's collective ass.
further, americans have a jack bauer-view of what torture is. let them see what real american-style torture is like: the rapes, the genital cutting, the genital shocking, etc.
i am tired of the populace-coddling, and most americans have NO idea what is being done in their names. maybe, after seeing the shocking photos, americans won't be as complacent and distracted, and will finally decide to wake up. 9/11 didn't happen b/c "they hated our freedom"
really, this is not about iraq, it is about america.
the guy who says just trust me since you have to since i won't allow you access to real information?
sweeping our accidents under the rug of supporting troops is BS. Sometimes the truth hurts. if we really cared about the troops they would be on their way home. but we can't do that because we care about the iraqis. but then we can't show them what we've been doing since it will piss them off.
your like the friend who bangs your best friends girlfriend and then tells her not to say anything because your just worried about your buddie's feelings. blatant ass covering BS.
.
Photo's say a thousand words...
... Grave sites scattered across a broken land, last forever!
It isn't about "the photo's" but rather the inability to investigate WAR CRIMES. And, to further the injustice more, the newly (s)elected Constitutional Lawyer turned boy king of the United States of Apathy, he's attempting to trump the Supreme Court so as to suppress an investigation of the people who shat on the Office of the President and Vice President of the United States of America.
But "change" won, so who cares, right?
.
What is this really about?
Power.
I think it's more about keeping out of jail. The ones who are REALLY going to be hurt are the animals that ordered the torture to be done in the first place.
Don't underestimate the lengths (**cough**swineflu**cough**) these bastids will go to keep their pillaging going for another decade or two.
...for Obama the next time around. He cares nothing for the Constitution. I live in a state where every vote matters.
.
Obama lost my support when, as Senator, he voted to make immune, the Corporation$ that assisted the Bush/Cheney cabal in violating Americans Constitutional safeguards. Oath of Office...? What does that mean, again? The 'WHOLE' Constitution or just the parts the Corporation$ pay me to support/ignore?
.
I voted Kucinich in the primaries. The only reason I voted for him in the general was because it was going to be a very close vote in my erstwhile red state. To have stayed home would have been to vote for McCain. But, I'm not doing it again. He's beginning to get scary.
enjoy your obamamania.
The release of these photographs WOULD NOT BE AN ISSUE if we would get off our national a$$ES and prosecute those who are responsible rather than giving them prime time media spots! Bring Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Rice and any others responsible before the Hague and put them on trial!
You can't have it both ways however. The majority of the posts on this site vehemently supported the fact that the actions and photo's of Abu Graib were the tool extremists used to recruit. Now it's convenient for you to have the photo's released. Quite frankly I don't have much faith that this administration is a whole lot differant from those in the past with regard to it's treatment of our troops and vets.
My father and father-in-law were USN retired, and my son is a marine. The stories of Walter Reid and Haliburton/KBR are no surprise to me. If anyone gets screwed on a regular basis by washington it's the troops Regardless of the administration.
Does anyone really think the AG needs photographs of these abuses, to gain convictions of Bush administration officials, seems to me if they do they already have some.
Huh??!?! That sure doesn't sound like the C&L I've been reading. I don't think there's any doubt the photos are recruiting tools, I certainly don't recall "the majority" asking for them to covered up though.
So what if they're a recruiting tool? Do you think having the US military bivouacing in your country or sailing off your shore is an advertisement for our benevolence? Mon dieu, these pictures are the very least of the "recruiting tools" we've made available to the muslim world
like I said if you need photo's they already have some.
...it's about us as a people and who and what we are choosing to be. Obama has been making some wrong and foolish choices.
He was going to release the photos, but was told by military that it could lead to escalation of terrorism and attacks on GI's by outraged Muslims. (Don't forget how they reacted to a cartoon) So, if he releases the photos, anything bad that happens, would be blamed on him. (It's not always good to be the King)
Jesus Christ guys. Does anyone else remember all the times Bush said "We wouldn't want to do that as it would embolden our enemies."
You are falling for the same line, different president.
If you have a child, do you tell the child "If you do something wrong, hide it. Letting your parents know will only cause more trouble than covering it up."?
No more money for him.
Until there is change we need, or that I can believe in.
Two words for Mr. Obama (One would note here that I spelled his name with a capital letter-unlike bush or cheney).
Bull shit!
You touted a transparency that would have no rival. Now that you have a chance to show a real transparancy---you act more like bush or cheney. Shame on you!
Graham-Lieberman. Yep, those are two guys I would take advice from?
Oh well, can't be any worse than having Larry Sommers as a top economic aid.
I sure am glad the democrats won. I would be happier though, if they would start acting more like FDR, and less like Bill Clinton.
The powers that be behind the scene you the "people are really in charge" decided McCain told too much of the truth and he accidentally slip up and let all the cat out of the bag so to speak. You know how we are really going to be in Iraq for a hundreds years and such, and the bush crime syndicate would never have to pay or make amends for their perversions of S&M. How the banks and the Fed were going to continue to rob us blind without any consequences, How we actually be maybe heading into paying for employer sponsored health care or end up on socialized medicine like Canada....you know that kind of stuff!!!
Oh Well next time vote for the guy who paints the worst picture, I guarantee you 5 times of 10 he might be telling the truth!!!
I see the way of the future; the president, or Congress does not like the legal status of a law so a New law gets passed. FOIA requests are a pain- just supercede that law with one of your preference.
This has got to be stopped.
"No bill of attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed."
US Constitution, Article I
An ex post facto law (from the Latin for "after the fact") or retroactive law, is a law that retroactively changes the legal consequences of acts committed or the legal status of facts and relationships that existed prior to the enactment of the law.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_post_facto_law
Lessee, Obama hasn't been and won't be pushing for prosecutions, because (unlike many of you) he realizes that doing so would open the door to the lunatic right (and their dimwitted "undecided & independent" enablers) claiming that he doesn't really care about the economy or healthcare or national security or anything that "real Americans" care about, but rather his first priority is to "play political gotcha" and try to "destroy the opposition". I'm not saying any of those allegations would be true, but the right would repeat them ad nauseum as if they were true, and the corporate media would assist with this meme until they've convinced just enough dumbasses that "Democrats hate America" to put the Republiscum back into play.
I'm sorry if I sound like a brainwashed defender of Obama on this one, but I firmly believe that he's just being pragmatic. He is not going to let a national fight over Bushco war crimes derail everything that needs to be done for the American people. If you doubt that the right still has the power and the media outlets to use war crimes prosecutions as a full-time distraction, look hard at how many weeks have been dominated by the phony torture arguments spewed by DICK FREAKIN' CHENEY of all people. If a scumbag like Cheney can get that kind of attention for that long, imagine how the corporate media would behave if we had hearing/trials. The corporate-owned GOP would use it as cover for every blocking, stalling and disinformation tactic in their asshole toolkit. And pardon me if I don't have much trust in the same public that elected Dummya twice to see through the smokescreen or understand what they're losing while the right-leaning corporate media peddles their newest distraction.
Would I like to see Cheney tried and convicted? Yes. Will it happen? No. And if it's not going to happen, then releasing these photos will produce absolutely no good that I can think of. We all know Bushco were criminals, how does the releasing of these photos affect that knowledge?
Again, I apologize for being so pragmatic, but I've lived too long and seen the corporate rightists use any excuse to stop progress too many times to lose this opportunity.
Login or Register to post comments.