Democrats Will Investigate Bush…They Hope
November 13, 2008 / 9:13 am • By Dr. Melissa ClouthierCongressional investigations of the current administration is EXACTLY what the electorate wanted when they put Democrats in power in all three branches. I’m so glad the Democrats are in touch with the voters in a way the Republicans just aren’t.
Topics of open investigations include the harsh interrogation of detainees, the prosecution of former Gov. Don Siegelman of Alabama, secret legal memorandums from the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel and the role of the former White House aides Karl Rove and Harriet E. Miers in the firing of federal prosecutors.
Mr. Bush has used his executive powers to block Congressional requests for executive branch documents and testimony from former aides. But investigators hope that the Obama administration will open the filing cabinets and withdraw assertions of executive privilege that Bush officials have invoked to keep from testifying.
“I intend to ensure that our outstanding subpoenas and document requests relating to the U.S. attorneys matter are enforced,” said Representative John Conyers Jr., Democrat of Michigan and chairman of the House Judiciary Committee. “I am hopeful that progress can be made with the coming of the new administration.”
Also, two advocacy groups, the American Civil Liberties Union and Human Rights First, have prepared detailed reports for the new administration calling for criminal investigations into accusations of abuse of detainees.
It is not clear, though, how a President Barack Obama will handle such requests. Legal specialists said the pressure to investigate the Bush years would raise tough political and legal questions.
Because every president eventually leaves office, incoming chief executives have an incentive to quash investigations into their predecessor’s tenure. Mr. Bush used executive privilege for the first time in 2001, to block a subpoena by Congressional Republicans investigating the Clinton administration.
So, the Democrats want their own President (Barack Obama) to tie his own hands during a time of war and get their permission to prosecute it, too? This issue is going to put Obama in a serious jam. The party faithful are out for blood, but these investigations will piss off most fair-minded Americans.
It will be interesting to see how many self-inflicted wounds Obama will take in order to appease his rabid base.
Cross-posted at RightWingNews
17 Responses to “Democrats Will Investigate Bush…They Hope”
By Naqamel on Nov 13, 2008 | Reply
You mean they still have the “Karl Rove Frog March” wet dream on the left?
/sarcasm
By Chalmers on Nov 13, 2008 | Reply
Can I get a comment in before the Independent Mr Chuckles and the Liberal Glynn?!?
W absolutely should be investigated and brought to justice! All Clinton did was commit perjury. W and Cheney belong in prison for their illegal war that they foisted upon the American people without even telling anyone what they were doing!!!
By Naqamel on Nov 13, 2008 | Reply
Chalmers is right. Charge them for a “Rush to War” - you know, where they took 14 months to go to war in Iraq…
And HOW DARE CHIMPY BUSHHITLER enforce 14 UN resolutions!
And HOW DARE CHENEYHALLIBURTON shut down Saddam’s Rape Rooms and stop the filling of Mass Graves.
Never mind they found chemical warheads in Iraq. Those don’t count as WMD, because we lefties say so.
By Mat on Nov 13, 2008 | Reply
“Can I get a comment in before the Independent Mr Chuckles and the Liberal Glynn?”
Sure, but if you act like them, don’t expect to be taken seriously…
OMG Naq,
They’re not even in power yet and they’re already talking about freaking Nuremburg trials. All Clinton did was perjury? Um, not to rain down on your parade, Chalmers, but that’s a pretty serious legal offense in the Constitution. You don’t lie under oath, period. Unless you don’t think the Constitution means much.
Cripes, Chalmers sounds like one of those marxist propagandists. “Bush has committed evil acts against the peace-loving American people.” Where have I heard that term before?…
Chalmers, it’s not quite yet the Democratic Peoples Republic of America (hey that’s a good acronym DPRA). That’s not to say that “ObamaCo” (hey, I like that term) won’t try their damnedest to make that. But it isn’t yet.
By Naqamel on Nov 13, 2008 | Reply
Um, Chalmers was mocking them just as much as I was, Mat.
By Chalmers on Nov 13, 2008 | Reply
Mat,
Dude, relax. Check the history on this blog. I have been here from the beginning. As the Senators would say, “Check my record.”
By Mr. Chuckles on Nov 13, 2008 | Reply
For all of my chickenhawk friends above,
Nuremburg trials? Sorry, nope. Can’t speak for Glynn - I just want Bushco out of office. My personal hope is that they will simply fade into the sunset of gross incompetence. I will let history be thier judge. I must say however, that lying about where you put your meat missle is just um, SLIGHTLY less important than lying about reasons for going to war. But hey, a lie is a lie, right?
It would have been nice if Bushco had such strong convictions about righting all of the other wrongs in the world (Darfur, N.Korea,etc.) but I guess there weren’t enough national resources in those countries to justify invasion.
But hey, you guys are right. I mean, forget Afghanistan and the building al queda/taliban alliance there and their march into Paskistan (you know, the country with an unstable gov’t and 20 nukes). We’ve got important work to do in Iraq!
By Naqamel on Nov 13, 2008 | Reply
Chuckles, a lie is any statement, true or false, with the intent to deceive.
The fact that the intelligence was wrong about the number of WMD’s in Iraq is not a lie.
Furthermore, using truthful statements, I can lie to you. I call this the Michael Moore method:
I want to convince you that I own a small dog.
I can invite you to my house, and I can show you a dish of food on the floor next to a dish of water. I can show you white hair on a couch, and in a small grooming brush. I could also show you a small bottle of flea shampoo.
By then, you would probably believe I have a dog. However, despite the 100% truth of the above facts, I would have lied to you.
I own a cat.
Bush acting on intelligence that was wrong is not a lie; there was no intent to deceive. If there was an intent to deceive, then every member of Congress who voted to use military force in Iraq also deceived, and that includes John Kerry and Hillary Clinton.
Don’t forget that aside from the WMD issue, there were 13 other UN Resolutions that Iraq was breaking. Did you forget about the $25,000 payouts to families of Palestinian suicide bombers, or are you intellectually dishonest and willfully ignorant?
By Mr. Chuckles on Nov 13, 2008 | Reply
Naqamel,
As I recall, the main reasons for going into Iraq were that Hussein and his regime posed an immediate threat to our security, and that Iraq had something to do with 9-11. These were the overarching justifications for invasion. Chemical weapons alone are not a justification, especially since Hussein had no delivery system to get them to the US, therefore they were not an immediate threat. As for the 9-11 connection, well, you know where that whole theory went. We’ll conveniently leave out the fact that most of the hijackers were Saudis, “allies” of the US whose leader is a good friend to the house of Bush. So yes, they lied. They later ammended their argument for invasion several times. Was Hussein a nice guy (maybe we should ask Rummy - they were pals in the late 80’s)? No, but neither are any number of other dictators in the world that we seem to ignore (or prop up -remember Pol Pot?). As to the payouts to Palestinian bombers, it’s a separate issue and has nothing to do with Bush’s main justification for invasion. Should it have been stopped? Clearly yes, but I doubt that it would have taken a full blown invasion to accomplish.
Clinton and Kerry effectively put the nails in their own coffins by voting for this mess, and now we have BO for president because of it. Kerry was a schmuck anyway, but I could have lived with Clinton. I would have prefered her over BO any day of the week, but the far left got ahold of her and beat her down almost as bad as the right did for the last 16 years (be careful what you wish for).
Thanks for the clarificaton on the definition of “lie”. I’m learning so much here…
By Naqamel on Nov 13, 2008 | Reply
Chuckles,
The reasons for going into Iraq are available here: Link to UN Resolutions broken by Iraq.
Furthermore, Bush NEVER said Iraq had anything to do with the 9/11 attacks, only that Iraq was a State Sponsor of Terror. Which, they were.
Pointing out the terrorist training facility at Salman Pak and pointing out that Saddam Hussein Al-Tikriti (as opposed to Barack Hussein Obama) had meetings with Osama Bin Laden is not suggesting that Iraq had anything to do with 9/11.
Any suggestion that the above means Bush was blaming Iraq for 9/11 is an illogical inference.
But I will give you some credit - at least you didn’t call it a war for Oil.
By Mat on Nov 13, 2008 | Reply
Oops…Sorry Chalmers. I owe you an apology. I’ve been on and off of this post over the last year. Oh well, my bad. I fired it off this morning before I had time to read it (running to class).
By Chalmers on Nov 13, 2008 | Reply
Mat,
No worries. I was just giving you a hard time.
By Chalmers on Nov 13, 2008 | Reply
Chuck,
The Saudi Royal Family has been “friends” with the US for some time, not just the Bush’s. There is no doubt that there are other bad people, leaders, governments, etc around the world. Iraq was special, not because of its oil, but because of its location. Iraq has been a destabilizing force in the Middle East for quite some time, no one denies that. The 9/11 connection was not the reason for invasion, the presence of WMDs was. As it turns out, there was yellow cake uranium in Iraq, but reality has not been able to overcome the perception. Just like no amount of yelling “Iraq was not responsible for 9/11,” will convince some of the reality.
As for Afghanistan, we are still there, we are still trying to do the right thing. Will we be successful? Time will tell. I am not sure there is a closer relationship between al Qaeda and the Taliban now than there was prior to 9/11, but I am not sure that it makes any difference. They are both enemies of democracy that want to oppress the people of Afghanistan, all the while celebrating their strong religious beliefs by growing and exporting drugs. Whatever.
We shall see what is most important to BO in regard to National Security. Like you said, be careful what you wish for…
By Artruen on Nov 13, 2008 | Reply
Chuckles, bama won. Maybe you could move on past the rhetoric and use your (hopefully possessed but not showing) intelligence. Move on past any theory that involves you personally and what the BushHalliburtonNaziCheney’s did to you. (deep down, it is personal, isn’t it chuckles?) Free your mind. Cheewawa, just use your mind.
By Mr. Chuckles on Nov 14, 2008 | Reply
Artruen,
Ummm, no. It’s not personal. It’s actually about what has happened to all of us over the last eight years. Admittedly I had some good years with my business, but all in all it’s about 50/50. Not sustainable. For me it’s all really about economics, which is about to become a deep dark hole according to many financial experts. I could give a rat’s ass about whether or not these guys are prosecuted. Personally, I don’t think that it would be good for the public’s morale given the current economic situation. Let them fade away. If you want to know how I feel about prosecution, read my 1st Nov 13th post above. And yes, Obama won. He’s got a shitload of work to do and a high likelihood of failure. That works in your favor politically. He was also not my first choice, so I don’t have a lot of personal feelings vested in his presidency. I just hope things improve economically. If his ideas make this happen, great. If they don’t, I’ll be first in line at the ballot box in Nov. 2012 to cast him out of office. That’s the beauty of being independent - I don’t feel compelled to tow either party’s line.
By J David on Dec 23, 2008 | Reply
It is very much too bad that the REPUBLICANS won’t investigate Bush.
FREE RAMOS and CAMPEON!!