If you could only prosecute 1 person from the Bush Administration?

[ThomWV]

Poll question: If you could only prosecute 1 person from the Bush Administration?

Excluding Bush and Cheney and limiting yourself to just one choice (because polls here at DU do not allow multiple answers) who would you prosecute, and if you care to comment tell why please.

[Patsy Stone]

1. John Yoo

:mad:

The man who made torture and other heinous unitary executive actions "legal".

[OnceUponTimeOnTheNet]

2. David Fucking Addington.

[ThomWV]

3. If I were to respond to my own poll he would be way up on my list too

[EFerrari]

18. Cheney's Cheney. n/t

[Clarence Birdseye]

4. Gonzo, definately.

He reminded me



(warning: upcoming Nazi reference!!!)




of those legal academics in Nazi Germany that gave a blessing to all sorts of enormaties.

Fact is that he won't be nor should anyone else, IMO. The precedent it would set is breathtaking in it's potential destructiveness to our political process long term. We should, though, remember all of the enablers in Congress when election time rolls around again.

[lostnotforgotten]

5. Missing Bush From The List - He Was Part Of His Own Administration

eom

[varkam]

6. Gonzo fo-sho.

It's a tough call, but I'd have to go with Gonzo. It would seem to me that the wrongs committed by others are premised upon the notion of the rule of law (i.e. if you break the law, then you should be punished). What Gonzo did was to try to overturn that and make the DOJ the "enforcement" arm of the administration. He basically turned the government's prosecuting agency into little more than a den of thugs shilling for Bush.

So, if I had to pick one, he'd be it.

[ThomWV]

8. You don't think Ashcroft started that trend?

I'm not trying to start an argument but I was wondering.

[varkam]

11. Sure - but I think that Gonzo took it to a whole new level.

Then you throw in the "I don't recall" stonewalling he tossed in front of Congress, and for my money, you got yourself a winner.

[Jim Lane]

7. Why is Bush excluded?

As a lawyer, I think I could make a stronger case against him than against any of his minions.

[ThomWV]

9. There are only so many spaces on a poll and Bush and Cheney were 'givens'.

I presumed them to be on the top of every list so there was no reason to put their names up, and besides that, when you post a poll you only have a limited number of blocks to use.

[Jim Lane]

14. Then the admins are complicit in war crimes by not providing enough blocks. :) (n/t)

[independentpiney]

10. I'll go with Rumsfeld because he'd be the most likely to be convicted

There's an article floating around in either gd or lbn where the UN rappatoir(sp?)has stated there is enough evidence against him for trial and conviction.

[Saturday]

12. Powell, because if he hadn't sat at the UN with his vial....

and his "credibility" we'd never have gone to war in the first place.

[Alcibiades]

13. Gonzo, because

restoring the rule of law is what's most important.

[Michigan-Arizona]

15. Rove

He'd rat out all the other scum being they are all nothing more than coward's & in my dream's would take them all down with him.

[ConcernedCanuk]

16. No Dick Cheney? - frigadee - he was the defacto emporer/president/king

.
.
.

CHENEY

Who else could it be?

boy oh boy

:freak:

[EFerrari]

17. Seriously, where is the Cheney choice? Most of the rest where just his surrogates. n/t

[arcadian]

19. Where is Cheney and Bush?

It would have to be Bush, Cheney is gonna kick the bucket soon anway. Then Rummy after Bush and Cheney. Start at the top work down.