Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Mary Matalin on Imus now saying the Bush Administration doesn't

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Freedom_from_Chains Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-20-06 07:42 AM
Original message
Mary Matalin on Imus now saying the Bush Administration doesn't
want to be prosecuted for war crimes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
agates Donating Member (743 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-20-06 07:44 AM
Response to Original message
1. Whoa
She admitted it, right out loud?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Freedom_from_Chains Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-20-06 07:46 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Yeah, said that the reason they want to get these new laws
Edited on Wed Sep-20-06 07:48 AM by Freedom_from_Chains
passed is because there is a concern that later on down the road people could be charged with war crimes. Or at least that's they way I heard it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SpiralHawk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-20-06 07:53 AM
Response to Reply #2
7. "We're guilty as sin of torture, but do not want justice." - Matalin
"We republicons are special. We are above the law. As pResident AWOL often says at our White House staff meetings: 'Nah, nah, nah.'" - Matalin
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Backlash Cometh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-20-06 08:18 AM
Response to Reply #7
14. I'm so TIRED of the privileged mindset.
What evil people, knowing all along that these privileged networks were available to them and they went out of their ways to attack people on welfare and those who got a chance through Affirmative Action.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elehhhhna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-20-06 10:18 AM
Response to Reply #7
22. Matalins puffy hungover face is a war crime. Imus better watch out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-20-06 07:49 AM
Response to Original message
3. Matalin will go ahead and talk about the big elephant in the room
Edited on Wed Sep-20-06 07:50 AM by Gman
she knows its no big secret. She often seems to think its stupid not to talk about the obvious. Where her and I get crossways is when she talks about things she thinks are obvious from the GOP perspective. This one is a bit different.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Freedom_from_Chains Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-20-06 11:09 AM
Response to Reply #3
27. Yeah she was real up front about it.
Didn't preface it or pause or anything, just this is the way it is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Divernan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-20-06 07:51 AM
Response to Original message
4. Of course. Bush doesn't give a shit if CIA agents are prosecuted.
Edited on Wed Sep-20-06 08:06 AM by Divernan
It's all about him, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld.

When considering legislation for military commissions, members of Congress should be careful not to open themselves to personal war crimes liability by denying the due process requirements incorporated in Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions.

Justice Stevens, writing the opinion of the SC in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld (2006), warned that the military commission created by Bush "lacks power to proceed because its structure and procedures violate the Uniform Code of Military Justice and the Geneva Conventions," adding: "at least one provision of the Geneva Conventions . . . applies," common Article 3. This prohibits the passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples.

Stevens also cited Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (a treaty of the US that happens to reflect minimum due process guarantees under customary human rights law).

In his concurring opinion in Hamdan, Justice Kennedy emphasized the: by Act of Congress, moreover, violations of Common Article 3 ARE CONSIDERED WAR CRIMES, PUNISHABLE AS FEDERAL OFFENSES.

Therefore, Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld have already committed war crimes. If Bush can bully Congress into passing a law approving torture, each member of Congress who voted for it will also be guilty of a war crime.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gator_in_Ontario Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-20-06 07:51 AM
Response to Original message
5. Well I can understand that
I wouldn't want to be prosecuted for robbing a bank...That is why I don't do it!!!!! lol
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Freedom_from_Chains Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-20-06 07:59 AM
Response to Reply #5
10. That's what I thought, if I was out breaking the law I would probably
want to get the laws changed also. Going to the joint doesn't sound like my idea of fun.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nimrod2005 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-20-06 07:52 AM
Response to Original message
6. Save this tape!!! any transcripts or video yet?
You can't later say, that after the fact, we changed the law, and therefore we can't be put on trial!!!

I love it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Freedom_from_Chains Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-20-06 07:55 AM
Response to Reply #6
8. Unfortunately I wasn't recording when I heard it but my mouth
feel open. Geesh, she actually said what everyone knows.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elehhhhna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-20-06 10:20 AM
Response to Reply #6
23. That Goddam Piece of Paper keeps getting in KimGeorge Illl's way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Totally Committed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-20-06 07:56 AM
Response to Original message
9. What she's hoping is.... enough Americans won't want
the President of the United States convicted of war crimes. She's just letting the Bush base know that's a possibility so they'll "do their thing" and bury their legislators and the MSM with letters and calls until there is protective legislation in place to get Bush off the hook.

TC
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Freedom_from_Chains Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-20-06 08:00 AM
Response to Reply #9
11. I think you might be onto something there. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Totally Committed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-20-06 08:19 AM
Response to Reply #11
15. I think so. This wasn't as much an admission as a
call to arms, I think. I could be wrong, but that's how I see it!

TC
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Divernan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-20-06 08:05 AM
Response to Reply #9
12. Impunity attempts didn't work for tinhorn dictators, won't work for Bush.
Congress should not attempt to provide domestic immunity for criminal violations of rights and protections contained in the Geneva Conventions. Tin-horn dictatoships attempt such forms of impunity, but the attempt itself violates several treaties of the United States and, as Marcos, Milosevic, Noriega, Pinochet, various Argentinian generals and others have learned, have no legal effect abroad in foreign or international fora. Can you say World Court War Crimes Tribunal?

Congress should protect what's left of the tattered honor of the United States and maintain the rule of law.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Totally Committed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-20-06 08:19 AM
Response to Reply #12
16. Let's hope! n/t
TC
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elehhhhna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-20-06 10:22 AM
Response to Reply #12
25. Saddam probaby pardoned himself, too. How's that working for him?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
calimary Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-20-06 10:10 AM
Response to Reply #9
21. So then, what are WE gonna do? Sit on our hands and let them
take cover?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elehhhhna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-20-06 10:21 AM
Response to Reply #9
24. You hit it on the head. Too bad/so sad. Public opinion doesn't trump
Edited on Wed Sep-20-06 10:22 AM by elehhhhna
the Constitution or the Geneva Convention Treaties.

OPIINIONS DO NOT TRUMP FACTS
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
godai Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-20-06 08:10 AM
Response to Original message
13. Matalin: "pResident AWOL"? I don't think so n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uben Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-20-06 08:31 AM
Response to Original message
17. Aren't ex post facto laws unconstitutional?
How do they intend to make these laws retro-active?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elehhhhna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-20-06 10:23 AM
Response to Reply #17
26. Voodoo legislation
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Supersedeas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-20-06 11:42 AM
Response to Reply #26
31. giving definition to vagaries--wasn't that what John Yu's memo was for
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MaineDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-20-06 08:33 AM
Response to Original message
18. Can't say I blame them
But not wanting to be and not being are two very different things.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
indepat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-20-06 08:46 AM
Response to Original message
19. One shouldn't have to worry about being prosecuted for war crimes if one
hasn't committed war crimes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-20-06 09:17 AM
Response to Original message
20. I was wondering when she would show her face....
mostly after WHIG (group) in the White House was given breathing room by the Armitage confession?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beacho Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-20-06 11:12 AM
Response to Original message
28. That's one of the reasons she quit when she did
Got while the gittin' was good
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Freedom_from_Chains Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-20-06 11:18 AM
Response to Reply #28
29. I suppose that is a pretty good legal defense. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
warrens Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-20-06 11:27 AM
Response to Original message
30. I imagine bank robbers don't want to be prosecuted
For robbing banks. I guess they could redefine bankrobbing as "killing three or more guards in the process of acquiring a permanent, zero-interest loan from a financial institution. Otherwise, it's OK."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Apr 24th 2024, 07:57 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC