Hey Boss, don't want to release the stinking pictures then DON"T, but ya better

prosecute the stinking bastards who authorized the torture that is shown in the stinking pictures.

Let's get on with it. NOW.

Give the military, Cheney, Fox News, Donnie Deutch, Tweedy, Joey Scar, Lizzy the Mouthpiece, and the rest of the pro torture scum of the world their due, and keep the stinking pictures under wraps. But in exchange for keeping the stinking pictures under wraps, ya got to prosecute the stinking bastards.

But let me say this, and say it only once. Draw in a deep breath, reach for courage and prosecute the stinking bastards or we will bear the brunt of this for many decades.

Are ya with me?

Do ya hear?

:shrug:

The President is with ya too.

authorized the stinking torture so the stinking photos could be taken??

I'm confused. Really,he is going to prosecute?

Then somebody better do a fuckin' perp walk over 'em.

:hi:

:hi:

the final decider on the issue, just as was the procedure with the last batch of photos which were released against appeal, in favor of the ACLU.

Regardless of the details, I'd love to see prosecutions too.

understandable, does not comport with the fact that there wouldn't be any stinking photos except for the fact that the stinking torture was authorized by the stinking bushie bastards.

Obama apparently has heard and agreed with those who oppose releasing the photos to the public. Neither here nor there.

Obama can see the reason and as a separate matter, PROSECUTE THE STINKING BASTARDS.

I AM SOOOOOOOOOOO WORKED UP ABOUT THIS......MY HEAD IS POUNDING.

BASTA!!! ENOUGH. SILENCE CHENEY AND GET HIM TO HIRE HIS DEFENSE COUNSEL.

1. Political pressure.
2. Courage.

Rather, it is going to hinge on whether Holder can build a solid case against Bush, Cheney, Yoo, or whoever. If he can't, there won't be prosecutions no matter how hard people push. If he can, there will be. The damage from a failed prosecution would be absolutely, completely, Presidency-destroying enormous. He's not going to expose himself to that risk. Either prosecution is a slam-dunk, or it is a pipe dream. No in-between.

the President's statement today was any passion nor stiff resolve in conveying that AG Holder was moving forward with his investigation.

Do you really think there isn't enough "hinges" of proof of torture?

How about re-writing the manuals on torture?

How about the low level Lindy England's of the military who took the fall for the stinking bastards?

Sorry to be so passionate.

what he says to us isn't so much intended to convey what he is doing as it is to provoke or avoid provoking a particular reaction. He doesn't want to give any signals either way about prosecution; the last time he did that he created a media shitstorm, and all he said was "we're not going to prosecute the chumps who were told waterboarding wasn't torture, and we'll see about the others." He can't very well say "we are totally investigating those bastards," because if they don't come up with enough evidence to make any charges stick, it will be hard to defend against charges of witch-hunting. A high-profile investigation of your political enemies that results in no convictions never looks good. It looks absolutely terrible if you try to throw your political opponents in jail and the court rejects the validity of your arguments.

There's certainly proof people were tortured. Proof of criminality is another matter entirely. The Valerie Plame case is a good example of what I mean by that. It was clear that the White House leaked her name to the press. Yet all the lines of communication and all the paper trails were set up to run through Scooter Libby, so that in event of prosecution he could stonewall and thus prevent prosecutors from seeing anything that would allow them to win a conviction of Dick Cheney. Because of their meticulous track-hiding, all we got was an obstruction of justice conviction of a mid-level aide. Do you think they would have been less careful in their ass-covering for something as brazenly illegal and as clearly premeditated as a policy of torture?

He tells them what to do.

They're carrying the story of the decision -- which they're calling a "flip flop" (or words to that effect.

And, they're illustrating the stories with the torture pictures we have seen -- which are pretty bad. And, they're drawing the conclusion that the non-published pictures must be even worse.

So, I'm not sure this is really helping our image a whole lot.

resolute in restating that AG Holder was going to investigate.

"These pictures are part of an ongoing investigation and it wouldn't be in the best interests of justice to release them prematurely."

It would be bullshit, but it would have sounded a lot better.

He's not quite the "chess player" some people seem to think he is.

but he is our "leader". and needs to lead on this issue.

tongue in cheek, no disrespect intended.

and we need to keep demanding he do something about this.

Feingold Rebukes Obama For Detainee Photo Reversal
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/13/feingold-whack...

Sam Stein

Feingold Rebukes Obama For Detainee Photo Reversal

First Posted: 05-13-09 04:40 PM | Updated: 05-13-09 04:57 PM



Senator Russ Feingold became one of the first elected officials to criticize Barack Obama for his reversal on releasing of detainee abuse in a statement Wednesday afternoon. Saying he saw no "compelling reason" to object to the release of the images, the Wisconsin Democrat said:


"I am generally opposed to keeping the American people in the dark for no other reason than to shield misconduct, avoid embarrassment or other reasons not pertaining to national security. From what I've heard so far, I'm not convinced there is a compelling reason these photos shouldn't be released."

Obama's like almost all of the rest of them. Maybe he should put some of the Republican House Managers that prosecuted Clinton under contract to take care of this unpleasant business. Anyone remember their zeal and the "rule of law?"