Remember Oliver North

In all the excitement about the Rove subpoenas, truth commissions and other non-judicial procedures for obtaining information about the Bush crimes, please remember Oliver North. Any proceeding that hinges on a grant of immunity to a key witness may bar meaningful prosecution at any later time.

Excerpt from Wikipedia:

In November 1986 as the sale of weapons was made public, North was fired by President Reagan, and in July 1987 he was summoned to testify before televised hearings of a joint Congressional committee formed to investigate Iran-Contra. The image of North taking the oath became iconic, and similar photographs made the cover of Time and Newsweek, and helped define him in the eyes of the public. During the hearings, North admitted that he had lied to Congress, for which he was later charged among other things. He defended his actions by stating that he believed in the goal of aiding the Contras, whom he saw as freedom fighters, and said that he viewed the Iran-Contra scheme as a "neat idea."<6>

North was tried in 1988 in relation to his activities while at the National Security Council. He was indicted on sixteen felony counts and on May 4, 1989, he was initially convicted of three: accepting an illegal gratuity, aiding and abetting in the obstruction of a congressional inquiry, and destruction of documents (by his secretary, Fawn Hall, on his instructions). He was sentenced by U.S. District Judge Gerhard A. Gesell on July 5, 1989, to a three-year suspended prison term, two years probation, $150,000 in fines, and 1,200 hours community service.

However, on July 20, 1990, with the help of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU),<7> North's convictions were vacated, after the appeals court found that witnesses in his trial might have been impermissibly affected by his immunized congressional testimony.<8> Because North had been granted limited immunity for his Congressional testimony, the law prohibited the independent counsel (or any prosecutor) from using that testimony as part of a criminal case against him. To prepare for the expected defense challenge that North's testimony had been used, the prosecution team had - before North's congressional testimony had been given - listed and isolated all its evidence; further, the individual members of the prosecution team had isolated themselves from news reports and discussion of North's testimony. While the defense could show no specific instance where any part of North's congressional testimony was used in his trial, the Court of Appeals ruled that the trial judge had made an insufficient examination of the issue, and ordered North's convictions reversed. The Supreme Court declined to review the case. After further hearings on the immunity issue, Judge Gesell dismissed all charges against North on September 16, 1991, on the motion of the independent counsel.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oliver_North

We should, instead, demand, loud and clear, that the Obama administration prosecute the Bush administration criminals. That is the only way to achieve justice.

that post was an obituary.

The creep was a traitor and he has made his fortune because of it. He was the ulitimate war profiteer. A true scumbag.

Exactly what I thought.

I paricipated in protests against that SOB and LT Calley as well.

The Repugs have a habit of trying to make heroes out of traitors.

hearings in Congress or truth and reconciliation commissions. We could be shooting ourselves in the feet with those procedures. Please help to get the questions about the wisdom of granting immunity to these characters. We know one thing. If they ask for immunity, if they need immunity to motivate them to testify, they probably fear indictment. They only take the immunity to avoid prosecution. It would be stupid of Congress or a truth and reconciliation commission to grant them a free pass out of prosecution. No way should we do that.

Not the immunity issue, but a sort of Oliver North moment, where a Jack Bauer type of character comes before some such committee, is grilled in a very public forum, and then is turned into some sort of hero/patriot by the right wing noise machine.

Careful. It could happen.

He was and is a liar, a perjurer, a traitor, and a disgrace to the oath he took upon graduating from the United States Naval Academy.

That's how they work hand in hand with each other, Congress and the criminals in the various administrations -- to avoid ever facing the consequences for the serious crimes they commit.

And, let me tell you, if you become the patsy in some internet fraud scheme or steal $5 worth of merchandise from the grocery store, you will be convicted and sentenced, and in some states, three strikes and you are out. While you probably will never have three strikes, you will live in terrible dread that the next time you do something without even realizing that it is a crime or on an inexplicable impulse, you could face a long, long sentence.

I would advise anyone who thinks that a congressional hearing or a truth and reconciliation procedure is enough to punish the Bush criminals to spend a week sitting in on criminal court arraignments and sentencing procedures. (Most of the trivial cases I am talking about end with a plea bargain and a sentence, not a trial.) If you see the parade of non-violent offenses, the kinds of charges the accused plea to and then the sentences they get. I'm not saying that shoplifters should not be sentenced and serve. (For first offenses, they usually get a few days in jail and public service of some kind.) I am saying that the Bush administration members committed very serious crimes and should not be permitted to go the immunity/no sentence that sticks route.