Guess Who Wants to Appoint a Special Prosecutor

142 Organizations Agree With Leading Senators and Congress Members: The Crimes of Bush, Cheney, and Other Top Officials Must Be Prosecuted

Statement on Prosecution of Former High Officials

We urge Attorney General Eric Holder to appoint a non-partisan independent Special Counsel to immediately commence a prosecutorial investigation into the most serious alleged crimes of former President George W. Bush, former Vice President Richard B. Cheney, the attorneys formerly employed by the Department of Justice whose memos sought to justify torture, and other former top officials of the Bush Administration.

Our laws, and treaties that under Article VI of our Constitution are the supreme law of the land, require the prosecution of crimes that strong evidence suggests these individuals have committed. Both the former president and the former vice president have confessed to authorizing a torture procedure that is illegal under our law and treaty obligations. The former president has confessed to violating the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

We see no need for these prosecutions to be extraordinarily lengthy or costly, and no need to wait for the recommendations of a panel or "truth" commission when substantial evidence of the crimes is already in the public domain. We believe the most effective investigation can be conducted by a prosecutor, and we believe such an investigation should begin immediately.

DRAFTED BY The Robert Jackson Steering Committee, SIGNED BY the Center for Constitutional Rights, the National Lawyers Guild, the Society of American Law Teachers, Human Rights USA, After Downing Street, American Freedom Campaign, and a total of 142 organizations listed at http://prosecutebushcheney.org

NANCY PELOSI agrees:
"Senator Leahy has a proposal, a Truth and Reconciliation Commission, which is a good idea. What I have some concern about though is it has immunity. And I think that some of the issues involved here, like the services part, politicizing of the Justice Department, and the rest, they have criminal ramifications, and I don't think we should be giving them immunity. … No one is above the law. The president has said that. < ... you would support a referral for a criminal investigation, potential prosecution?> Absolutely. No one is above the law." -- Feb. 25, 2009.

JERROLD NADLER agrees:
"We have no choice. We must prosecute." -- Feb. 18, 2009.

JACK REED agrees:
"I think we have to seriously investigate allegations of torture. I don't know if we require a formal new Commission to do that. We have the DOJ. We have Federal attorneys. But we cannot simply ignore credible allegations." -- Feb. 12, 2009.

RUSS FEINGOLD agrees:
"As President Obama and Attorney General Holder have said, nobody is above the law. There needs to be accountability for wrongdoing by the Bush Administration, including the illegal warrantless wiretapping and interrogation programs. We cannot simply sweep these assaults on the rule of law under the rug." -- Feb. 10, 2009.

SHELDON WHITEHOUSE agrees:
"Whitehouse said the Justice Department should probe the matter. He pointed out that the agency has long regarded waterboarding as torture and, back in the 1980s, prosecuted a Texas sheriff in the 1980s for using waterboarding to extract confessions from suspects. Simply fixing the law around a policy does not make it legal, Whitehouse added. -- February 2009, http://afterdowningstreet.org/node/39495

ANTONIO TAGUBA agrees:
"There is no longer any doubt as to whether the current administration has committed war crimes. The only question that remains to be answered is whether those who ordered the use of torture will be held to account.” -- February 2009.

THE AMERICAN PEOPLE agree:
criminal investigation 38%
independent panel 24%
neither 34%
USA Today / Gallup Jan 30 - Feb 1, 2009.

THE NINTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS agrees:
On Feb. 27, 2009, it rejected an attempt by the Obama administration to use the state secrets privilege to block a lawsuit concerning the Bush administration’s domestic surveillance program.

TORTURERS' OWN LAWYERS agree:
"Once Holder said that I got nervous," said one lawyer who represents a CIA official involved in the interrogation program, who asked not to be identified talking about a legally sensitive matter. "If he says it was torture, he has to do something." -- Newsweek, January 2009.

JOHN CONYERS agrees:
"The new administration should conduct an independent criminal probe into whether any laws were broken in connection with these activities. Just this week, in the pages of this newspaper, a Guantanamo Bay official acknowledged that a suspect there had been "tortured" -- her exact word -- in apparent violation of the law. The law is the law, and, if criminal conduct occurred, those responsible -- particularly those who ordered and approved the violations -- must be held accountable." -- Jan. 23, 2009.

CARL LEVIN agrees:
"I suggested to Eric Holder … that he select some people or hire an outside person who's got real credibility, perhaps a retired federal judge, to take all the available information, and there’s reams of it. Look, the Vice President, the former Vice President of the United States, acknowledged that they engaged in torture. He says that waterboarding’s not torture, he’s wrong. Waterboarding is torture, period. And this administration and Eric Holder has said so. It’s torture and there’s other forms that they engaged in, so what needs to be done, I believe, in addition to finishing the investigation, is for the Attorney General, the new Attorney General, to identify some people in his office to take the existing documentation. The acknowledgment, folks, this is not a very difficult — this is almost like a case in court with an agreed upon statement of facts, that the previous administration acknowledges that they engaged in waterboarding, period." -- Jan. 22, 2009.

MANFRED NOWAK agrees:
The incoming American President Barack Obama is legally obligated to prosecute Bush and Rumsfeld because the US has ratified the UN Convention on Torture and has also recognized it as legally binding, said UN Special Rapporteur on Torture Manfred Nowak. -- Jan. 20, 2009.

ERIC HOLDER agrees:
At Holder's confirmation hearing, when Senator Patrick Leahy asked if waterboarding is torture and illegal, Holder agreed that it is. When Leahy then asked whether the President of the United States can immunize acts of torture, Holder said that he cannot. When Senator Diane Feinstein said that an Inspector General's report on politicized hiring, firing, and prosecuting at the Department of Justice is evidence that officials have lied to the Senate Judiciary Committee, and that doing so is illegal, Holder replied that he will review prosecutors' determination not to pursue criminal charges. When Senator Orrin Hatch asked if the president has the authority to engage in warrantless surveillance, Holder said no. When Senator Russ Feingold asked the same thing, Holder stammered and stuttered and called it a "hypothetical" but said no. When Feingold pointed out that lawyers at the Department of Justice, the White House, and the Office of the Vice President had written memos that clearly sought to sanction illegal actions, and asked "What is your view of the President's Constitutional authority to authorize violations of the law?" Holder replied that the president does not have that authority.

56 MEMBERS OF CONGRESS agree:
"Dear Mr. Attorney General:
"We are writing to request that you appoint a special counsel to investigate whether the Bush Administration's policies regarding the interrogation of detainees have violated federal criminal laws. There is mounting evidence that the Bush Administration has sanctioned enhanced interrogation techniques against detainees under the control of the United States that warrant an investigation." -- June 6, 2008, http://afterdowningstreet.org/node/39727

DICK DURBIN agrees:
On February 12, 2008, Senators Durbin and Whitehouse wrote a letter to the Department of Justice requesting an investigation into the role “Justice Department officials in authorizing and/or overseeing the use of waterboarding by the Central Intelligence Agency... and whether those who authorized it violated the law.” The two senators wrote: “Waterboarding has a sordid history in the annals of torture by repressive regimes, from the Spanish Inquisition to the Khmer Rouge. The United States has always repudiated waterboarding as a form of torture and prosecuted it as a war crime."

What will the panel members suggest?

I think they will. Those memos released yesterday are only going to inspire people to get to the bottom of this corruptness, finally.

If you don't prosecute for war crimes then aren't you just protecting war criminals? Aren't you just saying it's OK for Presidents and others to torture & murder people? Saying "never again" might feel good but it means less than nothing without the force of accountability (prosecutions). Don't tell me "no one is above the law" when it's just so obvious that some people are above the law.

Until there are prosecutions, America is just lying to itself about respecting human rights...lying to itself about the rule of law...lying to itself..period.

As always, my government is welcome to prove me wrong anytime it wants to...

shine into some of the creepy dark places Cheney/Bush et all created. What part of "no one is above the law" do they not get?

for the rest of his miserable life.
And then take back all the money he let XE steal and put it back in our budget

Re investigate 911 with a real investigation. Too many unanswered questions and this time put those fuckers under oath!

This is the kinda change that was voted in. It's time to hold those who are responsible for their actions accountable. How many times can the likes of slime like Karl Rove avoid subpoena? And yes, a new investigation for 9/11, independent, and this time, all under oath.

Prosecutions and nothing less.

Because that is exactly what will happen. The far Right will spin this whole prosecution into a witch hunt perpetrated by the evil Liberals in their attempt to take over the country completely by attacking the Republican party. Bush is seen as a hero by 25% of Americans. Those 25% of Americans listen to Rush. These people are armed and some heavily. Some of them are mentally unstable and delusional. Hate crimes against minorities and gays will skyrocket. Are we prepared for this? Neighbor turning against neighbor? Domestic terrorism? All levels of government within our borders will be a target by these crazy people. I think this is why Obama wants to move forward and not look back because he knows how dangerous opening up the "Bush" can of worms will be. He's trying his best to bring us all together. But going after Bush and Company will ultimately tear this country apart permanently.

And FAR MORE people supported Clinton than Bush...

I think this is the ultimate scare tactic. That we shouldn't pursue justice because of a prospect that this minority that will turn violent against us. Until we cross that bridge, we'll never have a fair justice system again... We need to draw a line in the sand here. If they don't like it? TOUGH! If they want to start shooting people? We'll then shoot back! 75% vs. 25% I think will push them into the corner eventually. And even if they do resort to violence, they will ultimately understand that their place in society isn't a majority supported position, and that they better STFU and cool it if they want to be a part of this society and not try to enforce their dictatorship on it!

Doing nothing because of fear will ultimately tear down our constitutionally based government and the protections it should provide.

I agree with you completely that we should prosecute...but I think the reason there wasn't a "civil war" (misnomer acknowledged) is because there was no voice of reason to counter the injustice...and we hadn't had the contrast of the last 8 years to compare it to. Nevertheless, we have those 8 years now and these assholes are STILL able to influence the message largely because they own the mainstream media outlets.

And it may be that Obama is taking a step by step approach to this in order to convince even the majority of brain dead that we were all bamboozled.

you don't have enough nuts!

Besides it takes a helluva lot to get Americans up off their asses and marching in the streets. I can never believe what you guys will tolerate.

prosecuting bush et all will go a long way toward restoring the rule of law. we'll get our country back. without it, no. it is necessary imo.

daring to enact justice simply because we're afraid of what the minority might do, then what have we become? What level of crime must the president reach before we're willing to say "that's enough!"

It's so hard to tell anymore.

"Neighbor turning against neighbor"

"tear this country apart permanently"

:rofl:

Dr Ray Stantz: Fire and brimstone coming down from the skies! Rivers and seas boiling!
Dr. Egon Spengler: Forty years of darkness! Earthquakes, volcanoes...
Winston Zeddemore: The dead rising from the grave!
Dr. Peter Venkman: Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together... mass hysteria!

We must not bow to threats of violence.

I used DU mainly to keep track of the lastest Bush scandals and criminal activities. Now, better times have arrived and I needn't worry as much anymore. :)

But there is an overriding interest here that justice be done. If these people are not prosecuted to the full extent of the law, if the nature and scope of there crimes are not made public, then they will simply use the time they are out of office to refine their methods and start all over again, safe in the knowledge that good people will do nothing to stop them. Violence is inherent in truth telling, but that does not mean the truth should not be told. The truth and the Constitution have to be defended with fierce conviction if this nation is to survive. We shall have to risk the violence.

We're supposed to ignore the rule of law because we're scared of right wing nut-jobs?

Fuck 'em! They don't have all the guns.

Keep your tools oiled. :smoke:

I too would expect the losers to lose.

Resistance movements evolve into revolutions when the conservative forces dig in and react violently. It is not something that is in our hands. We should never advocate NOT fighting for justice because of what the opposition MIGHT do. We should never back down because we are intimidated. That won't avoid conflict, it merely postpones it and will make it much worse when it finally does (inevitably) happen.

Saying that we should back off because there will be a civil war is just fear mongering. Surrender is not the same as peace. Surrendering is worse than risking the possibility of conflict.

Can you see what you are saying? "Don't defend yourself from the bullies tormenting you, because if you do they might really hurt you." Submitting to bullies is never the path to peace, and can never turn out well. The sooner and more strongly you resist bullies, the less violence there is likely to be.

with Nixon either. I don't believe there are that many really crazy Americans.

Some Liberals are just as heavily armed.

Just saying...

I pray that peace shall prevail...and that Criminals shall be prosecuted regardless of Right Wing Veiled threats of Civil War.

Thanks

people listen to dat?

very good to know

into to a teaching job at a university, the way that Choo guy did, floors me. We let these people teach kids and KKKarl does news analysis? How is this happening? What message is this sending the rest of the world? These people need to be held accountable for the mental wellness of the country. We have to take on the collective sins of our Fathers and share what they did, as if we believe it was alright, if someone does not make it clear that we don't endorse,preemptive war, torture, rendition, ignoring the signs that 9/11 was being hatched on our soil. What message is this sending young minds? They are out of office and Bush can not pardon them, we either prosecute them of send them to the Hague.

K&R.

And make sure it is not one of Bush Hold-Overs Obama has kept!

Commission = white wash

Special Prosecutor with full authority to see all the intelligence , wiretapping, torture memo's and evidence..nothing witheld.

Another words..no possibility to cover up or white wash the crimes committed, and nothing off the table!

That "table " has been waiting to be set..

Do it and do it now!

"the attorneys formerly employed by the Department of Justice whose memos sought to justify torture." Although I disagree with their viewpoints, how will they be prosecuted for writing memos?

btw thanks for your post

I mean they can give their opinion in a memo, but so could I...how does that lead to prosecution?

and so do all the anteaters.

Sheldon Whitehouse was supposed to be the guest speaker at a gig I played last week; but he wasn't able to show. After hearing his wonderful speech a couple of days later, I'm really sorry I didn't get the chance to hear him in person. He's quite inspiring!

in wednesday's hearing at 10 a.m. ET

Otherwise the case is dead on arrival :shrug:






:think: Of course they will be obliged to to decline since they themselves were complicit

r

Amazing. No credit to the net-roots or to Dennis Kucinich.

What does that mean? I love Dennis but haven't heard him asking Holder to appoint a prosector. I will give him credit, though, for that crack about "they want four more years but with any justice they'd get 10 to 20" which was the only line team Obama censored from DK's speech in Denver

I suppose it was the fact that he has been calling for action against these jackals for over a year now and has experienced nothing but foot dragging Emmanuel and Hoyer style

Nice post.
Go for the jugular, David,
the confluence of politics and law.

Here you use politics. Very good.
Yet not enough. Law, you must also use law!

Your cause must do both. To bring the politically
powerful before the bar you must have the political
will. To bring them before the gallows you must have
the compelling legal case.

I hope you know this ain't a game.
Yet having begun you should not stop,
and with such people you dare not miss.

Very nice post.

http://prosecutebushcheney.org

well, that kicks it up a notch. lol.
citizen's arrest, eh? heh heh... bad idea in practice, but excellent politics.
love the deck of cards.

reading now...

keep up the great work!

:kick:

And Russ Feingold, as much as I love him, has said he didn't support impeachment. Even Obama said he didn't believe Bush did anything worthy of impeachment.

This is just another dead-end street.

... it should have happened before Bush left office. Our unwillingness to do it then when it really mattered is a huge indictment of our justice system.

Better late than never, but late is certainly no compliment to our nation at all.

There needs to be justice.

Senate Commission will not suffice.

For those who were killed & maimed for life, for those families who will be haunted for life with their loved ones' lives which were brutally snuffed out, I'm sad that the deception & lies to take this country to war with Iraq isn't the crime of focus.

After Schumer greased the skids for Mukasey's nomination for Attorney General I vowed I would never vote for him again.

Our standing around the world depends on our enforcing & upholding the laws of our land, as well as International Law.

This is encouraging.:thumbsup:

Listen up, Eric Holder!

That's my favorite email statement to congresspeople.
This is second only to reforming the propaganda media. IMHO

Without those two items, we cannot become a "united" nation. Bring back the Fair Reporting Doctrine.

Doesn't matter how many laws we have, they might as well not exist if they are not enforced.

Complete & unbiased information is the RIGHT of a free people in a country that claims freedom for its citizens.

i agree

Banish the whole lot of them so that whatever country they choose to reside in prosecutes them for war crimes?
I don't know; I'd love to see them all suffer for their war crimes.

:kick:

Talk is cheap...

It must happen. It's absolutely imperative. If the current administration lets the crimes of the Bush and Cheney regime slide, it is giving tacit approval. Our Constitution demands it, and we owe it to those who died because of Bush's lies.

I´ll bet that little spread in Paraguay is starting to look pretty tempting to the Bushes.