Concerning Bush & Cheney: Do You Prefer Trials Or Truth/Reconciliation Hearings?

[KittyWampus]

Poll question: Concerning Bush & Cheney: Do You Prefer Trials Or Truth/Reconciliation Hearings?

IMO, it's best to get as much information out as possible. Trials give actors too much incentive to hide info.

[BeFree]

1. You left one out

LYNCH.

[Democrats_win]

2. It should be a Mark Twain story. He goes on for paragraphs about how a guy was brutalized

by this and that only to have the coroner proclaim that he died of natural causes.

So let it be "natural causes."

(The book was "Roughing It.")

[H2O Man]

3. Both. n/t

[RaleighNCDUer]

4. Both.

T&R hearings for the administration as a hole (yes, I said that deliberately), from which we will glean the necessary information for trials for Buch & Cheney - maybe throw in Rumsfeld, for good measure.

At the end of WW2 we didn't hang ALL the Nazis - just the top tier. I think that's a good model.

[WinkyDink]

5. The justice that comes from a trial, with the potential for punishment.

[political_Dem]

6. A trial. There is nothing that Bush and his cronies did that is worthy of reconciliation.

[spanone]

7. don't tease

[DailyGrind51]

8. I favor shipping them off to Gitmo without access to attorneys for 3 years minimum.

[dkofos]

9. Send them to the Hague and be done with them.

[Posteritatis]

10. T&Rs are probably healthier, but sadly less likely

The only times I've seen those work out is for situations like Rwanda or South Africa or parts of Congo-Kinshasa. (Correct me if I'm wrong, BTW, but didn't the concept originate out of that region?)

I almost think the things should be regularly scheduled, though that would also remove a whole lot of the significance.