C&L Video, Rahm Emanuel: NO Bush officals should be prosecuted over the torture memos

[Amerigo Vespucci]

VIDEO @ the URL below.

Rahm Emanuel: NO Bush officals should be prosecuted over the torture memos

By John Amato Sunday Apr 19, 2009 2:00pm

http://crooksandliars.com/john-amato/rahm-emanuel-sez-no-bush-officals-shoul

Rahm Emanuel not only told George Stephanopoulos of ABC's This Week that no field officers should be prosecuted over breaking the law when it comes to torturing prisoners, but he took it a step beyond and proclaimed that even the lowlife John Yoos and Jay Bybees shouldn't face any consequences for their actions.

STEPHANOPOULOS: What about those who devised policy?

EMANUEL: Yes, but those who devised policy, he believes that they were -- should not be prosecuted either, and that's not the place that we go -- as he said in that letter, and I would really recommend people look at the full statement -- not the letter, the statement -- in that second paragraph, "this is not a time for retribution." It's time for reflection. It's not a time to use our energy and our time in looking back and any sense of anger and retribution.

We have a lot to do to protect America. What people need to know, this practice and technique, we don't use anymore. He banned it.

Look, it's up to us and Congress to push along these hearings and impeachments.

[seemslikeadream]

1. FUCK YOU Rahm

FUCK YOU

[islandgirl808]

2. sick

just fucking sick

what did axelrod say??

[tekisui]

3. Bullshit. It's up to the DoJ to prosecute this. GET OUT OF THE WAY

Rahm!

[Taverner]

4. Give to the ACLU then - I am

If they are unwilling to go farther, I know some folks who will....

[jody]

5. Is it possible that Israel's Mossad played an active role in Bush era tortures and to reveal all

would be detrimental to Israel's image? :tinfoilhat:

[ima_sinnic]

8. as if Israel's "image" was so sterling (nt)

[dixiegrrrrl]

22. Oh, you mean like renditions and secret prisons and all that stuff?

Welll, yeahhhh....

[ima_sinnic]

6. what the fuck are they covering up? bribery? threats? criminal activity by "friends"?

so tell me again why I shouldn't say this administration is corrupt, just like the others.

[jody]

10. Agree "what the fuck are they covering up?" If there is nothing to hide, then open the files! n/t

[MessiahRp]

7. No surprise here...Rahm's always been a traitor to the party...

and worse the Obama team likes the shit Bush pulled off, which is why they are keeping the illegal wiretapping going.

Rp

[ima_sinnic]

14. yeah, that's a real "constitutional scholar" for you. (nt)

[dysfunctional press]

9. anybody who honestly thought that they would be are not very good students of american history...

and possibly a few steps out of pace with reality.

[onehandle]

11. Yep. nt

[MikeNearMcChord]

12. Howard Zinn would say I Told You So!

I think people here should read "The People's History Of the United States"
It takes the scales off the eyes.

[dysfunctional press]

25. or at least TRY to read it...

it gets very difficult to stomach very quickly.

[noise]

13. The propaganda worked

Torture was successfully portrayed as an act of super patriotism--badass tough on terror operatives (and the badass bureaucrats) were willing to venture into the "dark side" while the squeamish ACLU played Monday morning quarterback.

In reality torture is an unreliable interrogation method used by police states. We should remember that we don't really know the true results of the torture. Sure we have had government officials boast about how effective the program was and how the release of memos would be detrimental to national security. OTOH, we have also had reports that indicate the torture was not effective in attaining reliable information (as one would expect) but was effective in attaining false confessions. We know that al-Libi's false confessions about Iraq's WMD's were used to enhance the false case for invading Iraq.

Another point is that Sen. Feinstein is leading a secret investigation of the torture program. This suggests that Congress really has no idea if the torture really worked. Meaning that the pronouncement of good faith by all officials involved is based on nothing but propaganda and authoritarianism--the idea that officials who broke US and international law (and in doing so disgraced the country and put soldiers at further risk) simply must have acted with the best of intentions. The public record indicates that they did not.

Why should officials who betray US law and values be given all sorts of leniency? Where is the patriotism of the officials who broke the law and the officials who are so quick to come to their defense? Do they not believe in the US Constitution? Do they think the Geneva Conventions is a joke? Do they believe the unitary executive theory is remotely democratic? If these officials truly believe they cannot uphold the law then they should not hold positions of authority in the US government. They are not so special that we should trash our values so they can protect their criminal friends.

[ima_sinnic]

16. +1 +1 wish I could rec your post

:thumbsup:

[leftstreet]

18. +2

:thumbsup:

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

15. Well, so much for the apologists' claims that Obama has a "strategy" to get the big fish.

Politics-as-usual is not "change".

[jody]

19. "Politics-as-usual is not 'change'"? Look into my eyes and chant "Hope & Change".

[Atman]

17. I will be sure to use that line of reasoning should I ever be called before a judge.

"Your honor, now is not the time for retribution. It is a time for reflection."

I'm sure I'll be let off the hook for my crimes just as the Bush people have been.

Remember the right-wing outrage over Clinton's blow job? It was all about the example it sets for future generations, therefore we MUST impeach him.

Was that retribution? Or forward thinking? I'm confused.

.

[pacalo]

20. Really, considering in our justice system "we are all equal under the law".

"As the president said, your honor, no one is above the law, & he believes that when crimes are committed with the best intentions -- & my crime of shoplifting that dress for an out-of-work friend fits into that category -- we should reflect on it rather than prosecute."

[ProgressIn2008]

21. What do you call folks who flout the rule of law to protect torturing criminals, I wonder? nt

[jody]

23. Is there a difference between "torturing criminals" and "torturing SUSPECTED criminals"? IMO Bush

did the latter.

[LWolf]

24. There's a reason why I've never wanted him in a position of power. nt

[dysfunctional press]

26. Kucinich 2012

is it too early?