• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Put Pelosi On Trial For Torturing The Truth

Pelosi didn't do anything illegal, she just stood by and did nothing while she knew people in the Bush administration were breaking the law. And then she lied about it in an attempt to pander to those of us who abhor the fact that our government used torture.

She needs to be removed as majority leader ASAP. Like, by the end of this week. Call your congressperson!
 
The amusing thing is that as Obama's already ruled out prosecuting the CIA agents who actually did the waterboarding and prosecuting the lawyers who prepared the memos or Bush/Cheney for authorizing the procedures seems unlikely, at this point it appears that the only price to be paid for this is political, and it's most likely going to be paid by top Democrats like Pelosi and Reid.

And who comes out smelling like a rose? Jane Harman, because she's the only Democrat whose objections to the program are on the record. The same Jane Harman that Pelosi refused to let become the chair of the House Intelligence Committee, even though Harman had a claim of seniority on the panel (muddied by the fact that Harman dropped out of the House in 1998 to run for governor of California, then won her seat back in 2000). Wouldn't it be ironic if Pelosi has to step down as speaker (while retaining her seat) and Steny Hoyer (whom Pelosi opposed as majority leader) moves up and pushes Harman for majority leader?
 
Upchurch said:
Isn't that against the law? Accessory-after-the-fact?
Click to expand...
I'm not sure, but the Convention Against Torture uses the term "complicity". I don't know if you could make that case.

I don't think you could without charging someone else for torture first, which has yet to be done. At the very least, there are people I would like to see investigated and prosecuted ahead of Pelosi.
 
BeAChooser said:
I insist that all those who knew about and approved the waterboarding of KSM and the other two terrorists face an American jury.
Click to expand...

So if you want to prosecute Pelosi for torture, do you admit that torture was committed? You realize that in order to prosecute Pelosi for complicity, you'd have to make a case against the people who ordered it? So are you ready to do that now?


I also insist that they show us, during that trial, whether the waterboarding worked and caused the 3 terrorists to reveal vital, life saving information that they'd resisted telling under conventional interrogation.
Click to expand...
As you well know by now, whether or not useful information was gained would be irrelevant in such a trial. The C.A.T. very specifically says that no circumstance whatsoever can be used to justify torture.

So, on what grounds would you insist that this stuff be raised at trial? At best, it might be raised during sentencing as a mitigating circumstance.

As for a determination of guilt, it's no more relevant than what a bank robber might use the stolen money for. He may have stolen it for a "good" motive--like paying for his wife's surgery, for example. It doesn't change the fact that bank robbery is a crime.
 
Deleted snarkiness. What's the point?
 
Last edited:
godless dave,

Doesn't that sort of go under depraved indifference?
 
TraneWreck said:
This is yet another pathetic attempt on the part of right wingers to try and find shelter from the coming prosecutions by pretending that others were as morally bankrupt as they are.
Click to expand...

As long as Speaker of the House Pelosi might be one of those sitting in the docket, there will be no prosecutions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom