As always, please explain your answers and be open to discuss it.
After all, this is a discussion forum.

Yes, I believe they should. I actually believe they should NOW. However, Bush has broken his oath to protect the constitution, and isnt that perjury? Isnt that what got Clinton in such big trouble? We could go one for days about his violating the supreme law of the land.

Yes. We need to put all the crooks in prison. Look what happened when they got away with Iran-Contra, all the crooks came right back. Of course, the (public) trial might be more important than the prison sentence.

Even if it's just "lying to congress," there needs to be a public exposure of what these evil bastards have done.

I'm torn on this question, and that's why I created this poll.
On the surface it seems pretty simple. Of Course we should prosecute! And the emotional side of me absolutely agrees.


But then I start thinking about the unseen.
What would be the effect on the country as a whole? Look, it took us decades to get out from under the Vietnam/Nixon blanket. Carter was a reaction to the Nixon years, and Reagan was a reaction to Carter. The social implication of impeachment are huge. But a trial, or even several trials could be a social nuclear bomb leaving us with a social nuclear winter for decades. Ripple effects that start other ripples, and so on.

How can several trials of these neo-cons serve to reunify the country? Considering the aspects of Lakoffs framing structures, wouldn't the trials which would go on for many years, if not decades, (Cheney would likely not live long enough to be convicted) and as long as they continued the frame would perpetuate the republican instituted social wedge. In other words, things would not improve quickly. We would be force to not move on for a decade at least.

It's like, if we react to the terrorists to protect ourselves yet lose our American freedoms, they win.
And if we do not manage to move away from the Neo-con way of thinking and find a way to reframe the collective American path, then we are forced to remain in the Repugnant frame, and they win. If we remain in the Repugnant frame, how can we accomplish the many Progressive ambitions we all wish for? Such as, how can we tackle universal health care, global warming, and energy independance, as well as fix a failed war in Iraq and make peace with the Islamics if instead we're mired down in a dirty, protracted and lengthy legal battle that continues to pit Republicans against Democrats?


I hope we all understand now that the answer to this poll isn't as easy is it might seem.

I am thinking that the sooner we can make these bad years a distant history, the better off we will be.

What happy says> the SAME gang did it before and came back and did it worse this time! There needs to be a public trial to nip this behavior in the bud.

That makes a lot of sense and might be worth America's continued internal bleeding.
Sometimes Doctors have to rebreak the bone before they can set it properly.

Weren't crimes of treason usually punishable by hanging?They have broken many laws and put their own corporate ambitions above those citizens of this country;thus any punishment that is meted out should be such that it warns those in the future of attempting another such putsch here in the US. They have fucked the citizens of this country ,and many around the world ,over, and it would be our duty to show that we prosecute criminals for what they are, morally corrupt SOB's who have treaded all over everyone in their claim for world domination. Screw 'em.

If such should happen or not, you and I both know this isn't even a possibility.

no, but we all need to have dreams don't we?

IF they are put on trial and convicted, having them in prison, even a special prison built just for them would serve much better "educational value" than having them killed for their crimes.

my only apprehension would be that an execution of some type for traitors may end up turning them into martyrs, and further polarizing the country. So you may be correct in that prison would serve the purpose better. Even though I would prefer maybe that all their cell-mates were named BUBBA

Wasn't there a Nazi that was sent to big solitary prison for his whole life? What was his name? Heimlich Maneuver , or something like that... I forget

Albert Speer. Hitlers Archetect.
Sentanced to Spandau Prison.

Not only will they not be tried, they should not be tried. This is not the way to go. What is the way to go is to have their policies publicly and thoroughly discredited. That would be the best vindication we could ever have.

But can't we still send them to spend "quality time" with Bubba, just to rearrange Karma a little for all the seriously and unashamedly bad shit they've done ? Please ? Even only a few years of being little pets for Bubba and his chums, so they may just understand what its like to be a powerless and helpless civilian caught up in the cosmic destiny of things spun beyond your control....by pathalogical psychopaths who should never EVER have been given the keys to a Country, even for a day .....

I think far more credible and effective a punishment would be to fine them to the point they are forced into a middle class life style, discredit everything they ever did to remove any and all aspect of power from them, and make them rub shoulders with ordinary, 35K a year families forced to live in a 2 bedroom apartment complex.

No and no. Perjury is lying under oath as regards a matter of material fact in a trial.

Clinton was impeached for obstruction of justice.

Yes, but there's no treason here, so it's not really relevant, is it?

That has yet to be investigated, which means you are out of line to make this assumption.
In my opinion, based on everything seen over the past 6 years, Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld and the whole gang could very well be guilty of treason!


The original reasons stated for the invasion of Iraq, the lead up to the invasion of Iraq and everything that has happened in Iraq subsequent to that invasion, could well be treasonous if the accusations of lies prove to be as deliberately deceptive as we all believe they are.

The Downing street memo's alone should have been the smoking cannon that Got the WHIGs all led out of the White house in chains.

It's not an assumption. It's the law.


Too bad your opinion isn't the law.


No they couldn't. Lies aren't treason.

Allow me to quote:

"Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort."

U.S. Constitution, Art. III, sec. 3.

Enjoy your opinion. If it's all right with you, I'll stick with the Constitution.

The law as it applies in this circumstance, has not been investigated or tried.
To make the decision that it is or is not treason, in this case, is assumptive.



I don't want my opinion to be the law. Didn't ask for it to be the law. And don't expect it to ever be considered the law. That wasn't the point. The point? It was my opinion, because I said, "in my opinion!"



Again, treason or not, has yet to be investigated!
If the leaders of our country DELIBERATELY went to war and INTENDED to give the Jihadists reason to gather and fight the western infidel, (the US) for the purpose of destabelizing the area for the purpose of profit and power, that's treason!



I'm pleased you value the constitution and it's amendments.
I just wish the Bush government did.

Let's try this again. "Treason... shall consist only in levying War against [the United States]."

Deliberately going to war and intending to give anybody a reason to fight anybody is not levying war against the United States.

All caps and exclamation marks doesn't make your argument any more sound. It just makes it louder.

The the WHIGs deliberately took our country to war for reasons that gives "the enemy" reason to attack or make war upon the US, that's treason as defined in the constitution.

Are you a constitutional lawyer?



Hang around a while, and you'll get used to my posting style. It's best to not read too much into the text.

No, it isn't. Giving another party reason to levy war against the United States is not levying war against the United States. That's like saying if I insulted you outrageously and you punched me, I would be guilty of punching you. It's not logical and it surely isn't the law.


As it happens, I am. But don't let that stop you. I'm using the words of the Constitution and ordinary logic here, not my legal knowledge.


I didn't read anything into the text you didn't put there. That's why I quoted everything I responded to. If you didn't mean what you said, I can't do anything about that. I'm not a telepath. I can only respond to what you say.

Sky, perhaps this is what we a re looking for?




Since Bush seems to be making up (or ignoring) laws as he goes, with consent from the Republican Congress, perhaps this should be the charges and sentence against he , DICK and the others.

Or This???

And if we really wanted to get rid of the whole lot of bums we could check :


Title 18 > Part 1> Chapter 11> Bribery , Grafts and Conflicts of Interest

I'm not gonna argue constitutional law with a constitutional lawyer.
I may not be very bright, but I'm certainly not stupid.


Actually, when it's just text we humans naturally read into it.
Read a book, a good drama. Does your mind make images?
How do you know your images match those of the authors?

Your personal experiences are what make your understanding of reality,
and that includes my text.

Yes, but I don't think it insults you to point out that your posts hardly rise to the level of "Man's Fate."


I got no mental images at all from your posts. Just an incorrect application of the "treason" section of the Constitution. By the way, probably the surest way to get President Bush behind bars would be the wiretapping, not the war.

I agree absolutely. Realistically, though, I am afraid it is a pipe dream. There certainly is evidence that the war with Iraq was planned all along. All you need to do is check out the PNAC web site. All the key players are there, except for W himself.

Understand that Impeaching the Bush Cabal is not the same as putting them on trial.
One would hope that if they were impeached that they would follow Nixons example and quit, considering that they know exactly how guilty they really are.

However, the prospects of trial after impeachment could be kept in the wings as a visable "big Stick" and brought into play should they fail to cooperate in any way in the investigations seeking truth during the impeachment process.

because when all is said and done, what we really want is the truth. Retribution serves the best interests of no one. We want the truths so that we might fashion laws and legislation to prevent such from happening again. This would in other words be refered to as "Learning from and acting on our lessons".

The unlimate intention from all of this, is that which is best for the United States, it's people and ultimately the world. Selfish interests cannot be afforded a place in this process, or we are the same as them.

No, sky, we can't let them walk this time... this is the SAME cabal that was with Nixon! Cheney and Rummy were in the NIXON administration, for crying out loud !!!! No, sky, we can't let them walk this time

Yank.

Though I can't disagree with you, I wonder about this.....

What happens to all the other very important things on our agenda while we are focused, (and focused will be exactly correct) on the trial of the millienia? Do you think anyone will want to discuss universal health care? Do you think anyone is gonna want to tackle reversing Bush's environmental disasters and address global warming, or alternative energy?

No, we'll be so busy picking up and throwing stones that for several YEARS we'll be all about "holdining them accountable" and not about the True Progressive Agenda.

Now, understand that I can't disagree with you on this, would you say it's worth the cost?
45 million americans don't have health insurance. How many of them will die an early, preventable death because we instead wanted to teach those dirty ass wipes to never come back to this town again? (and odds are they'll be back eventually anyway)

45 million might be dead if we don't nip these NeoCONS in the bud. They won't need universal health care then. Do you really think the NeoCONS are gonna stop their agendas on their own?

Besides, I'm capable of multi-tasking, I'm sure most Progressives are! How about you, sky ? You up to American justice and Progressive agenda simultaneously?

Yank.

Consider the reality that this is a polulation that knows more about Madanona's adoption than they do Darfur it's self.


Personally? Absolutely I can and would do both.
But do you think 150 million Americans can or will?
Do you not think the conservatives would do everything they could to derail a trial, and would the Progressives not fight back, and the bickering would not end, and might it not then consume the national attention span?

If we are good at what we do, then we will produce an environment in which their kind can't easily flurish and prosper. If on the other hand we fail, they will be back no matter who we put on trial. Because they are not simply out laws, which they are. They represent a segment of our society, and the very best way to defeat them is to not be them. To create a forward reaching, productive and healthy progressive environment. These bad guys exist because the environment was created for them to exist in, and over the decades Liberals didn't do enough to stop it. But as rock moves unstoppable towards the next earth quake, it's hard to see and even harder to stop. The best action plan is to be prepared for the next big one.





Edit to add.....


After November, assuming they regain power, the Democrats will have roughly 18 months to prove them selves to the American people. How will that time, that very short amount of time be best used to it's maximum posative effect?

By chasing enemies?
Or putting into place Progressive policy and correcting the criminal acts of Bushco?
I am certain that if they try to do both, they will do neither very well, and be replaced by something else in 08.
And if all they do is the first, they will be replaced by something else in 08.


As pleasing as putting Bush and Cheney on trial might be, I'm still not certain that's the best course of action for the Country and Progressives.

Which separates the "Lets get evens" from the "lets fix the problems". What I dont want to see is 4-8 more years of partisan bitching about what we should have done. How impressive would it be that the Dems would actually shut the fuck up and DO what the Republicans could have, should have, but did not do. How impressive would it be that the new leadership would merely lead by doing what has to be done. The right things for the right reasons. Retribution in this case will only put a temorary salve on the sensabilities of some. Doing the right things for the right reasons will be enough evidence to most that the past 8 years were squandered and hell, maybe the country learns from it and says in contrast...uhhhh, dont want to do THAT again.

Multi-tasking. I'm hoping for both. Fix the problems, move the nation forward and hang the bastards. It seems to have worked in Germany and Japan.

Except that Germany and Japan were under occupation and little to no internal productivity at the time. That and they had to be bombed cross eyes to get to that point.

MCA makes us virtually occupied by our own secret police. Anybody can be declared an illegal enemy combatant and disappeared. And the Republicans are promising us we will, indeed, be bombed cross-eyed. Oh, and that internal productivity thing...we are burning our door jambs and window sills to keep our house warm. We are the greatest debtor nation on the planet, and show no sign of catching up to our obligations.

Well, the parallels are there true enough, vague....but there. And all of this means....you think trying and hanging these guys will fix this? You say multi-tasking. I say....Priorities.

Abell, "let's get even" is putting a man on trial for a stain on a girl's blue dress (and as vindicating as that is to all women on the planet, THAT impeachment was partisan bitching .)

"Let's Fix the Problem" is about placing a man on trial (along with his ilk, the PNACers) who ravaged the Middle East with their NeoCONISM and turned Iraq into a blood stained oil slick, and took 2700 of our finest and over 600,000 Iraquis down for for PNAC lies, not to mention the maimed and PTSD victims, many of them children. It is not only American bloggers that are crying out for justice, THE WORLD is. We owe it to ourselves, and to Iraq, and to the international rule of law.

We MUST set a precedent that no-one of this unconscionable lack of character can do this again, or they WILL do it again, only worse next time. Can you imagine if we just let the Nazis go because it was just "getting even" or too time consuming or some other procrastinator's excuse?

Justice is NOT partisan, justice is blind and justice can and shall prevail !!!

Ok, I can't argue the emotion of what you said but in reality, Yank try them for WHAT? As one member of the board pointed out...think it was Jubal....try them on WHAT? Maybe the wiretap issue but what else? It may have been dispicable, the actions may have been wrong but are we speaking of legalities or feel goods? Serious now. What LEGAL ground do we try them on? If we know going in that it is NOT going to happen....why bother. And your point on trying to tie in a parallel between Nazi's and IRAQ have a few things missing. The Nazi's had the Jews which were taken by train loads to concentration camps, burned, tortured, starved and killed. While I can see where you "MIGHT" equate that as the same as what we have done in IRAQ....the public won't buy it and I doubt seriously if the law would support it. Throw in the ever popular "pardoning" process Presidents are famous for and where are we then?

I admire your "want to". As well, I respect your opinion. But do you REALLY believe it is going to happen? I dont. And even if it did, Ive seen Presidents let off some notorious criminals and so have you.

For lying to Congress and the American people for grounds of Iraq War, Gulf of Tonkin-style
(no WMD , no connection to 9/11> so that's a no-brainer), lying to Colin Powell so that he could un-wittingly lie to the UN , conspiracy to invade PRIOR to Bush's selection & 9/11 (the PNAC website ), Downing Street Memos (conspiracy to invade by fixing and falsifying the intel), fixed elections for NeoCONS to get in and stay in power, PLUS illegal wiretapping , etc. etc. etc.

Lying to Congress and American people for reasons for Iraq war, Gulf of Tonkin-style (wmd & 9/11 connection> no brainer there), lying to Colin Powell to unwittingly lie to UN (since he is not a PNACer he made a good patsy) , PNAC invasion conspiracy prior to Bush selection and prior to 9/11 (on their arrogant website, which the NeoCON cabal actually implemented), Downing Street Memos (to fix intel to make a false case for Iraq invasion) PLUS fixed elections, and illegal wiretapping, etc, etc, etc

Yank, Im not arguing his sainthood. Im questioning the legality on much of what you contend and the reality is....the ONLY thing up there that might be considered is the wire tapping. And even at that it would take a pretty sharp herd of Attorney's to make it stick.

Lieing? Isnt illegal. Immoral, unethical...but NOT illegal.
Fixed elections? What proof? Serious now. What court where validated his involvement in what elections? Its not from lack of trying that they havent pinned this on him.
Downing Street Memo's: Don't know enough to say if that would or could be challenged.
PNAC Invasion Conspirousy: Illegal? I doubt it. Again, maybe immoral unethical ect....but in looking at the website which you were the one who showed it to me by the way....I can't find the smoking gun of illegality. I see intent, a statement of what they believe...arrogance, even philosophical ramblings...but could you take him to court on it and WIN? Im not an Attorney...I dont know. Jubal??????

Sadly, this is true, Abell. Jubal summed it up pretty well. These sleezebags have managed to bring the World to the brink of destruction legally, or just, and have then modified where neccessary the Law to better suit them and their fellow partners in crime. We all know they are evil, twisted fucks, with hidden and not so hidden agendas, we all know that they are slimy and shrewd enough to be able to grease through the edifice of Justice with nary a scratch, and that if we don't stop them soon, or NOW, it will be too late. Germany in the late 30's is not just a silly comparison. These people are fanatic, and truly believe that they are on the right path. If that leads to the complete destruction of Humanity, well, thats just an unplanned side-effect (much like winning the War in Iraq would be....)

This poses a moral question, much like racial segregation and attitudes prevailing in the USA not so long ago. It was a democratically voted and supported legal evil. If you fought against it peacefully, you were breaking the law, if you fought agaist it violently, you were still breaking the law. Was the law worth breaking ?

The PNAC and their ilk need to be removed and neutralised, exposed to all for the charlatans they are, before we all sit around in the smoking ruins of our civilisation wishing that we had acted sooner. I hope that there is a legal, peaceful and effective way of sending these swine to spend time with Bubba, who's warming up now with his new Enron playthings, because a lawful resolution to the PNAC virus is the best solution.
If there is no lawful solution, and I fear that that may just be the case, then I fear for our survival. It's us or them !

Conyers has got his ducks in a row with a 300 page document... when he becomes head of Judiciary, I'm sure his intent is too impeach. He was at the Watergate Hearings , so he has some experience in this venue. We'll see... I pretty much gained hope when Nuremberg prosecutor spoke up:

http://www.clipmarks.com/clipmark/4D9B37DF...E-6789786B0A48/

Conyers has his duck lined up for impeachment a vastly different aspect than the next step which would be to try them for crimes.

Bushco can be impeached for lying, but held accountabel in a court of law? That's questionable.




Yank, others. Look at the very real and logical debate that has generated here among somewhat like minded people. Now just imagine how the right wing would attack the basis for a trial! It would immediately become a circus! Can anyone deny that this wouldn't happen? Putting Bush on Trial would immediately surpass any M Jackson trial for sensationalism, and partisan face smashing!

No, the more I think about this the more I am thinking a trial would not be in the long term best interests of Progressive policy. As mentioned, priorities. Perhaps after the extremely bulky and hulking ship of state is turned around away from the rocks, and is placed securely back on course, then perhaps legally addressing the legal aspects of any possible Bush crimes would be in the cards, and even a good idea.

If Bush spends time with Bubba, I want it because that is what the country needs to be the country spelled out in the Constitution, and NOT because the man makes my skin crawl every time I see him on the tube.


Again, IF the Democrats take back power in November, (and that's still a big IF) then they will have roughly 18 months to do something concrete and conclusive to demonstrate to the People of America that they deserved that vote of confidence, or come 08 they'll face the same angry public the Repugnants are right now.


Walking the talk and leading by example does not include retribution!
In other words, is it wise to become that which we dispise?

This is EXACTLY what we have been complaining about all along... we see MJ on trial, but no justice for America and the world. Now we are soooo close, and you don't want it? The whole world can see justice on TV, and you don't want it? The sheeple will be educated to stick up for themselves, and you don't want it?
I don't get it.

Declare them all illegal enemy combatants and disappear 'em. A taste of their own medicine.