House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is receptive to the idea of prosecuting some Bush administration officials, while letting others who are accused of misdeeds leave office without prosecution, she told Chris Wallace in an interview on "FOX News Sunday."
I don't know about you guys but I will believe this after it's done and the door to the slammer is locked and not until then.
I agree One Fly..plus, how will she determine who gets tried and who doesn't?
ReplyDeleteThey've had eight years to do something, or at least to more-or-less unanimously suggest that something be done. The obvious question people will ask is "Why now?" The obvious answer would seem to be, "Because it's no longer dangerous to them." At least, that's the most flattering obvious answer.
ReplyDeleteI don't disagree but I find the reason lame when it comes to treasonous dastardly deeds.
ReplyDeleteIt probably comes from the judiciary Dusty and that's an assumption only. I'll be all boned up on that as conviction appears imminent.
The other thing to keep in mind about Pelosi's seeming reversal is that her branch of government isn't the one that will be doing the investigating any more. Now the executive branch, the DoJ in particular, will be doing that job. IOW, Pelosi is saying "Do the job I wasn't willing to do personally" to Obama.
ReplyDeletePlease note that this in no way means that I think the DoJ shouldn't investigate. It should. It should investigate anyone who willingly participated in illegal wiretapping, extralegal imprisonment, and torture. But then, I thought Pelosi should have impeached Bush for ordering those things when she had the power.
Dems have only had the powerof subpoena for two years. Voices crying in the wilderness are seldom heard unless they are amplified by automatic gunfire. Pols are rarely leaders, even house speakers. We must demand justice and an eye for an eye in this instance. Nothing less than full prosecution will rebalance our tilted scales of justice.
ReplyDelete