Obama DOJ Quietly Closes Door…

on Bush/Cheney Torture Murders.

Obama to his worshippers: “Suckers!  Now vote for me again because the Other Lizard is soooooo scary! Why, he might authorize torture or something!”

Some people think I want to vote for a third party candidate.  I just want to vote for a second party candidate.  We currently live in a system where one party commits some grave evil and then the other party makes sure that evil continues or, at worst, is never punished or repented.

  • http://chicagoboyz.net TMLutas

    I disagree with the Obama DoJ on its handling of the New Black Panther Party, a completely separate matter. The relevance is that the opposition actually can cite and has cited how, chapter and verse, the DoJ acted unusually in withdrawing after it had actually won the case in a default judgment. That’s how one does it in a democracy under the rule of law. J Christian Anderson, who used to work in the relevant department has assembled the necessary evidence and published it in a series of articles, mostly for PJMedia.
    Challenging the duly constituted government in its prudential behavior should require overcoming a presumption that they’re the experts and rightly should have prosecutorial discretion. Normally that’s a pretty steep hill to climb. That doesn’t mean it can’t be done, as my example above shows. It does mean that if you don’t do the work, you undercut your own case, giving your presentation the air of the lynch mob.
    The line drawn between the permissible and the impermissible in interrogation is difficult and it is an unpleasant topic. I *know* that your side of the argument can be done better than this even as I think that it ultimately will fail.

  • Noah D

    Random morning thoughts on this:

    1) Of course, they’re too busy running guns to the Mexican cartels and covering it up. Takes a lot of time to sit on those documents.

    2) No administration is every going to bring any sort of serious charges (as in legal charges) against a previous one of the opposing party, not unless they’re ready to kick off ACW2. There’s so much ideological divide (abortion, etc.) that anything like that would be seen as a purely political move, and would be repeated back and forth with each change in office until the country shatters.

  • Blog Goliard

    Or, y’know, it could be that they tried their best but couldn’t come up with enough evidence of criminal wrongdoing.

    I think I’m pretty cynical…but I guess I’m not cynical enough to be certain that either: a) crimes were committed here, and b) the Obama Justice Department has made a conscious decision to look the other way.

    Why not save the moral outrage for situations where we can be morally certain that a specific wrongdoing occurred and that specific persons are directly culpable?

    • http://dailybail.com Pitchfork

      “I guess I’m not cynical enough to be certain that either: a) crimes were committed here, and b) the Obama Justice Department has made a conscious decision to look the other way.”

      Are you cynical enough to do a simple Google search? As for a), there are reams of information in the public domain that should satisfy even the most naive citizen. As for b), the O admin has made it clear that they have “made a conscious decision to look the other way.”

    • Ted Seeber

      I’m pretty damn certain of both- though the word “crimes” would mean “against the law”, and the question becomes “which law”?

      Certainly against God’s Law, Natural Law, and Canon Law, but was it against American Law? Not in the sad state the Bush Admin left it in after 9-11.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X