ACLU chief to Obama: Pardon Bush for torture to establish he's a criminal

[Revmitchell]

Help me out here. Isn't the mission of the American Civil Liberties Union, at least nominally, to protect people from being made into criminals by the legal system without their constitutional rights being fully protected? Because if that's the case - and I'm pretty sure it is - wow, ACLU executive director Anthony Romero sure turns the mission on its ear with this idea:

President Obama needs to pardon George W. Bush for torturing detainees. Why? To establish that torture is illegal, thus making those who were supposedly involved with it in need of pardons.

Given that Obama has shown an unwillingness to indict members of the Bush administration over the CIA’s use of waterboarding, “black sites,” and other means of collecting information that the White House now calls torture, Romero wrote that issuing pardons would at least make clear that what the former administration did after Sept. 11, 2001, was illegal.

“Pardons would make clear that crimes were committed; that the individuals who authorized and committed torture were indeed criminals; and that future architects and perpetrators of torture should beware,” he wrote.

“Prosecutions would be preferable, but pardons may be the only viable and lasting way to close the Pandora’s box of torture once and for all.”

http://www.caintv.com/aclu-chief-to-obama-pardon-bus

 

[InTheLight]

Waterboarding has been found to be legal, and not torture.

Pardoning Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, etc. would not establish waterboarding as a crime, therefore there is no need for a pardon, because there was no crime, so no pardon needed.....because no crime.

Really, the head of the ACLU is a lawyer? Could have fooled me.

 

[HankD]

Hmm, the murder of innocent babies is OK but the torture of terrorists is a crime?

HankD

 

[carpro]

Waterboarding has been found to be legal, and not torture.

Pardoning Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, etc. would not establish waterboarding as a crime, therefore there is no need for a pardon, because there was no crime, so no pardon needed.....because no crime.

Really, the head of the ACLU is a lawyer? Could have fooled me.

:laugh: Well said.

 

[Rolfe]

ACLU chief to Obama: Pardon Bush for torture to establish he's a criminal

I thought that for a pardon to be granted, first a crime must be committed. What am I not understanding?

 

[Revmitchell]

What am I not understanding?

The liberal mindset. They have no problem doing things backwards. In a logical and reasonable world a pardon is given once a crime has been established. Since that has not been done, extremists liberals want to establish a crime by giving a pardon.


See it is like using executive orders to by pass congress. Or it is like using the courts to establish the Constitution as a living document to by pass the amendment process.

The ends justify the means at all costs.

 

[Salty]

ACLU chief to Obama: Pardon Bush for torture to establish he's a criminal

I thought that for a pardon to be granted, first a crime must be committed. What am I not understanding?

Very simple - the cart before the horse

 

[Don]

Holy moley, doesn't this guy realize that if Obama pardons Bush, then he'll have to issue a pardon to himself as well?

Or is this lawyer really naive enough not to realize that Obama hasn't condemned the practice because it most likely has been used during his presidency?

(No proof on my part; simple logic)

 

[poncho]

Torture Never Stopped Under Obama

“A year on, the [Obama] administration continues to look the other way when it comes to full disclosure of and remedy for human rights violations perpetrated by the U.S.A. in the name of countering terrorism.” – Amnesty International

What is Torture? It can be physical or physchological, quick or unhurried. It implies lasting trauma unbefitting a human. The U.N. defines torture as:

“ …any act by which severe pain or suffering, physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him, or a third person, information or a confession…” (U.N. Convention Against Torture).

By this definition the U.S. continues to practice torture.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/torture-never-stopped-under-obama/17204

The report said the CIA had tried to justify its use of torture by giving examples of what it called "thwarted" terrorist plots and suspect captures, but the "representations were inaccurate and contradicted by the CIA's own records."

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/12/09/us-usa-cia-torture-idUSKBN0JM24I20141209?utm_source=twitter&utm_reader=feedly

 

[Rolfe]

Or is this lawyer really naive enough not to realize that Obama hasn't condemned the practice because it most likely has been used during his presidency?

Thought of that one also.

 

[HankD]

I believe the left press and administration think that this issue will somehow make a difference in the 2016 election.

Personally my thought is that it won't and in fact may backfire on them.

After all the so called "torture" gleaned the information that eventually lead to the demise of OBL.

Of course the Republicans will probably fail to ride that wave, but even at that I don't think the average American will feel any sympathy for those having been "tortured" those who murdered almost 3000 people on 9-11, who behead our journalists, bomb our sporting events (Boston) etc, etc...


HankD

 

[poncho]

We're all pretty well conditioned now to accept all kinds of things we'd find shocking to our sensibilities in America past.

 

[HankD]

We're all pretty well conditioned now to accept all kinds of things we'd find shocking to our sensibilities in America past.

And powerless (or so it seems) to do anything about it.

HankD

 

[poncho]

And powerless (or so it seems) to do anything about it.

HankD

We have the power we just choose to waste it all playing the leftie vs rightie game instead of holding government accountable.

 

[HankD]

We have the power we just choose to waste it all playing the leftie vs rightie game instead of holding government accountable.

So maybe Gruber was right?

HankD

 

[Jedi Knight]

Democrats care about illegals and enemies of America......what else need to be said?

 

[Crabtownboy]

Waterboarding has been found to be legal, and not torture.

Source please.

If you do not believe that waterboarding is torture, try it.

In a confirmation hearing Tuesday for James Comey to lead the FBI, the most memorable exchange FBI lasted just six seconds.

"Do you agree that waterboarding is torture and is illegal?" asked Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy of Vermont.

"Yes," Comey replied.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way...e-agrees-waterboarding-is-torture-and-illegal

Waterboarding, also called water torture, simulated drowning, interrupted drowning, and controlled drowning, method of torture in which water is poured into the nose and mouth of a victim who lies on his back on an inclined platform, with his feet above his head. As the victim’s sinus cavities and mouth fill with water, his gag reflex causes him to expel air from his lungs, leaving him unable to exhale and unable to inhale without aspirating water.

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/1470200/waterboarding

Waterboarding is a form of torture, more specifically a type of water torture, in which water is poured over a cloth covering the face and breathing passages of an immobilized captive, causing the individual to experience the sensation of drowning. Waterboarding can cause extreme pain, dry drowning, damage to lungs, brain damage from oxygen deprivation, other physical injuries including broken bones due to struggling against restraints, lasting psychological damage, and death.[1] Adverse physical consequences can manifest themselves months after the event, while psychological effects can last for years

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterboarding

US official admits waterboarding presently illegal

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/feb/14/terrorism.usa

 

[carpro]

This is an old discussion dredged up by democrats to take the focus off the multiple problems of the Obama administration.

There is nothing to really discuss. It's a partisan report written by democrats without bothering to even interview anyone that worked for the CIA.

Pure politics. Nothing else.

A willing press will go along and push everything else off the front page. Even Gruber, being one of the smartest men in America with one of the poorest memories in history will go to Section B.

If they really want to discuss something that's happening now, they could discuss the legality of drone strikes ordered by Obama that kill innocent bystanders. No one died of waterboarding. Obama is killing innocents by the dozen. Let's hear that one debated by the prima donnas in the Senate.

 

[InTheLight]

Source please.

If you do not believe that waterboarding is torture, try it.

From the Wikipedia link you provided:

These legal opinions (including the 2002 Bybee memo) argued for a narrow definition of torture under U.S. law. The first three were addressed to the CIA, which took them as authority to use the described enhanced interrogation techniques (more generally classified as torture) on detainees classified as enemy combatants. In March 2003, John Yoo, the acting Office of Legal Counsel, issued a fourth memo to the General Counsel of DOD, concluding his legal opinion by saying that federal laws related to torture and other abuse did not apply to interrogations overseas, five days before the March 19, 2003 invasion of Iraq. The legal opinions were withdrawn by Jack Goldsmith of the OLC in June 2004 but reaffirmed by the succeeding head of the OLC in December 2004.[14][15] During the presidency of George W. Bush, U.S. government officials at various times said they did not believe waterboarding to be a form of torture.

 

[Revmitchell]

This is an old discussion dredged up by democrats to take the focus off the multiple problems of the Obama administration.

Yep and you can bet your last dollar that it was intentionally released today the same day gruber was being grilled.