HuffPost: Andrew Napolitano...Bush and Cheney "Absolutely should have been indicted"

[AsburySkinsFan]

Andrew Napolitano, Fox Contributor; Bush and Cheney "Absolutely should have been indicted".

per Guantanamo, suspension of habeas corpus, torturing, spying, arrested without warrant.

TosF6Ope53E

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/14/andrew-napolitano-fox-con_n_645671.html

Fox News contributor and host of Fox Business' new libertarian show Judge Andrew Napolitano said over the weekend that President Bush and Vice President Cheney should have been indicted over their administration's conduct around Guantánamo Bay.

In an interview with Ralph Nader on C-SPAN, Napolitano blasted the former administration for suspending habeas corpus.

"What President Bush did with the suspension of habeas corpus, with the whole concept of Guantánamo Bay, with the whole idea that he could avoid and evade federal laws, treaties, federal judges and the constitution was blatantly unconstitutional — and in some cases criminal," Napolitano said. "They should have been indicted. They absolutely should have been indicted. For torturing, for spying, for arresting without warrants. I'd like to say they should be indicted for lying but believe it or not, unless you're under oath, lying is not a crime."

Napolitano added that "the evidence...is overwhelming...that George W. Bush as President and Dick Cheney as Vice President participated in criminal conspiracies to violate the federal law and the guaranteed civil liberties of hundreds, maybe thousands, of human beings."

[Thiebear]

That was stopped right?

[Teller]

This is hysterical. You bring up "FAUX News" in threads more often than anyone I know. But when it suits the agenda, you're more than willing to use one of their hosts/contributors as a source.

You'll pardon me while I go start a thread touting the new playground the New Black Panthers just built for inner-city kids.

[AsburySkinsFan]

This is hysterical. You bring up "FAUX News" in threads more often than anyone I know. But when it suits the agenda, you're more than willing to use one of their hosts/contributors as a source.

You'll pardon me while I go start a thread touting the new playground the New Black Panthers just built for inner-city kids.

I have noticed here that you haven't addressed the content of the post. :thumbsup:

BTW, he was on CSPAN when he said it, when they start saying it on Faux News then I'll think about changing my opinion of them.

[Rdskn4Lyf21]

This is hysterical. You bring up "FAUX News" in threads more often than anyone I know. But when it suits the agenda, you're more than willing to use one of their hosts/contributors as a source.

You'll pardon me while I go start a thread touting the new playground the New Black Panthers just built for inner-city kids.

You and Napolitano are on the money...

[Destino]

That's not how it works. If you are going to screw up while in power do so in a way that people would just rather not talk or think about. Had they cheated on their wives or taxes they'd be dragged into court. Since indicting them would be an indictment of US policy and burst the "we're always the good guys" bubble, people will never go for it.

It's an interesting look at group behavior. Seriously would even most liberals support this at this stage? I doubt many Americans would want a trial in which we basically admit to the world all the horrible **** that was done while we wagged our finger at China at others over human rights.

[Teller]

I have noticed here that you haven't addressed the content of the post. :thumbsup:

I just think it's funny that FOX is ebil until one of their hosts says something you agree with. I'm looking forward to your next Glenn Beck thread.

And FWIW, I think my support of Obama during the last campaign more than clearly demonstrates where I come down on Bush/Cheney. I'm not the most conservative person on this board, but it takes some SERIOUS mistakes on the part of a republican administration to get me to support someone as far left as Obama is.

Also, I'll see if I can find the thread I started supporting the ACLU's lawsuit against the feds over warrantless wiretapping. It took me a while to come around, but I fully supported a criminal investigation into that matter.

[AsburySkinsFan]

I just think it's funny that FOX is ebil until one of their hosts says something you agree with. I'm looking forward to your next Glenn Beck thread.

Hey apparently the Judge is allowed to say whatever he wants to say whenever he's not on the clock at Faux.

Like I said, when I start hearing these things on the Faux network then we'll talk, until then they are still the GOP shills.

[AsburySkinsFan]

That was stopped right?

Remind me of your position on the Gitmo closure.

[sacase]

Remind me of your position on the Gitmo closure.

When did Gitmo close?

[Rdskn4Lyf21]

Hey apparently the Judge is allowed to say whatever he wants to say whenever he's not on the clock at Faux.

Like I said, when I start hearing these things on the Faux network then we'll talk, until then they are still the GOP shills.

At 1:37.....

gWCQhAx_U38

Also, Beck rails on Bush quite often. Then again, that would contradict what you said and would either 1. Not prove enough to you 2. Make me an extremist because I'll occasionally watch Beck 3. Leave you with no opinion on it because it doesn't fit into what you say. Hell, I'll go with all of the above.

....one other thing, I agree that Fox leans heavily towards the GOP. Every network (unfortunately) has a bias, no matter how great or small. I find it funny that you are willing to crucify Fox for their bias, yet you constantly post from the HuffingtonPost. That seems a bit hypocritical.

[twa]

So what's the hold up...Holder can't spell W?

[Teller]

Hey apparently the Judge is allowed to say whatever he wants to say whenever he's not on the clock at Faux.

Like I said, when I start hearing these things on the Faux network then we'll talk, until then they are still the GOP shills.

I admit, I do watch a little bit of FOX, but I also watch Brian Williams every night. Can we all agree that NBC isn't a GOP-shill network? I don't recall hearing anything like this there either.

OK, after your next comment, which I think is only fair, I'll drop the source issue. It just struck me as at least a little hypocritical, whether or not I agree with significant portions of what was actually said.

I do think Judge Napolitano is pretty decent in terms of his ability to analyze things -- especially legal matters -- in a fairly unbiased manner. He definitely leans right, but he's not deliberately inflammatory or misleading (that I've heard) the way some right-wing hosts can be.

And just to be clear, my positions on the topic at hand are:

Guantanamo: keep it open

Suspension of habeas corpus: wrong in every case that I can reasonably think of

Torture: waterboarding isn't torture, IMO, but actual torture has no place being used by our government. I'll grant myself the "being able to avoid nuclear holocaust by hurting one guy" exemption, but I think that situation is EXTREMELY rare, if it ever happens.

Spying: Necessary and good. (Unless you're talking about warrantless wiretapping, in which case it should be prosecuted.)

Arrested without warrant: Always wrong, in every situation I can think of

[aREDSKIN]

This is hysterical. You bring up "FAUX News" in threads more often than anyone I know. But when it suits the agenda, you're more than willing to use one of their hosts/contributors as a source.

You'll pardon me while I go start a thread touting the new playground the New Black Panthers just built for inner-city kids.

It is joyfully ironic isn't it??

[zoony]

It still comes down to a legal point of view, doesn't it? I mean, if it is an open and shut case, why wasn't it challenged easily at the time?

I'm not an expert on this issue but I do know that there are some very respected legal scholars out there who see clear judicial precedent with the actions taken by the administration.

Most times you start talking about indicting someone and throwing them in prison, having a 50/50 split among academics about the legality of said actions isn't usually part of the deal.

[stickyshooZ]

Judge Napolitono is awesome. True constitutionalist. He rails against all the corrupt SOBs, the Federal Reserve, the wars, the banks, and everything that goes against the spirit of the Constitution. Everyone who's ****ing about him being on Fox, go watch some of his other videos, there are plenty of them on Youtube. He's the real deal.

[AsburySkinsFan]

I admit, I do watch a little bit of FOX, but I also watch Brian Williams every night. Can we all agree that NBC isn't a GOP-shill network? I don't recall hearing anything like this there either.

Agreed, apparently Walter Cronkite took his spine with him when he retired.

[Teller]

Agreed, apparently Walter Cronkite took his spine with him when he retired.

I wish I could have lived through more of Cronkite's career. We were kids when he retired. But all of the video I've seen from him supports my opinion that he was one of the greatest television journalists of all time.

I also have a tremendous amount of respect for Tom Brokaw. IMHO, he was the greatest, most fair and honest, network journalist of our time. I was incredibly disappointed when he retired.

I perceived a slight shift left when Brian Williams took over, but that may well be a misperception on my part, due to my own bias. He's still good enough, and fair enough, that I can watch him without becoming agitated about clear left bias.

I should probably apologize for my tenor at the beginning of this thread. Though I think CNN leans left, I'm not above using one of their reports to make a point if I see fit. My bad on that.

I would be interested to see where you agree and disagree on my positions on the topics laid out by the judge.

[ACW]

This is hysterical. You bring up "FAUX News" in threads more often than anyone I know. But when it suits the agenda, you're more than willing to use one of their hosts/contributors as a source.

You'll pardon me while I go start a thread touting the new playground the New Black Panthers just built for inner-city kids.

That's 'cause Napolitano's not a shill like Hannity or Beck

[Thiebear]

Remind me of your position on the Gitmo closure.

[position Gitmo] We let go of 75% of the people and kept the few.

Bush wanted to let go of more but nobody would take them.

President Obama wants to let go of more but nobody would take them.

They are stuck.

[/end position on Gitmo]

Can you now answer my question on secret prison, sending some to other countries and what the thread was about now that President Obama is now in charge.

[Teller]

That's 'cause Napolitano's not a shill like Hannity or Beck

I despise Hannity. The guy is a complete a-hole and an idiot.

I do think Beck has some value; emphasis on some. (Founder's Fridays is a must-see, IMO.) But you have to watch him with a HEAVY does of salt (not a grain) and be informed enough to know what to take to heart, and what to cast off without a second thought.

Likewise, I like much of O'Reilly's radio show. And he actually does a TON for charity. His TV show is worthless though, IMO.

[Thiebear]

on his second day in office, obama acted on one of his campaign pledges by issuing an order (executive order no. 13491 (jan. 22, 2009)) designed to shut down secret prisons and ban bush-era torture practices, and directing that the red cross would have access to any detainees. But when we wade into it, the order turns out to be less than meets the eye. Only cia prisons are shut down. Prisons operated by the department of defense remain in place. The defense department overhauled its detention policies in the wake of the disclosures at abu ghraib and bagram, where prisoners were literally tortured to death. It embraced common article 3 of the geneva conventions as a “minimum baseline.” a number of observers concluded that the pentagon had been brought whimpering back into compliance with the basic norms that the american military largely authored in the first place. But is that conclusion correct?

Disclosures over the past weekend suggest that there are serious problems in a detention facility operated by the pentagon’s secretive joint special operations command (jsoc), the same outfit linked to executive assassinations, predator drone attacks contracted out to blackwater, and similar controversies. Here’s the washington post account:

Two afghan teenagers held in u.s. Detention north of kabul this year said they were beaten by american guards, photographed naked, deprived of sleep and held in solitary confinement in concrete cells for at least two weeks while undergoing daily interrogation about their alleged links to the taliban. The accounts could not be independently substantiated. But in successive, on-the-record interviews, the teenagers presented a detailed, consistent portrait suggesting that the abusive treatment of suspected insurgents has in some cases continued under the obama administration, despite steps that president obama has said would put an end to the harsh interrogation practices authorized by the bush administration after the sept. 11, 2001, attacks. The two teenagers — issa mohammad, 17, and abdul rashid, who said he is younger than 16 — said in interviews this week that they were punched and slapped in the face by their captors during their time at bagram air base, where they were held in individual cells. Rashid said his interrogator forced him to look at pornography alongside a photograph of his mother.

animals

[techboy]

And FWIW, I think my support of Obama during the last campaign more than clearly demonstrates where I come down on Bush/Cheney. I'm not the most conservative person on this board, but it takes some SERIOUS mistakes on the part of a republican administration to get me to support someone as far left as Obama is.

How odd. I seem to recall a rather earnest individual trying to convince me (and others) at an ES/RR tailgate that Obama was actually pretty conservative. Something about middle class tax cuts or the like. I think you were there, right? Can you refresh my memory as to the identity of the speaker? :evilg:

[Teller]

How odd. I seem to recall a rather earnest individual trying to convince me (and others) at an ES/RR tailgate that Obama was actually pretty conservative. Something about middle class tax cuts or the like. I think you were there, right? Can you refresh my memory as to the identity of the speaker? :evilg:

Obi-Wan? Obi-Wan? There's a name I've not heard in some time. Know him? (Lower's hood.) He's me.

I fully admit that candidate Obama and president Obama are two entirely different people. (A fact that the more skeptical members of said tailgate seemed to know would happen.)

I fell for the Jedi mind trick. He's not the president I was looking for.

Lesson learned. :doh:

[Destino]

People are proving my first post in this thread so far. None of you want to deal with the reality that this has absolutely nothing to do with left v right or a clear cut legal issue. This isn't politics as usual. This isn't the justice system. This is pure national pride and potential shame because ultimately you can't put a President on trial for national policy moves without putting the nation on trial with him. The US will not stand to be humiliated in such a fashion while the world watches. We'd rather allow behavior we supposedly oppose to continue than to admit it happened and that it was wrong. Maybe in 50 years some President will issue an apology for it once it's history book fodder and all players involved are dead.