The American Spectator

Melvin| 4.28.09 @ 7:16AM

The Left wants President Bush and Vice President to be crucified and their bodies displayed on the Washington Mall.
Only then and just maybe this final blood letting will sate their thirst of vitriol hatred they feel toward these two men.
Unfortunately for this country this macabre orgasm of hatred is reminiscent of what Robert Mugabe is doing in Zimbabwe is doing to his political enemies.
"But how you compare the political situation to what is happening in Zimbabwe to what is happening here in the US?"
"It's very easy my dear people...It's what leftist socialists government's do to their political opposition they get rid of them and display their carcasses as a warning to others who might disagree with the current political ideology."

stu.b.con| 4.28.09 @ 7:34AM

L'il Davey...every time your finely manicured wittle fingers hit the keyboard is another leap into the abyss of ignorance. Moron. Shall we go ahead and try fdr in absentia for the internment of Americans? Truman for the incineration of 100's of thousands of Japanese civilians? Bubba for his penchant for lobbing cruise missiles?
If you really want to live in a third world cesspool why not pack your twinkies and juice paks and head for Venezuela or Cuba? Or won't mommy and daddy give you the money this time?
go to hell

Bill| 4.28.09 @ 7:41AM

Dave might want to do a little research on the "I don't recall" defense. He'll discover that Hillary used it extensively during the Whitewater investigations.
On second thought, doesn't look like Dave has the capacity to be objective or to do research.

Darin| 4.28.09 @ 7:49AM

Interesting how Democrats hate it when Republicans play the game using the rules instituted by the same Democrats.

To other readers, please don't insult David Mathews. He likely can't help himself. Being liberal, we need to be somewhat understanding of his pointless ravings. While he doesn't get a pass, think of it more like an argument from a 2-year-old. Just chuckle at the absurdity and leave it alone.

Big J| 4.28.09 @ 8:22AM

The difference between previous witch hunts and this one is most disturbing: we are at WAR! These investigations, leaking of convenient portions of memos do nothing more than inform and embolden our enemies. Moveon.org and it's leftist minions will not stop until our country is completely destroyed.

Very sad.

Big J| 4.28.09 @ 8:33AM

It's kinda funny, when you think about it. Reminds me of the old Bill Cosby routine: "she's touching me! Will you stop touching Me?!"

I know you are, but what am I?!

Thanks for my morning laugh.

D.M. post deleted in 3, 2, 1.....

Aaron| 4.28.09 @ 8:54AM

Mr. Lord,

Great article, a pleasure to read first thing in the morning.

The left may well be the masters at the political sneak attack and smear campaign, but the right are thoroughly proficient at payback carpet bombing. I have a feeling that this administration will face a grilling from the right that will make the Clinton days forgettable. Bill should be (and probably is) thrilled. Can some say new found legacy?

1Freeman| 4.28.09 @ 9:06AM

I didn't even have to read the story to know Dave Mathews would be lurking in the comments section on this one. Troll, finding your endless posts spouting lies has gotten too easy.
Have you found employment yet?

Redheart| 4.28.09 @ 9:10AM

So typical. Liberal progressives refuse to read, study and learn. This article is very clear in laying out what has happened in the past and what the future might hold. It is important historical perspective that is contemplated by those with an interest in learning from the past and using that information to guide the future.

The very mention that the Obama administration may face scrutiny and question once they leave office obviously enrages his following. Hearings and prosecutions are unbecoming and certainly insulting to a former president, right? Indeed. That is why the author does comment that it is a sad fact in America that retaliation of this sort even exists, but yet it does. Welcome to politics. The Democrat lawyer quoted as saying they couldn't win at the ballot box so they had no path to power unless they used these tactics nailed it. Whether or not those commenting here will take a few minutes and read this again using intelligent discernment and a willingness to even try to embrace a differing point of view is a useless question because the answer is clear. What matters, and is the most disturbing of all, is the fact some of our friends here are 100% certain that there is guilt and evidence of war crimes. No benefit of trial, presentation of evidence or testimony. No fact finding, decision by a jury, nothing. In their minds, there is guilt beyond doubt and nothing short. While these same folks screech for legal representation and the benefit of trial for Gitmo terrorists, they have no such desire for democratic due process for a former administration. I agree w/ the columnist. There is now, and will continue to be, questions as to why Mr. Obama started drone bombings as soon as he took the helm. A country that we are not at war with was attacked and it was implemented without approval of Congress. There was collateral damage and innocents died. Has Code Pink and other such groups placed crosses on a field somewhere for these unfortunate bystanders, caught up in the terror of war and destruction, unable to help or defend themselves? Why did he do it? Was it because he was sobered and overwhelmed by those first national security briefings? Was he simply keeping a campaign promise of 'bombing Pakistan"?

Every president makes blunders and miscalculations, some of their own endeavor and some at the expense of poor intelligence and advisement. Every human is stuck with the same aweful fate--we are imperfect in every aspect of our lives. Mr. Obama will be no exception and America has a way of leveling the playing field when too much political arrogance is allowed to accumulate. Never in history has a president and staff taken over the White House with as much question and background inconsistencies that the biased media buried and refused to expose to daylight. Far too many questions existed in the minds of the nearly 50 million Americans that did not vote for Mr. Obama for him to waltz through his term, pointing accusatory fingers into the past without facing some tough questions about his own actions at some certain point in the future.

jim rice| 4.28.09 @ 9:37AM

This is one of the best articles I have ever read on this site. The Obama administration would do well to heed these warnings.

That said, bush and cheney and whoever else may have broken the law deserve to stand trial. If they're found guilty, they deserve to be punished. If they are found innocent, they deserve to go back to just being awful people. This isn't a matter of "criminalizing policy differences" as the authors on this site seem so fond of saying. There were laws. They were broken. Someone is guilty and deserves to be punished.

If bush wanted to break laws, he should have changed the laws first... using the proper channels. THEN, if he was prosecuted, we could talk about "criminalizing policy differences." That's such a stupid phrase.

Regardless, this article was a good and informative read despite its biases. Thanks, Mr. Lord.

tonypal| 4.28.09 @ 10:11AM

David Matthews:

Would you please be so kind as to explain, with precision of course, how Pres. Bush violated the Constitution? This is a familiar theme of the Bush haters on this site and elsewhere, yet we never get any details. I will await your explanation.

Hair| 4.28.09 @ 10:12AM

Ahh, I've been dropping down to the comments first, just to read D M's posts, to see if the left wing talking points have in anyway evolved. Sad to say no! And to confront D M with any logic, reason, or information is a total waste of time. Also to fall to his emotional base level only reinforces his beliefs!
He is a troll!!!!
And comes here not to glean , nor share information. But as a child throwing a fit in a public space, just wants your undivided attention!
The reward is not that thing he is crying about, but the fact that you are watching him cry!

tonypal| 4.28.09 @ 10:14AM

David Matthews:

"Everyone involved in crimes against humanity ought to stand trial for their crimes and face justice."

I agree. Perhaps we should start with the biggest murderer in our hemisphere. You know, the left's hero, Fidel Castro. Just a thought.

mark in wv| 4.28.09 @ 10:14AM

Great piece! So much of what you read today is reactionary, with no sense of perspective or history. Thank you.

Jack| 4.28.09 @ 10:26AM

If George was furious just imagine how Nan feels right now! She gave cover, nutured and abetted the strategy decisions to use harsh techniques to bring down the bad guys. Now what do we hear? I didn't, I did, I didn't before I did, I did or didn't, I doesn't remember. Oh will somebody else get infront of all these pesky cameras and microphones? PPPPLLLLeeeeaaaasssseeee!

Mary| 4.28.09 @ 10:30AM

This is an excellent piece!

Two things I thought of when reading it. The first is that pursuing this hunt for our "moral bearings" is going to require tacitly asking the American people to choose where to place their affection and where to offer their forgiveness. I don't see those responsible for bringing this front and center accruing benefit, especially once photos are released. It's like forcing people to see the dismemberment of a baby following abortion. Everyone knows it wrong; but nobody wants to be forced to look at gruesome photos. And, while the photos of the abused may be sympathy invoking they will be nowhere near as gruesome, as the memory of 9/11 will naturally spring to mind.

Yesterday's idiocy with the low-flying plane in NYC was a bit of a premature punctuation mark here.

The second thing I thought of is President Eisenhower at the side of President Kennedy following the Bay of Pigs debacle. In an old issue of NRO, it was reported that Kennedy asked Eisenhower for this joint appearance to shore up national solidarity. Apparently, Eisenhower agreed but warned Kennedy that he would only do it once, and that as far as any future snafoos were concerned, he would have to learn to stand on his own two feet.

You forget what a great leader Eisenhower was. He was president when I emigrated to the United States. His genius was easy to dismiss because he wasn't so self-impressed. MacArthur said he was "the best clerk I ever had." I like MacArthur, and even given that he was first in his class at Westpoint, the judgment that he had a "brittle mind," was accurate.

Northern Rebel| 4.28.09 @ 10:40AM

Is this the same Dave Mathews that has that famous rock band? If so, I guess this is just another feces dump out of the tour bus!
What ignorance!

JP| 4.28.09 @ 10:57AM

Writers on this site as well as other institutions have warned the President about setting in motion events in which he would lose control of. It is no secret that there are quite a few Senators and House members who would like nothing more than to frog march any number of former Bush WH officials into a court room. The UN also has claimed jurisdiction.

I seriously doubt that a federal judge in that case would not demand all of the documentation concerning the WOT policies to be made public (esp. congressional oversight meeting minutes). Former VP Cheney is already demanding this be done.

This entire imbrigolio could blow up in the Dems face, harm national security, and become a horrible distraction for the President. But once the situation unfolds.... it takes on a life of its own.

mijattarab| 4.28.09 @ 11:14AM

Stop Obama's Illegal Wars! Put Obama on trial for killing innocent Somali pirates.
What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

JJ JR| 4.28.09 @ 11:57AM

Y'all,

Exellent article per usual from Jeff Lord.

Jeff, one mistake in this passage:

"Second, the release of "Top Secret" documents can easily be reviewed by a new and different batch of lawyers and ruled to be a deliberate breach of the Espionage Act of 1917. This statute plainly states that a government official who has information "relating to the national defense and has reason to believe it could be used to harm the United States and willfully transmits the information to an unauthorized recipient'' -- meaning, in the case of the Obama officials, the media -- is open to prosecution and a ten-year prison sentence. "

The POTUS is the ultimate classification and DEclassification authority. That statute governs all government officials EXCEPT the POTUS. The POTUS can decide on his lonesome to declassify ANYTHING that's currently classified by the USG. This is one of the many reasons why it's sooooo important to actually elect a President who actually understands and promotes American Exceptionalism and our standing in the world--not the opposite!

Mary| 4.28.09 @ 12:24PM

This is one of the many reasons why it's sooooo important to actually elect a President who actually understands and promotes American Exceptionalism and our standing in the world--not the opposite!

Amen to that! On another blog, a commenter noted that history might record this period as the epoch of America's self-loathing.

Big Leo| 4.28.09 @ 12:37PM

Every time Dim Dave posts, he puts money into the pockets of the publishers of American Spectator. Their advertising rates are based on the number of people who read and also those who post here. Go Davie, go!

Son Of Sam| 4.28.09 @ 12:41PM

Both sides want to criminalize the others policy initiatives. The difference is that patriots, conservatives and Republicans are protecting America from her enemies, while liberals, ObamaNazis and Democrats are apologizing for America to those same enemies, and to the entire world.

That's all you need to know.

Stay strong until freedom dawns,
Son Of Sam
http://www.geocities.com/samadamssos

Mathewsblaster| 4.28.09 @ 12:52PM

Typical of the little lady, Mathews uses legerdemain and friable 'arguments' (if they can be called such) in a offcious attempt at seeming sagacious.

Senescent attempts at appearing trenchant fail and reveal hebetude.

Ms. Mathews is surely a farrago of several moveon personel assigned to assault this and other web sites on a diurnal basis.

Like their insouciant hero, Bill Clinton (still wearing a "spoof me!" sign on his butt) the two Ms. Mathews will prove fugacious and retire to their sinecures at CAP.

Harold Theisen| 4.28.09 @ 1:07PM

Editor of Comment Column:
David Matthews is like a mangy hound who keeps showing up for a bone to chew on. But at this site, he has found tenderloin steaks. Not only one steak, but dozens. This hound tosses off fleas while afflicted with severe flatulance, which generally stinks up the porch. Stop feeding this hound and maybe he'll just go away.

Truthteller| 4.28.09 @ 1:17PM

Dave Matthews,

Is Obama guilty of crimes against humanity for his drone bombings and should he be tried and punished as you advocate for Bush?

NavyBrat| 4.28.09 @ 1:38PM

Dave Matthews. First of all, please stop besmirching the name of one of my favorite bands. I actually like them, & your comments might remain in my head the next time I feel like going to one of their shows. Secondly, maybe since you think that internment was a crime against humanity, then you & your ilk can stuff that drivel about what a good president FDR was. After all, the New Deal didn't work, & the internment camps were "crimes against humanity," then why don't we wipe the histories clear of any mention of this heinous individual. As for the atom bomb being an "act of terror," you can pound that, too. I suppose you think it would've been better to INVADE the home islands of Japan, thereby costing about half a MILLION lives, if not more. By the same standards that morons like you set, we should also erase ANY mention in history of the terror President Truman. You people are so predictable. Why is it that YOUR country is always the wrong doer? Do OTHER countries do anything wrong in your opinion? Were the Nazis just "misunderstood?" What about Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Amin, Abu Nidal? I suppose they were "misunderstood" in their efforts to bring about a "worker's paradise."

cwbois| 4.28.09 @ 1:44PM

Don't be mean to DM we need to keep him around to show our kids what a person on drugs looks and acts like. Maybe he does think like he writes or maybe he just gets off stirring the pot. Either way he and his type are as meaningless as their words. Have a great day DM, dont spill the cool aid on your way to the sandbox.

Bob Sacamano| 4.28.09 @ 2:15PM

I read a similar column a day or-so-ago and the final conclusion was the people who attended the interrogation briefings and their staffs were going to incur an anal exam for their recollections of said briefings. Said anal exam will become expensive, a proctologist's dream.

Marc Jeric| 4.28.09 @ 2:22PM

Just like the murderous communist regimes call themselves "People's Democratic Republic" so our commies like this creepy union goon David Mathews call the normal interrogation methods of the Islamo-fascist terrorist beasts of prey "torture". All this while those beasts enjoy their tropical Gitmo paradise, well fed and cared for by the best doctors available anywhere on earth. There has been no torture - you commie scum and bottom feeder!

Bob| 4.28.09 @ 2:26PM

Remember that this is all a part of political strategy for Obama and Axelrod. The most probable outcome for those people who have studied Obama (unlike most of you here), is that Obama will label this as a strictly legal matter and Holder will decide that poor legal opinions are not illegal. The Congress will devolve this episode into one that degrades the Republicans but does not try to get any legal remedy. It will be like the 9/11 Commission in that respect inasmuch as no one was blamed. We will find that there were some memos that said that the interrogation efforts were fruitful, but there were many others that argued against them. Both will be released in some form.

There will be an effort to disbar a couple of lawyers outside of Congress and obviously an attempt at impeaching one judge. Both of these will be for advertising purposes only and will not be successful.

That will be the Axelrod/Obama strategy. If you studied Obama, you'd know that. Watch and learn.

ds80| 4.28.09 @ 2:40PM

Go ahead David Mathews, 'fess up: ideology-wise, what's very clear is that you are Obama's homosexual love child by Chris Mathews. Ooooh. All tingly and everything.

ds80| 4.28.09 @ 2:43PM

Big Leo has a point: whilst Davy Boy posts away, A.S. profits and we just laugh at him. Thanks for the free enterprise Davy!

Michael Tomlinson| 4.28.09 @ 3:47PM

Bravo Mr. Lord! I fully agree bring it on, but know this BO we're going to drag Bill Clinton and his administration into this whole messy business, because he along with Reno, Pelosi, Reid and Rockefeller and not George W. Bush were the architects for the rendition program and aggressive interrogation.

As for Bob and those who believe in the "brilliance" of the Axelrod/Obama team I would suggest they discover why Gallup found so many American's think Obama sinks and then look at Governor Deval Patrick for a glimpse of BO's political future. Thanks to David Axelrod BO is toast and his fawning drones don't even get it.

Don't lose hope Republicans and conservatives change is coming!!!!!

Bob| 4.28.09 @ 3:48PM

Bob,
You should cut a few of us some slack. I think plenty of people here know what Obama is up to. He wishes to feed his Far Left some meat on the cheap. The President obviously underestimated the pent-up anger of his Netroots as demenostrated by his 3 flip-flops in a period of just 72 hours.

A good portion of the President's party and an even greater portion of its donor base wants some GOP insiders ruined, bankrupted, and goaled. Believe me, if the President thinks he could get away with it politically, he would.

But these kind of Beltway jihads can take on an entire life of thier own. They are unpredictable; just ask those in the GOP how well the ClintonDerangementSyndrome worked out for them circa. 1998-2000.

Mattled| 4.28.09 @ 3:49PM

Yay----a truth commission to find out what Nancy Pelosi knew and when she knew it.

Quick, she better get Jamie "The Wall" Gorelick for some Sanny Franny tap-dance coaching.

Jamie, famous for erecting the famous "wall" for protecting Clinton's-----dare I say it, e"l"ections?

Mattled| 4.28.09 @ 3:52PM

Overeaching has always been a liberal trait.

NavyBrat| 4.28.09 @ 3:55PM

Nice to see a familiar handle from the Washington Times site, ds80. I miss some of the wit of the regulars there, & your love child analogy didn't disappoint. Hopefully, the WT will get the comments on their site back up & running soon. It really is the best in my opinion.

PS. Strange that there's no more drivel from our fraternal socialist brother, Dave Matthews. Maybe he realized he was providing revenue to the site as others have pointed out. Well, you know what Oscar Wilde said, "Some cause happiness wherever they go. Others, whenever they go." I think it's safe to say we're happy Dave has gone.

Mattled| 4.28.09 @ 4:08PM

M.T.--hope you are right except for Deval doesn't have the MSM Mafia Drive-By machine applauding Obama every time he sneezes (Did you see the way he put his hand over his mouth-----what a brain he has!).

Mr Lord---it's' the media. They have to be stopped. Someone has to come up with a long-term plan.

I nominate Ari Fleischer, who has more intelligence in his pinkie than Obama has in all that space between his sail-like ears.

Mattled| 4.28.09 @ 4:18PM

Bob---What you term Clinton Derangement Syndrome was really the media finally covering what had been said/known about him by the right, including this publication and Mr. Tyrrell. It took Matt Drudge to open the floodgates because Newsweek had the story-----and sat on it.
Therefore lost the scoop, and the rest is history. Conservative bloggers got noticed---bad for the left.
Dan Rather memos? Bloggers from the right again.

How did it work out? well, Gore lost and Bush won---and then won again.
No coattails.
Reagan had coattails.

Bush's VP (Cheney) didn't run.

Then when he re-entered politics (with his wife running), the left called him a racist!? WTF? I thought he was the first black president?

Who's afflicted again?

I'd say CDS worked pretty well. Although we called it the truth.

Mattled| 4.28.09 @ 4:24PM

Sorry---the period 1998-2000 mentioned as Clinton Derangement Syndrome was really the beginning of President Lewinsky's final two years.

The Drudge story was the history making beret wearing blue dressed intern. Thanks to Monica who defined the eight years of a Clinton Presidency. Perhaps history will be kinder in the long run, but who can argue that is what he will be remembered for short-term.

stmichrick| 4.28.09 @ 5:10PM

I think the Dear Leader is in an excellent position to call a halt to all of this; if only he can rationally envision the prospects for his own legal and financial future.

He probably looks at the most corrupt of all, Bill Clinton, with his speaking fees, book royalties, travel and new-found respect and thinks; doesn't matter. We'll end up on our feet. He'll overlook the fact that W could have gone after the Clintons in a big way, didn't, and this is what HE gets.

That analysis, of course, overlooks those who work with him of more modest means and prospects.

Michael L. Hauschild| 4.28.09 @ 5:28PM

Captain Trips pours across our southern border while Walking Dude One photo-ops Lady Liberty. Also pandemic is the stench of the defecation issuing from the mouths of his podium minions and the invasive cawing of the sentinel crows on the conservative blogs. Take heart though, in 2010 the Trashcan Man will cometh bearing ballots cast on the backs of the voters 10W40’s.
Hey, you try writing like Steven King, a great book but a truly whacked out author. Turns out though you (he not me) can write this stuff.

ben| 4.28.09 @ 5:29PM

The dems could make waterboarding illegal but they haven't. Instead they want a show trial. They want to try these people in the court of public opinion, where laws, logic, and reason don't matter. They want to grandstand and take the appearance of the ethical, moral, righteous leaders, while castigating Republicans as exactly the opposite.
If the street I live on has a speed limit of 25 then it is illegal and wrong for me to drive 50. The law has been written, signs have been posted and ignorance of the law is no excuse for breaking it. Now, what if my neighbor, a crotchety old man thinks 20 mph is too fast. Would he then have the right to ticket me or have me arrested for driving 25? Of coarse he wouldn't. The elected lawmakers decided what the top mph limit for that road is, and anybody who drives up that speed is acting within the law. If enough people think that speed is too fast then they can petition their lawmakers to change the limit. Until that limit is legally changed, any speed up to 25 mph is legal no matter what anyone believes.
This is what's going on here. The Geneva Conventions outlined what legally constitutes torture. We have had ample time to ratify or add to it but have not. Now, because some people (biased by their politics) call waterboarding torture, we're supposed to arrest those waterboarders. Just because you think it's torture doesn't make it so. For waterboarding to be considered torture we would first have to change the laws to make it so. Once it is against the law, then and only then is it illegal. These people who want the commission are just the old crotchety man who think 20 mph is too fast.

ds80| 4.28.09 @ 9:16PM

Cheers, NavyBrat (yours truly is also a member of that esteemed club). Glad to see that WT difficulties are not just my own (I thought for a sec I had tweaked one too many liberal noses and got booted).

As for D.M: like any whiny Lib with an adolescent mentality, when confronted he vanishes like a fart in a fan factory. Not that he takes anything of substance with him when he goes. Just diatribe and ad hominem (go ahead Dave ... you can Google both those words).

Michael Tomlinson| 4.28.09 @ 9:35PM

A little political reality. Bush had coattails in 2004 unlike Reagan who lost Republican seats his second time at bat. In 2002 Bush defied history and took Congress for his party. The only thing that brought him down was conservatives falling for MSM Bush basing. I can still hear Sean Hannity whining about his "independence" as he did the liberals dirty work for them. Sometimes we're our own worst enemies.

Another Democrat who is an illustration of arrogant BO is the idiot Martin O'Malley in Maryland. He's done for Maryland what Obama did for the US and it looks like even the moronic Democrats of that state are fast tiring of his antics.

BO stinks and while his drones refuse to admit their displeasure with his BS as unemployment climbs and doesn't get better over the next year Democrats will have problems on their hands. Hopefully, we win just enough seats to position ourselves for victory in 2012, but I don't want the GOP to save him like they did Clinton. Let the Democrats continue to barely control Congress after next years elections then hold them responsible for everything and remind voters under Bush and Republicans unemployment was 6%, the economy grew from 3-5% annually and the stock market and housing market were booming.

Claudia| 4.29.09 @ 12:40AM

From David Matthews@8:41 a.m.:
"Christianity is a violent, bloodthirsty religion for a reason. "

Ba-al-zebub? Is that you?!! Tell me, how DO you type without setting fire to the keys? Or, do you have a secretary? sarcasm off

I do think that we oft times read the essence of evil on our conservative pages from the so-called Far Left. That's the only thing that makes any sense of our country today. What once was good will become evil; what once was evil will become good.

Deborah D| 4.29.09 @ 5:19AM

Excellent article, Mr. Lord. I always look forward to your historical perspective. All Americans could use some history about now. Funny, everytime I see the president I wonder how much history he knows of this country. And then the next thought I have is -- he only knows what his left-wing education has taught him.

Our first multicultural-politically correct, America-is-the-worst-country-in-the-world president. (At least until The One changes everything wrong (right) about it).

Perhaps some right-winger could offer to shake hands with the president and ala Hugo Chavez slip him a copy of Bill Bennett's "America the Last Best Hope," just so he could have a more fair and balanced outlook.

I hope Obama heeds your warnings, sir. This country is in such turmoil, we truly don't need this hateful look back. God bless.

Echohawk| 4.29.09 @ 8:10AM

An excellent article.
The MSM is full of Woodward-Bernstein wannabees, who dream of winning Pulitzers after bringing down Republican administrations.
Even conservative, evangelical pubbies from the reddest of red states know how karma works and revenge is sweet.
The Obama adminstration, heed this: some time in the future, every obituary ever written about Bill Clinton will mention Monica Lewinsky and his almost impeachment.
What goes around comes around, guys, and with immense legal fees.

JamesJ| 4.29.09 @ 8:46AM

Lets see...Charlie Wilson, a democrat, supplies the Mujahadeen (later the Talisban) with illegal weapons..and gets a movie. The left claimsReagan/North did the same thing with Iran and they wanted prosecutions.
Hypocrits

Liz| 4.29.09 @ 10:58AM

This brilliantly put into historical context what I have been thinking the last 100 days - Obama is going to get seriously prosecuted and put in jail, there is plenty to go after him on. What goes around comes around.

Jack Neidlinger| 4.29.09 @ 5:20PM

Okay producers. those whoe vote foe a living have voted themselves a textbook Socialist, totalitarian administration and congress. It's time for those of us who still believe in liberty to take our money and leave. Who are they going to tax when everyone is on the take from the governent and we and the real producers are in Costa Rica or some other half assed country that we can buy. Hasta La Vista Bamster!!!

S.L. Toddard| 4.29.09 @ 9:05PM

DISCLAIMER: I've noted before that there is a loser here who has been using my name. It's the buffoon who calls Bob "blow-bob". I am not that person. He is a rather dull-witted Fox News neoconservative who regurgitates talk-radio talking points which he mixes with vulgar, low-life insults. A phony conservative, although that seems to put him in the majority as far as this site or the GOP goes.

Anyhow, back to Jeffrey Lord's piece:

Ever notice that when regular people break the law it's called a "crime" but when persons in high office break the law it's called a "policy difference"? Or that when regular Americans break the law they are subject to the machinations of the most merciless and unforgiving legal system in the history of the world (we imprison more of our citizens than any country in the world or in history - more than Stalin ever did) but when persons in high office break the law we are urged to "look forward, not backward"? Do the faux-conservatives that frequent this place really support a two-tiered justice system, wherein regular working Americans receive some of the harshest penalties in the world for even victimless crimes while powerful elites are allowed to break the law - to commit war crimes, to spy on their own citizens - with no accountability? Have you people really strayed so far down that road, to the point that your worship of Authority is such that you believe the powerful should be literally above the law?

It's fitting, though ironic, that Jeffrey Lord cites Ronnie Reagan in his rather long-winded defense of elite lawbreaking. Reagan signed the Convention Against Torture in 1989, which *compels* us to investigate any *alleged* acts of torture. Which is to say that if torture is alleged - and it has been here - it is *illegal* under US and international law (as per the treaty signed by the sainted Ronald Reagan himself) to fail to investigate and prosecute if torture is found to have taken place:

"The State Party in territory under whose jurisdiction a person alleged to have committed any offence referred to in article 4 is found, shall in the cases contemplated in article 5, if it does not extradite him, submit the case to its competent authorities for the purpose of prosecution.

No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat or war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture"

Article 6 of the US Constitution declares that this treaty, indeed all treaties "made under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land."

My question to pretend-conservatives is this: do you no longer believe in the Rule of Law? Because one cannot oppose investigations that are legally compelled while claiming to believe in the Rule of Law, as it is *illegal* to fail to investigate *alleged* acts of torture. And for any who believe no "torture" took place, or that what did take place was "legal", what reason is there to oppose investigations in that case? Apart from urging our District Attorney to break the law by electing to not investigate, an investigation would surely help your cause, as it would end in their exoneration if nothing illegal took place.

One can either embrace the Rule of Law and support investigations and prosecutions (if illegal torture is found to have taken place) or one can abandon the Rule of Law - the Constitution itself - and support the obscene, anti-American, power-worshipping notion that the Law is only for regular people, not for the richest, most powerful elites.

Bill O'Reilly and the "conservatives" at NRO and here talk a good game about Law and Order and the evil elites, but when it comes time to actually hold elites accountable under the law we see their true colors, don't we?

Lingerie| 9.12.09 @ 11:01PM

sexy lingerie wholesale lingerie