This message was self-deleted by its author

[branford]

80. You raise many substantive and relevant points.

I agree with many of your arguments, and certainly believe that issues of both fact and law exist if GWB were charged with any number of crimes. Nevertheless, my prediction (not agreement) that GWB will never be charged still stands.

With respect to a domestic prosecution, there really is no crime of "fraud against the people of the U.S.A." I certainly understand your thinking, but to fit GWB's actions into cognizable and actual crimes in an American court would be to also expose innumerable past presidents, government officials and military officers, as well as Obama himself, to criminal sanction. The loathing for GWB and his actions in Iraq may be justified, but we should not easily forget Clinton's actions in the Balkans, Carter's military support of the Afghan rebels during the Cold War, Obama's actions in Libya, Yemen and Pakistan, and the list goes on and on. Heck, it was even Johnston who ramped-up our calamitous involvement in Vietnam, not Nixon. Ultimately, decisions of war and peace in the United States, generally no matter how tragic, are considered political decisions that affect the ballot box, not the courtroom. GWB will never be prosecuted in the U.S., nor should Obama ever realistically fear prosecution for his own military and extra-judicial adventures.

The above reasons and more will also assuredly prevent a foreign court from ever prosecuting a highly ranked American official, no less a former president. You make a good case in the abstract to try GWB in an international tribunal for breaches of international law. However, what the American people do not expect, and will not often tolerate at home, will certainly not result in proceedings on foreign soil. (See my expanded explanations of American distrust of foreign institutions in Replies #21 and #78). Let's not forget both that the U.S. has not even accepted the International Criminal Court and no country will risk a devastating military confrontation with us to force the turnover or capture of GWB to stand trial. Also, as a practical matter, all international accords and enforcement of international law are truly determined in the political sphere. No large country with significant military or economic influence, no less a permanent member of the security council, will ever see their current or former leaders subject to foreign or international justice. GWB will not be sitting in the Hague any time soon, nor will Tony Blair, Vladamir Putin, Barack Obama or any other Chinese, Russian, French, British or American official.

I should also note that your reference to a jury in connection with international justice is misplaced. Few countries, even established democracies, are as reliant on the jury system as the U.S. I do not believe that any major international civil or criminal court employs a jury. I cannot imagine the American electorate tolerating a group of unknown foreign jurists, speaking a foreign language, passing judgment on a U.S. official in a location few could find on a map without an jury to be seen, whether the defendant is GWB or any other American. The political fallout to any administration, and their political party and supporters that allowed such a spectacle, would be both epic and potentially violent.

In my opinion, only history and God will judge GWB.