Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

caseymoz

(5,763 posts)
85. I'm sorry, there's not really that much of a comparison.
Mon Aug 26, 2013, 11:52 PM
Aug 2013

Though Vietnam did have a far larger casualty figure (and it was spread out over several presidents). None of those guys used their negligent fuck up (9/11) as a means to manufacture a couple wars wholesale. None of them privatized and contracted out parts of the US military to circumvent oversight and collect more pay. None of them bloated the US intelligence apparatus to prepare for oppression within the US. None of them had the huge imperial scheme that Bush had. No one combined criminal negligence with a grand plan the way Bush did.

Moreover, as bad as those crimes were, they all started out with the public behind them, or at least uninterested. The public was complicit. With Bush, millions of people marched against the Iraq War at the start. Now, how else do you tell a president that, no, the people are not behind this. They say it's a crime. He went ahead anyway.

And in hindsight, Vietnam is treated even now an error in judgment, not a crime. And I hate to say all those Presidents became more popular for what they did with the exception of Johnson.

Also, aren't you a little concerned that almost every recent president has done something criminal? The office is becoming more and more lawless, and dangerous. If we don't bust somebody, how are we going to stop that trend? The Cold War is long over. There's excuse now for the president to have extraordinary powers. None.

As for naming consecutive heads of state where both have been elected and the previous one has been prosecuted. I can name one right now: Italy, Silvio Berlosconi, the current PM incumbent, Enrico Letta.

And I know they weren't treating the Burlesconi case in the news as though it was unprecedented in the history of the world. Please, it's nothing that hasn't happened.

By. The. Way. Write. Please. Things. In. Familiar. Order. To. Not. So. As. Make. Your. Posts. Aggravating. To. Read.

And unless you're putting emphasis in your first person novel, Don't. Use. Periods.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

If this is really true ... earthside Aug 2013 #1
Post removed Post removed Aug 2013 #18
It's not true--federal law gives Bush immunity geek tragedy Aug 2013 #31
So, why did Obama say it's time to put all that behind us caseymoz Aug 2013 #43
You think this is the first time a former president has been sued like this? geek tragedy Aug 2013 #44
They do? caseymoz Aug 2013 #48
Are you talking about the recent certification or the "no looking backwards" speech? geek tragedy Aug 2013 #53
I'm sorry, there's not really that much of a comparison. caseymoz Aug 2013 #85
Gulf of Tonkin geek tragedy Aug 2013 #87
And people would have us believe ... 1StrongBlackMan Aug 2013 #82
The Way gussmith Aug 2013 #51
Not quite. jeff47 Aug 2013 #2
The suit included the premeditation of the Crimes in Iraq sabrina 1 Aug 2013 #8
And that would be based on what, exactly? jeff47 Aug 2013 #11
But, if those actions are not official because they are illegal JDPriestly Aug 2013 #23
Then you could sue after they've been convicted jeff47 Aug 2013 #29
Yes. Jurisdiction is a problem. But an opportunity may come. We shouldn't relent. JDPriestly Aug 2013 #64
I would agree with that. I think if a President is convicted of acting criminally during their admin stevenleser Aug 2013 #89
Maybe we need to change the name of the place we live. >>> BlueJazz Aug 2013 #3
If the Nazi's had thought of this pscot Aug 2013 #4
Unrec brooklynite Aug 2013 #5
Shhhhh.... SidDithers Aug 2013 #9
Don't bogart the butter! Initech Aug 2013 #19
So when do the Criminal Charges begin? The granting of immunity sabrina 1 Aug 2013 #12
The President cannot pardon until there are some charges and convictions. kentuck Aug 2013 #13
then explain the Ford pardon of Nixon stupidicus Aug 2013 #15
The President CAN pardon for crimes "known and unknown".... brooklynite Aug 2013 #32
Nixon Had Already Been Named... KharmaTrain Aug 2013 #50
but stupidicus Aug 2013 #74
Pre-Emptive Action... KharmaTrain Aug 2013 #76
No - it does not. brooklynite Aug 2013 #14
Torture is one: caseymoz Aug 2013 #45
To which the Defense will be... brooklynite Aug 2013 #49
They already have. Remember William Jefferson Clinton? RC Aug 2013 #46
Fraud against the people and government of the United States. - NT HardTimes99 Aug 2013 #54
By which you mean...lying to the public? brooklynite Aug 2013 #55
Um, fraud is entirely different from perjury (lying under oath). Fraud is HardTimes99 Aug 2013 #56
and the benefit or material gain was... brooklynite Aug 2013 #59
Read the definition I posted (relevant excerpt pasted below) and HardTimes99 Aug 2013 #62
Provide evidence for 2) and 3)... brooklynite Aug 2013 #78
Thank you. I suspect the government will get its way. JDPriestly Aug 2013 #25
Name an International Court that deals with Civil lawsuits brooklynite Aug 2013 #27
It could easily be turned into a criminal case based on the facts in the JDPriestly Aug 2013 #28
"Government officials acting in good faith" upi402 Aug 2013 #75
Again (and for the last time...) we're talking about LEGAL DEFINITIONS. brooklynite Aug 2013 #80
The BFEE would probbly kill him or his family if he didn't diane in sf Aug 2013 #6
Makes one wonder doesn't it? Populist_Prole Aug 2013 #7
that basically means Phlem Aug 2013 #40
... TBF Aug 2013 #88
corruption inc., nice handle snooper2 Aug 2013 #10
well, on hte brink of a new adventure in Syria... Scootaloo Aug 2013 #16
Post removed Post removed Aug 2013 #17
Tricky Barack just doesn't have the same ring to it. Fuddnik Aug 2013 #20
LOL +100 eom 99th_Monkey Aug 2013 #22
This merely stands for the unremarkable proposition geek tragedy Aug 2013 #21
So POTUS is literally 100% above the law in your view 99th_Monkey Aug 2013 #24
Under US law, he can't be sued in a civil case geek tragedy Aug 2013 #30
Why did Obama bother then, to sprinkle POTUS fairy dust on the Bush Crime Syndicate? nt 99th_Monkey Aug 2013 #34
Huh? nt geek tragedy Aug 2013 #36
The OP: "Obama Gives Bush "Absolute Immunity" For Everything <--THIS eom 99th_Monkey Aug 2013 #60
Obama did not give Bush anything, the post is a bunch of hyperbolic bs, which geek tragedy Aug 2013 #65
Which explains why you aren't concerned that "Obama Gives Bush "Absolute Immunity" For war crimes nt 99th_Monkey Aug 2013 #67
Oy, it simply does not occur to you that something might not be true, so long geek tragedy Aug 2013 #68
If I "have it in" for Obama so much ... 99th_Monkey Aug 2013 #69
Quote from 99th Monkey- Progressive dog Aug 2013 #81
Great detective work, I must say. 99th_Monkey Aug 2013 #84
WTF is that supposed to mean?... SidDithers Aug 2013 #39
The OP: "Obama Gives Bush "Absolute Immunity" For Everything <--THIS eom 99th_Monkey Aug 2013 #61
He didn't brooklynite Aug 2013 #58
The OP: "Obama Gives Bush "Absolute Immunity" For Everything <--THIS 99th_Monkey Aug 2013 #66
Repetition doesn't make you any more correct... SidDithers Aug 2013 #70
It must feel safe & comfortable 99th_Monkey Aug 2013 #71
Interesting choices... brooklynite Aug 2013 #72
The OP is "absolutely bullshit" for starters. Coyotl Aug 2013 #26
Yeah. Like the time Poppy pardoned Weinberger and the Iran-Contra traitors... Octafish Aug 2013 #33
Hope and change Phlem Aug 2013 #35
Sickening Injustice TheTruthBeKnown Aug 2013 #37
Do you have a daughter? Wait Wut Aug 2013 #42
????? TheTruthBeKnown Aug 2013 #57
!!!!! Wait Wut Aug 2013 #63
I thought he wasn't looking back. DeSwiss Aug 2013 #38
Dumbass article from commondreams... SidDithers Aug 2013 #41
why'd he wait so long to do this? is there some action or investigation pending nashville_brook Aug 2013 #47
Civil immunity, not criminal. AtomicKitten Aug 2013 #52
No he didn't MFrohike Aug 2013 #73
Makes sense...he doesn't want to be charged either. dkf Aug 2013 #77
Fuck that! gopiscrap Aug 2013 #79
Did you really expect RudynJack Aug 2013 #83
Just painful blackspade Aug 2013 #86
Another meeting of the Combustable Hair Club ... JoePhilly Aug 2013 #90
k&r! n/t wildbilln864 Aug 2013 #91
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Obama Gives Bush "Absolut...»Reply #85