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

cheapdate

(3,811 posts)
8. I won't be surprised to see the White House fight over this.
Tue Aug 5, 2014, 08:06 PM
Aug 2014

Regardless of what Obama's core beliefs on the matter are (who knows?), I think he's convinced that the spectacle of a long, bitter, divisive, and all-consuming legal battle over war crimes prosecutions for former and current military, government, and security officials would be extremely costly for the Democratic Party. He's signaled pretty clearly and consistently that he's against it. I might suggest he's scared of it.

Even though I marched, rallied, wrote letters, and sent contributions to prosecute the war criminals, I have to admit, reluctantly, that he may be correct in his estimation of the real political support for this fight.

Sure, national polls show broad support exists for things like income equality, but questions about national security and counter-terrorism are among those that remind us of how deeply Americans are divided and how removed from the majority the typical DUer really is.

Recommendations

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

Uh...we just did? You just did...just now? cheapdate Aug 2014 #1
"The White House put the CIA in charge of the redactions process" n/t PoliticAverse Aug 2014 #2
who does CIA director Brennan take his orders from? bigtree Aug 2014 #3
Were no actual foxes available? n/t winter is coming Aug 2014 #18
(Pulling Up A Chair...) BKH70041 Aug 2014 #4
It's not arguable that the White House isn't "obstructing" cheapdate Aug 2014 #5
I suppose the severity of a cover-up does depend on what's actually being obscured bigtree Aug 2014 #6
I won't be surprised to see the White House fight over this. cheapdate Aug 2014 #8
thanks for your insightful response bigtree Aug 2014 #10
Actually ... 1StrongBlackMan Aug 2014 #31
the more I consider the impact of such a 'scandal' that I'm positing bigtree Aug 2014 #43
Funny ... 1StrongBlackMan Aug 2014 #61
what about something along the lines he expressed Friday in partial defense of the Bush activity? bigtree Aug 2014 #65
What if he's ... 1StrongBlackMan Aug 2014 #75
Yes, participating in a cover-up of war crimes that are widely known is the best way to ... Scuba Aug 2014 #76
Think about what I wrote than think about what you wrote. eom. 1StrongBlackMan Aug 2014 #77
I guess I don't subscribe to the notion bigtree Aug 2014 #78
Admittedly, I haven't been following this closely; but ... 1StrongBlackMan Aug 2014 #79
I don't think anyone would be seriously talking about the President's responsibility in any of that bigtree Aug 2014 #81
Torture is no more a "political decision" than molesting a child. The fact that it was systemic TheKentuckian Aug 2014 #54
Yeah ... 1StrongBlackMan Aug 2014 #62
I'm not looking for a position trying to mount vapid defenses of some of the worst of the dark ages TheKentuckian Aug 2014 #67
+1000 legalizing torture was a crime, as was the torture noiretextatique Aug 2014 #63
Your job is far more important. Politicians manipulate and obfuscate and do whatever sabrina 1 Aug 2014 #26
Rec morningfog Aug 2014 #7
It isn't much of a cover up since the Senate knows the information. Johonny Aug 2014 #9
good point about the Senate knowing already bigtree Aug 2014 #11
Part of me thinks that choie Aug 2014 #13
that's an interesting observation bigtree Aug 2014 #21
Yeah and DiFi choie Aug 2014 #32
I suspect ... 1StrongBlackMan Aug 2014 #35
I thought about that bigtree Aug 2014 #49
Yes! I want to see that report, dammit. All of it. cheapdate Aug 2014 #52
A cover up suggests the W.H. is involved in an illegal action. pa28 Aug 2014 #12
there should be an investigation of the Brennan CIA's actions regarding the Senate investigation bigtree Aug 2014 #15
This message was self-deleted by its author pa28 Aug 2014 #25
He can prove that by firing Brennen, and Clapper and all the other Republicans sabrina 1 Aug 2014 #27
I hope you are wrong about Obama's knowledge but it seems I'm never quite cynical enough. pa28 Aug 2014 #40
We don't know what the President knew before about the CIA's activiities. But we know sabrina 1 Aug 2014 #60
Pelosi, Reid, DiFi, Leahy, Levin, Kerry and other powerful Dem leaders KoKo Aug 2014 #80
When you become a Republican... SidDithers Aug 2014 #14
that's your answer? bigtree Aug 2014 #17
You are an excellent Democrat. Always consider the source when you are being sabrina 1 Aug 2014 #28
Weak. That isn't even logically consistent. It was a republican administration morningfog Aug 2014 #34
Seems to me like you are on the wrong side of the torture issue. And calling people rhett o rick Aug 2014 #68
When? Raine1967 Aug 2014 #16
take a read through the conversations with folks who had enough respect bigtree Aug 2014 #19
I'm doing fine, thank you. Raine1967 Aug 2014 #23
is the accountability I'm looking for really just a 'libertarian' pursuit? bigtree Aug 2014 #24
At this point, no I don't. (to answer the question in the title of this response) Raine1967 Aug 2014 #29
your first response was a good one bigtree Aug 2014 #33
Wow, how very Republican. MohRokTah Aug 2014 #20
yeah, republicans always demand accountability from their own party bigtree Aug 2014 #22
Some are circling the wagons so hard that if called on will oppose all they fought for TheKentuckian Aug 2014 #36
So very true BrotherIvan Aug 2014 #45
You'll be calling for impeachment any day now. MohRokTah Aug 2014 #38
I'll fully support an investigation right now into Brennan's conduct bigtree Aug 2014 #59
It's very Democratic actually to ask questions, to try to get facts rather sabrina 1 Aug 2014 #30
So you condone letting torturers off the hook BrotherIvan Aug 2014 #41
So I guess you support impeachment. eom MohRokTah Aug 2014 #44
Oh For Fuck's Sake BrotherIvan Aug 2014 #46
As I suspected. MohRokTah Aug 2014 #47
I'm glad we're having this delightful interchange BrotherIvan Aug 2014 #48
. MohRokTah Aug 2014 #50
You're on ignore so I can't see your posts BrotherIvan Aug 2014 #51
. MohRokTah Aug 2014 #56
That always works on stupid people BrotherIvan Aug 2014 #66
You are wasting your time replying to some here. It is Mojorabbit Aug 2014 #86
You got that right BrotherIvan Aug 2014 #87
You and Sid with the same talking points. Sadly, that's all you got is calling people names. rhett o rick Aug 2014 #69
Covering for torturers? Sure is. nt Union Scribe Aug 2014 #82
It's not a coverup. More of a whitewash. Maven Aug 2014 #37
In the spirit of closure BeyondGeography Aug 2014 #58
This message was self-deleted by its author 1000words Aug 2014 #39
+1 BrotherIvan Aug 2014 #42
We'd better get the impeachment process going right away. Turbineguy Aug 2014 #53
So what's your point? Are you saying you apologize for Cheney's torture program? rhett o rick Aug 2014 #70
What is the point of pretending noise Aug 2014 #55
In Washington-speak... BlueCheese Aug 2014 #57
yeah, I think that's a reasonable view bigtree Aug 2014 #64
Redacting is literally covering up. It's easy to see. nm rhett o rick Aug 2014 #71
something interesting. I'll drop it here bigtree Aug 2014 #72
If the release of the "executive summary" of torture is delayed any longer, we need to contact rhett o rick Aug 2014 #83
I think before that happens bigtree Aug 2014 #84
Kicked and recommended. Uncle Joe Aug 2014 #73
When do we start calling this a (redacted) by the (redacted) (redacted)?" Tierra_y_Libertad Aug 2014 #74
It has been the entire time, hence the "look forward" aka look the other way Corruption Inc Aug 2014 #85
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»When do we start calling ...»Reply #8