Indictments, Indictments, Indictments

[berni_mccoy]

That's about all that will result of the CIA leak investigation.

First, I'd like you to imagine the mafia. Now, I'd like you to imagine the boss of the mafia with the ability to pardon for any crime. Next, I'd like you to imagine that the police are controlled by the mafia.

Now that that is clear in your mind, Bush is the boss, the mafia is the administration and congress is the police (at least the controlling part of congress).

Nobody in the mafia rats on anyone else in the mafia (unless the mafia wants them to). This group is in lockstep to the extreme and Bush has the ability to hand out a blanket 'get out of jail free' card.

Don't mean to be too negative, just want everyone to recognize what we are up against here. I see post after post of people talking about Cheney et al going to prison... it's a nice idea, but I've had my hopes dashed once too many here.

[nadinbrzezinski]

1. Oh I am giddy they are about to get indicted

the hard slug starts the second after the announcement and it WON'T be easy, if at all

[Buford Pusser]

2. They're toast -- just ask Nixon

I hear you, bernie, but to a similar degree the same phenomenon was present in the Nixon Administraton and it got him nowhere.

Fitzgerald's the real deal. I know very little about him -- but that's one reason I trust him: nothing obviously self-aggrandizing about the man.

The men and women in his sights are idealogues, but they're also selfish. When their butts are in the witness chair before that grand jury, facing the aggressive questions of an apparently relentless prosecutor, their oath to self-preservation, spun deep within their DNA, will turn those butts into buttermilk and they'll rat each other out.

Fitzgerald won't get the whole truth, but he'll get enough of it that the reign of Bush's men is over. Their done. Their toast.

Fox News might not even hire them.

[mestup]

4. "Fox News might not even hire them."

LOL!

[Toots]

10. Right like they didn't hire Ollie North

A true American Traitor, one who actually sold weapons to a declared enemy of the USA. Fox will be ringing their phones off the hook trying to sign them up. Fox is every bit as treasonous as these slime.

[longship]

3. Glass half-empty, eh?

Keep the faith, berni_mccoy.

Hell! I've got a magnum of champagne on ice and have the popcorn popper ready to go. You wouldn't want me to go to all that trouble and expense for no dud firecracker.

Now we all know that this Fitz guy is a good ol' Joe. He don't give two damns 'bout what anybody else thinks. He's just gonna do his job the way he always does. They call him apolitical. That's good enough for me.

Now that wiley chimpy may get some ideers 'bout slip-slidin' away from this here trouble. But there's a real problem with that. If he interferes at all with this here biz, the country ain't gonna like it too much, I spect.

So, keep the faith, my friend. It's all gonna work out okay. And you might want to put some champagne on ice fer yerself. I'll save ya some popcorn, if ya like.
:+ :D

[nadinbrzezinski]

5. With all the popcorn already poped

we can swim in the stuff!

;-)

[petgoat]

6. I bet the 22 involved haven't slept in 10 days

Did you see those pictures of Bush in that schoolroom today? He was
stooped, haggard, and looked like a sick old man. Fitzgerald is
making them sweat. He's going to make them turn on each other.

And if I may get real real speculative, there might be something going
on besides. For some time there's been speculation that the reason
there was no military defense on 9/11 is because the response was
confused by false radar blips in the FAA radar and the NORAD radar.
If this is so, then the official 9/11 story is a coverup and a lot of
people know it.

For the last two days, Logan airport has been disrupted by a
malfunctioning radar system that inserts false blips.

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/apus_story.asp?category=1110&slug=Airport%20Delays

If there's been a coverup, everybody who knows about the 9/11 false
blips has got to be sweating heavily.

In my wildest fantasies, Logan's false blips are the opening salvo of
CIA's war against the Bushcists. They say "It can be done, here's how
it was done, we believe it was done 9/11 and the people who did it are
going down."

[hang a left]

16. Wouldn't it be absolutely fantastic if Tom Flocco was right? eom

[berni_mccoy]

9. Thanks for that... I'm trying

But everything I've seen from this cabal is consistent with a blanket-pardon end-game and no impeachments.

Indictments damaging no doubt, so I think it will hurt an 08 pres run for repubs, but I have my doubts about it hurting repubs in congress.

One this is for sure, if we WANT it to hurt repubs in Congress, we need to start campaigning TODAY on the Repub Corruption issue... there is enough material out there now and I don't think it's been given enough focus by the dems yet. More is needed.

[longship]

11. Re: blanket pardons

A constitutional academic friend of mine (who has appeared on CNN in that capacity) told me the other day that the use of the presidentical pardon to escape accountability for this WH will likely result in quick impeachment proceedings for abuse of power. He said that "people would not like that" and that Congress support for the WH would fracture on that basis.

I really think that pardons at this point would initiate a tragic constitutional crisis that if not responded to would mean that we had a WH that is totally lawless and unaccountable. Regardless of whether US citizens are informed enough to respond to this crisis, the international community is not stupid. There might be severe repercussions.

I think that it is within the capacity of these thugs to try to invoke presidential pardon, but I pray that they don't. I can't think of any good outcome.

[FreedomAngel82]

25. If there isn't any good outcome from it

for the republicans the GOP officials won't let them. They'll find someway to stop them from doing so. Remember with these people they put their party above the country. With them it's self-intrest's, party, country.

[longship]

32. This is precisely my thinking.

nt

[TrogL]

31. You already have a WH that is lawless and unaccountable

They're ignoring the Geneva Convention.

They refuse to take part in the World Court either for NAFTA dispute resolution or war crimes.

The person sitting in the big chair is appointed.

[longship]

33. An accounting will happen to these guys.

Eventually, all lawless administrations must fail. It has always happened, and it always *will* happen. It is in our country's best interest to see to it that it happens sooner rather than later. I gravely fear for what may be required if it is not sooner.

The political environment has gone very, very sour for the neocons. With this investigation apparently going to very high places, this may be our best chance to bring on the necessary and inevitable correction. I am very afraid, however, that this may be our only chance to fix things without grave consequences.

We are already in uncharted Constitutional waters here.

[FreedomAngel82]

24. I agree

I know how you feel. I don't want to get my hopes up but I do have faith in Fitzgerald. He's proven himself to me. I do think there will be something. Why else would Bush be looking like crap? And to the democrats who are running in 2006 and 2008 they need to pound the corruption angle like crazy. Show all they've done and how they don't care about the public.

[autorank]

7. You left out "management", you know the people that own most of the

performing assets. Here's what they think:

End Game, "Is this the end of Little Rico?"

[radfringe]

8. toon says it all

http://radfringe.tripod.com/

[porphyrian]

12. The President can't pardon anyone if he's personally involved...

Do you really think he isn't, or just that we can't prove it?

[Demoiselle]

13. He can't issue pardons for indictments only, can he?

I thought only persons found guilty of something could be pardoned. I think we're a long way from the end of this one!

[porphyrian]

14. No, he can't.

But my understanding was that the OP was saying that, assuming there are convictions, the President could just pardon them all, so it's a waste of time. My point was that if the President is also shown to be guilty, he wouldn't last long enough to make those pardons.

[Demoiselle]

15. The lovely phrase "Unindicted Co-conspirator" comes to mind....eom

[FreedomAngel82]

26. With Bush I think

he was very much involved with the process. He might not have done the actions but he was involved. Remember the trip to Africa?? These people like to keep their hands clean and have other people do their dirty work. But eventually it all goes back to the same person. I don't buy the "Bush is just a puppet" angle at all.

[berni_mccoy]

20. Indictments and even Charges are not necessary

let alone convictions... see my ealier response to the post you responded to.

[berni_mccoy]

18. He can issue pardons even if there is no charge

Nixon was never charged with a crime NOR indicted after he resigned, but Ford granted him a pardon anyway.

Lincoln pardoned all confederate soldiers even though no charges were brought up and they were technically all guilty of treason.

Charges and indictments are NOT NECESSARY for a pardon to be issued.

[porphyrian]

34. Well, he better get going then.

Once he's connected to the crime, he's not likely to retain the power to do so.

[nickgutierrez]

17. Indictments + Pardon = kiss of death.

* can't pardon them immediately post-indictment without it becoming a big, public show. He would appear to be both acknowledging guilt and condoning of the crimes that were committed, and this would turn a lot of what little support he has left against him.

Remember that a lot of FReeper support of this administration is based on the idea that the things being investigated here are a whole lot of nothing.

[berni_mccoy]

19. He can say a law was broken that hurt a small group

In order to protect the greater good of America and aid in its defense against the nation.

If he sites laws were broken to preserve national security, I can totally see the RW nuts eating it up.

[nickgutierrez]

21. That's quite a stretch

Most of the lies this administration has gotten away with are ones that are easy enough to believe if one isn't in possession of the facts - the claims that got us into the Iraq war, for instance. This one, however, requires so much to be believed that it would be difficult for me to see all but the most delusional *-backer buying it.

I could see this cutting his already waning support in half, easily.

[FreedomAngel82]

28. Very true

It wouldn't be a good signal.

[FreedomAngel82]

22. The thing to remember though

is a lot of republicans have to get re-elected. Some will always be safe unless a democrat comes along they like better. I wonder if any republican will jump ship though? McCain probably still wants to be president. Hagel might jump ship since he's been vocal against the Iraq war since 2003 which I find quite strange since he was Bush's orignial VP choice and he's a long time family friend of the Bush family. They read the polls just like we do and do care about getting re-elected.

[DistressedAmerican]

23. Your Presumption Of Pardons Is Also A Presumption Of Convictions.

If you believe that pardons are coming you must also believe that convictions are coming. That is already more that your first line claims.

Just because you are indicted, tried and pardoned does not mean you keep their job.

Sorry. But this pesimistic post is way off base.

[berni_mccoy]

27. Convictions are not necessary for pardons

See my post above regarding this.

In fact, indictments aren't even necessary for Pardons.

Bush, *could* theoretically, come out and pardon anyone involved in the case. But his usual M.O. is to only act if forced to. Indictments will force his hand on pardons... and given his track record ("You're doing a heck-uv-a-job,..."), I bet it comes with the indictments.

[Irish Mastiff]

29. Bush pardons might be voided.

TREASONGATE: A NEW CONSTITUTIONAL DISCOVERY:Pardons May Be Voided For Criminal Prosecutions Flowing From "Cases of Impeachment"

http://citizenspook.blogspot.com/2005/09/treasongate-new-constitutional.html

[berni_mccoy]

30. Yeah, I read that...

I buy the argument, but there is a Key quote:

"This never before tested Constitutional process requires the House of Representatives to Impeach and the Senate to convict "civil Officers of the United States" so that pardons of those Officers pertaining to criminal prosecutions flowing from "Cases of Impeachment" can be voided."

2 Requirements:
1. Successful Impeachment AND Conviction of those parties. Not likely to happen, but if it does, then the next step is...

2. To test the condition by bringing it before the Supreme Court. I don't think we need to guess how that will turn out.

[berni_mccoy]

35. Just in case anyone still thinks the admin is going down over this stuff

Check out this recent post in DU: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x5040741

The Reagan administration had 138 members indicted and/or convicted. Bush Sr. still won election as Pres after all that.