Do you favor the appointment of a Special Prosecutor re: Torture?

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

Poll question: Do you favor the appointment of a Special Prosecutor re: Torture?

Do you favor the appointment of a Special Prosecutor charged with investigating all aspects of potentially criminal torture activity in the Bush WH and following the trail wherever it leads?

Feel free to explain your reasoning. It is a Yes/No poll because it's a binary choice but there are a host of potential "Yes, but only because..." and "No, unless..." stances, and that's what replies are for. For instance, someone might want a SP appointed because they will tend to make the issue go away and defuse political risk. Or someone might oppose a SP because they want Congress to take the lead instead, etc.

[tularetom]

1. Actually I favor the appointment of a firing squad

but you didn't give me that option.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

2. I favor it

I didn't want to taint the poll with my opinion, saving it for a reply.

It seems to serve both the justice side and the political side. Obama washes his hands of it while probably maximizing the chance for eventual Bushian accountability.

[Demeter]

3. Where's the Hell Yes Option?

[Jackeens]

4. Abso****inglutely.

[Lars39]

5. Yes!!!!!

Roll that rock right over.

[msongs]

6. I favor a special inquisitioner to torture bush n cheney into telling us where are the WMD's nt

[Sebastian Doyle]

7. I nominate Vincent Bugliosi

But they'd probably hire some weak coward like Fitzgerald.

[slipslidingaway]

8. Statute of Limitations - little more than a year left...

The eight year statute of limitations will expire in the spring of 2010 for some of the best documented crimes.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=5484154&mesg_id=5486073

[Hutzpa]

9. Yes!

they have to be independent of all parties, they should go to United Nation
and asked for their services.

This should not end up like the 9/11 commission which IMO was a farce.

[stillcool]

10. I don't know..

I would not like to see a repeat of the Iran/Contra Walsh prosecution. I think Special Prosecutors as well as Congressional Investigations have a way of covering up more shit than is exposed. Perhaps more will come out. If not, I think either one would produce the same results..although a Congressional Investigation could cover more areas.

[Danger Mouse]

11. Affirmative.

[chill_wind]

12. Yes.. even better, I liked the ACLU's call for a 3-prong approach

back in February. Come at them from every direction:

http://www.aclu.org/safefree/general/38836prs20090225.html


But since that hasn't shaped up very well so far, I want to see subpoena power above all, and extricate President Obama once that would get underway.

[jberryhill]

13. I favor confirmation of the rest of the DoJ appointees

Why is a special prosecutor necessary? Is there some indication that Barack Obama was involved in the torture program?

[chill_wind]

14. It frees him to return to and control his own message and agenda.

He rightfully gets the media off his back to the degree that he can to point to the fact that a formal investigation is underway that he is not free to comment on, and he gets to talk about what he came to the press events and to the country to talk about as POTUS. He shouldn't have to be made answerable by press about Dick and George every day for the rest of his administration, because he is not answerable for what they did, only answerable for allowing justice to now take its course.

[jberryhill]

16. The DoJ works that way anyway....

The President does not direct investigations by the DoJ.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

15. I wish more "NO"s explained their reasoning

I would like to know more about potential downsides

[LWolf]

17. Yes. nt