Bush justice is a national disgrace

[RetiredGySgt]

Are you so uneducated that you cannot respond to the substance of the post?

What substance? The unspecified, unproven, unsupported claims that Bush and Company have singlehandedly perverted our Justice System?

 

[Diuretic]

To allude to a few lib talking points: the government could have waited them out. They were contained and no direct threat to anyone.

Which is the usual tactic of course, but why did the govt take the action they did?

 

[Diuretic]

I don't have a strong opinion one way or the other about the Branch Davidian raid, but if my memory serves, there was a concern at the time that child abuse and child sexual assault were being perpetrated within the compound. In addition, as these guys were apocolyptics, I am sure that there was a concern that a mass suicide might have occurred. It wouldn't have been the first (or last) time. In hindsight, obviously the raid was a bad idea, but keeping these facts in mind allows one to at least see why some advocated the action.

Now that makes sense. If it had to be done, then the decision was good. Sounds like the execution (no puns from the tinfoil hats please) was flawed.

 

[Diuretic]

The point is that you claim this President has subverted our Justice system with absolutely no evidence to support your claim and remain quiet on the President that was responsible for armed attacks on peaceful american citizens, he also allowed the murderer and the man that ordered the murder of weavers wife and son to be promoted. He allowed an armed incursion into a house full of peaceful people to sieze a child AGAINST the direct wishes of the local authorities.

But do pretend it doesn't matter.

Now you're the one without the proof. You allege that Clinton was "responsible for armed attacks on peaceful American citizens" yet there is absolutely no evidence of that, years after the even and a Congress and Administration previously dominated by the Republican Party. No evidence. Your assertion fails, slides on its arse in ignominy with a lack of evidence.

 

[Diuretic]

Far be it for me to point out REAL crimes against the Constitution and the American people.

Waco is the litmus test for me. You just went from someone who has an honest difference of opinion to a hopeless DNC loyalist. Pathetic.

Bullshit. There's no evidence. You're a hopeless captive of your own side's propaganda, stump up the evidence or give it a rest accusing someone else of being a hopeless loyalist, you hypocrite.

 

[Superlative]

The point is that you claim this President has subverted our Justice system with absolutely no evidence to support your claim and remain quiet on the President that was responsible for armed attacks on peaceful american citizens, he also allowed the murderer and the man that ordered the murder of weavers wife and son to be promoted. He allowed an armed incursion into a house full of peaceful people to sieze a child AGAINST the direct wishes of the local authorities.

But do pretend it doesn't matter.

Why does everyone always go back to Clinton?

Why stop there? why not go back to Reagan and Bush Sr?

They were both Buds with Saddam when it suited the US, it was Carter who started the Funding of the Mujahadeen against Russia, Reagan and Bush didnt stop it, they trained them, all throughout the 80's. Who knew they would turn into al Qaeda or the Taliban?

Does everyone forget Nicaragua? Iran Contra? Remember how the US was tried and found guilty by the world court? ordered to pay reparations? how we simply dismissed the charges and walked away. (Then escalated the violence.)

Why stop at Clinton?

We have a pretty patchy track record. We might as well draw attention to the ones in power now and call for impeachment if its warranted.

But I bet dollars to donuts that you will never find a drop of evidence incriminating this administration.

 

[Diuretic]

The Adventures of Clinton"s Penis are far more important in contemporary politics than the criminality of previous administrations. It was a wayward head job and it nearly destroyed the nation! When will people try to understand that

 

[Superlative]

The very same man who wrote the first article of impeachment against President Bill Clinton, Bruce Fein, asserts that VP Cheney has:

-Asserted Presidential power to create military commissions, which combine the functions of judge, jury, and prosecutor in the trial of war crimes.

-Claimed authority to detain American citizens as enemy combatants indefinitely at Guantanamo Bay on the President's say-so alone.

-Initiated kidnappings, secret detentions, and torture in Eastern European prisons of suspected international terrorists.

-Championed a Presidential power to torture in contravention of federal statutes and treaties.

-Engineered the National Security Agency's warrantless domestic surveillance program targeting American citizens on American soil in contravention of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978.

-Orchestrated the invocation of executive privilege to conceal from Congress secret spying programs to gather foreign intelligence, and their legal justifications.

-Summoned the privilege to refuse to disclose his consulting of business executives in conjunction with his Energy Task Force.

-Retaliated against Ambassador Joseph Wilson and his wife Valerie Plame, through chief of staff Scooter Libby, for questioning the administration's evidence of weapons of mass destruction as justification for invading Iraq.

http://slate.com/id/2169292/

He is calling for Cheney to be impeached.

 

[Nevadamedic]

The very same man who wrote the first article of impeachment against President Bill Clinton, Bruce Fein, asserts that VP Cheney has:

-Asserted Presidential power to create military commissions, which combine the functions of judge, jury, and prosecutor in the trial of war crimes.

-Claimed authority to detain American citizens as enemy combatants indefinitely at Guantanamo Bay on the President's say-so alone.

-Initiated kidnappings, secret detentions, and torture in Eastern European prisons of suspected international terrorists.

-Championed a Presidential power to torture in contravention of federal statutes and treaties.

-Engineered the National Security Agency's warrantless domestic surveillance program targeting American citizens on American soil in contravention of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978.

-Orchestrated the invocation of executive privilege to conceal from Congress secret spying programs to gather foreign intelligence, and their legal justifications.

-Summoned the privilege to refuse to disclose his consulting of business executives in conjunction with his Energy Task Force.

-Retaliated against Ambassador Joseph Wilson and his wife Valerie Plame, through chief of staff Scooter Libby, for questioning the administration's evidence of weapons of mass destruction as justification for invading Iraq.

http://slate.com/id/2169292/

He is calling for Cheney to be impeached.

He was right on the money with Bill Clinton but going after Vice President Cheney is a disgrace. This guy is now over the top and just trying to make a name for himself.

 

[Ninja]

The Adventures of Clinton"s Penis are far more important in contemporary politics than the criminality of previous administrations. It was a wayward head job and it nearly destroyed the nation! When will people try to understand that

KKKlinton the serial killer should have been impeached... But not for using an intern as a humidor.

Why does the left ignore Waco?
There's a better case for making a martyr of David Koresh than Mumia Abu-Jamal. So why do liberals continue to overlook him?

- - - - - - - - - - - -
By Robert Bryce

June 19, 2000 | What does Mumia Abu-Jamal have that David Koresh doesn't? From Ed Asner to Alice Walker, liberals have flocked to defend Mumia -- convicted in 1982 of killing Philadelphia police officer Daniel Faulkner -- criticizing the way police and prosecutors handled his case and demanding a new trial. Luminaries of the left marched, chanted and purchased full-page ads in the New York Times to appeal to state and federal authorities to provide for Mumia, who has been on Pennsylvania's death row for 18 years.

Meanwhile, conservatives have taken up for David Koresh and the 80 Branch Davidians who died in Waco in 1993. Why haven't liberals shown the same concern for them? While there are some questions about the conduct of police and prosecutors in the Mumia case, there are many more lingering questions about the police actions taken against Koresh and his followers. For instance: Why did the Department of Justice use tanks against civilians? Why did the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms continue with its raid against Koresh when it knew the element of surprise had been lost? Why didn't the ATF simply arrest Koresh when he was shopping in Waco or away from the Mount Carmel compound in the weeks before the February 28, 1993, raid?

There are dozens of other questions, all of which are of particular importance now that the Branch Davidians' civil lawsuit against the federal government is going forward. Jury selection in the trial begins Monday. The lawsuit, being tried in Waco before U.S. District Court Judge Walter Smith, Jr., accuses the government of negligence in its actions during the standoff. So why haven't more members of the left rallied to the Davidians' side?

Indeed, of all the controversial police actions of recent years, the ATF's and FBI's assaults on the Mount Carmel compound are the ones that should have most aroused the left's passion. Never before or since has so much military firepower been brought to bear on a group of American civilians. That fact alone should be reason enough to convince the left to spring into action. After all, the left has long argued for demilitarization. Yet, when the military used tanks, helicopters and psychological weapons (including high-volume speakers blaring music to prevent Koresh and his followers from sleeping) against civilians in Waco, they remained, for the most part, silent.

A handful of liberals, including former Attorney General Ramsey Clark, who represents some of the Davidians and their survivors in the lawsuit, have weighed in on the matter. Another noted leftist, Howard Zinn, came out in defense of Koresh in an article he wrote for Z Magazine during the height of the Clinton impeachment debate. Zinn wrote that there were better reasons to impeach Clinton than having fellatio performed on him by Monica Lewinsky -- the foremost being the federal attack on Waco. The circumstances of the siege, he wrote, "did not warrant losing patience with negotiations and choosing a military solution."

Other theories that may explain why the left has ignored Waco revolve around the same broad issues that tend to galvanize Americans in general: guns, race, religion, class and the Clinton presidency.

Mumia Abu-Jamal has his own theory about the left's silence: Bill Clinton. In a recent exchange of letters from his death row cell in Waynesburg, Penn., Mumia opined that the main reason liberals haven't admonished the ATF and FBI is that they were "so hungry for a win in Washington after years of Reagan/Bush." Liberals "were certainly reluctant to pin Reno/Clinton to the wall after Waco," Mumia wrote, "and then proceeded to ignore and forget the carnage at Mount Carmel."

Former Texas State Sen. Jerry Patterson says the issue is guns. Patterson, a former Marine aviator, laughingly refers to himself as a "gun nut" and the "go-to guy for the black helicopter crowd." He authored the state's concealed-handgun law. He also used his connections with other Texas state officials to help filmmaker Michael McNulty, who produced "Waco: The Rules of Engagement," gain access to the state-controlled evidence rooms in Austin, Texas.

McNulty's investigation showed conclusively that the FBI fired numerous pyrotechnic devices at the Branch Davidian compound in the hours before the final fire that consumed the building on April 19, 1993. (The discovery served to discredit the FBI, which had long denied that any such pyrotechnic devices had been used.)

Patterson says liberals don't care about Waco because Koresh and his followers were gun enthusiasts. "The left has never believed in the Second Amendment," says Patterson.

Patterson, a conservative Republican, says the left's efforts to decrease the number of handguns in circulation, and its support of the Brady bill and harsher gun control measures, prevents it from supporting Koresh, whom federal authorities accused of possessing numerous unlicensed automatic assault rifles. Never mind that Koresh's weapons would have been legal under the laws in existence at the time of the siege if he had simply bought a $200 permit for each automatic rifle.

Nor has the left noted that the Branch Davidians could have argued in court that they were simply defending themselves during the original shootout with the ATF. Though it's rarely mentioned, Texas law would have permitted the Branch Davidians to fire back upon police officers if they believed the police were using excessive force.

When I mentioned to an apolitical friend of mine that I was writing about why the left has ignored Waco, he immediately offered his own theory: "That's because the Davidians were Christians." It's a harsh charge to make, but there is a kernel of truth in it. The left has never been overly supportive of conservative Christians, who have typically allied themselves with the right. In fact, the issues the left champions -- like gun control, abortion rights and abolition of the death penalty -- put them squarely in opposition to many conservative Christian groups. After Koresh was portrayed by the media as a Christian zealot, the prospect of liberals rushing to his aid was immediately diminished.

The Davidians were "presumed to be white Bible beaters and everybody on the left hates them, right?" asks Dick Reavis, the author of "The Ashes of Waco," perhaps the best single book yet written about the events of early 1993 and the aftermath. Reavis, a longtime leftist, has frequently remarked that his criticism of the federal government has not been accepted by the people that he believed were his allies. Ironically, after his book was published, he found himself speaking to pro-militia groups, pro-gun rights activists and other conservatives.

The political divisions over Waco are "not left to right," says David Hardy, a Tucson, Ariz.-based lawyer who has written extensively about the incident at the Davidian compound. "It's the rednecks against the yuppies," he said. Hardy also points out that Koresh was not born into money, he never developed intellectual passion for anything but the Bible and he dropped out of high school in the 11th grade. He was mostly interested in girls, rock and roll, the Bible and Camaros.

Hardy's position is echoed by Reavis. "Liberalism today is a bunch of Starbucks Coffee type of people," says Reavis. "Guns and religion are blue-collar issues. My peers on the left aren't interested, but the average truck driver thinks the government murdered those people."

The issue of class, combined with the Davidians' location in rural Texas, also figured into the mix. "Whatever Koresh's politics, he was a redneck, and therefore, to the liberals, he's not interesting," said Hardy. Mumia by comparison, says Hardy, "doesn't menace any of their values."

Mumia's theory -- that liberals didn't want to take on a Democratic president they had waited years to elect -- is shared by figures across the political spectrum. Indeed, it is even bolstered by an unlikely source: Byron Sage, the now-retired FBI agent who was a lead negotiator at Mount Carmel during the siege. Sage spent hundreds of hours talking to Koresh and later testified before Congress about the deadly confrontation. Shortly after the compound burned to the ground, killing all but nine of the people inside, he said conservatives immediately used the event as a hammer. The death and destruction at Waco has "been politicized by Republicans to beat the hell out of the Clinton administration and Janet Reno," said Sage, who volunteered that he was a registered Republican throughout his entire career with the FBI. "It inflames the hell out of me," he said.

With conservatives taking the offensive, opines Sage, liberals were left with nothing to do but defend Clinton. To side with the right on Waco, even if it was morally and intellectually defensible, was not an option.

As chief trial counsel and director of the Southern Legal Resource Center, Kirk Lyons has credentials more conservative than Sage -- and like him, Lyons credits the Clinton factor for the left's silence. Based in Black Mountain, N.C., Lyons has defended a number of white supremacists and has fought efforts to remove the Confederate flag from atop the Statehouse in South Carolina.

Lyons, who represents the families of several Davidians in the civil trial, including several black victims, is not one to shy away from hyperbole. And during an interview a few days ago, he quickly launched into an attack on Clinton.

The president, says Lyons, is "a totalitarianist. He and Hillary want a worker's paradise and you need a goon state to do that. The FBI and the ATF are their goons." The reason liberals won't say anything about Waco, says Lyons, is that "it's their boy in the White House. To criticize him is to criticize the left."

The great irony about Waco is this: If he is ever executed, Mumia will become a martyr figure for the left. Meanwhile, Koresh will likely continue to be ignored, even though he and about 80 others died due to the consequences of actions taken by federal police. It's those police actions, not political persuasion, that are the common denominator among the most outspoken critics of the government on Waco.

"There's been no accountability," says Lyons. "It appears they can murder people and then just leave. I don't think they should get away with it." www.

salon.com | June 19, 2000

http://archive.salon.com/news/feature/2000/06/19/waco/

 

[Ninja]

There's no evidence.

Nope. None at all

 

[Diuretic]

Oh look, a cult compound on fire.

So what?

Come on Snowboy you can do better than that

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Now that makes sense. If it had to be done, then the decision was good. Sounds like the execution (no puns from the tinfoil hats please) was flawed.

The charges of sexual abuse ONLY appeared AFTER the ATF raid failed and the siege began. They were nothing more than accusations, never tried in court or even investigated since everyone that might know was killed. It was a ploy to gain support from the public for the eventual murder of the people in that compound.

Further the only people making the charges were former members that had an obvious axe to grind.

The facts are that there was absolutely NO reason to raid the compound. The Sheriff had been to the compound on several occasions, he had asked Koresh to come to town several times, which Koresh did every time.

The so called weapons were in fact all legal. Prior to the raid the compound had at least one person, maybe more, I forget if there were several, that had a license to buy and sell firearms including automatic weapons. The ATF secretly revoked that license and never informed the person of that.

The REAL reason for the raid was politics. And I do not mean left or right. The DEA had several very high profile raids and cases in the news and the ATF wanted publicity in fear they may lose money in Congress. The whole plan to raid the compound was an idiotic thing.

Who in their right mind would plan an armed raid by Federal authorities on compound armed ( legally) that believed that the Government was going to attack them, that trained and prepared for JUST such an event? The ATF KNEW the locals informed the compound about goings on, yet they openly loaded and prepared for the raid in plain sight of numerous locals.

Also if you do a little research you will find that several of the agents that died just happened to be former members of Clinton's goon squad n Arkansas, the guys that as police procured women for him. The original tape of the raid clearly shows them enter the window and then the ATF agent outside sprays that very window with automatic weapons fire. I would like to see the original autopsy report on THOSE officers and the bullets that killed them.

The cars in the lot had no bullet holes in them from the direction of the compound, no ATF vehicls or others. Yet the ATF claims they were fired on and by automatic fire. Koresh as usual had come to the door when asked to and was wounded by the indiscriminate fire of the ATF raid when they opened up on the compound.

It was known the people in the compound were prepared to die for their beliefs, there was absolutely NO reason to end the so called siege, no reason to storm the compound full of women and children. Those people were NO threat to public at all. Were they a tad nuts? Ya I can agree with that, but it is not illegal in this country to be stupid, nuts or idiotic.

 

[Ninja]

Oh look, a cult compound on fire.

So what?

Come on Snowboy you can do better than that

Senator Schumer, the pleasure is mine.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Oh look, a cult compound on fire.

So what?

Come on Snowboy you can do better than that

So peaceful, non threatening people that happen to believe differently then you are fine to be murdered by the Government?

 

[Diuretic]

You've researched this I can see. I'm not going to trade facts with you because to be frank I don't have the facts.

You're right in that raiding a stronghold is the last thing any LE organisation should do. Tactically speaking it's usually going to go pear-shaped so it is absolutely the last resort. I have no idea why it was necessary to raid it, I'm not of a mind to go looking for justifications though. What I am interested in is why, if it was carried out for nefarious reasons, has no-one been charged with criminal offences? Rhetorical question. I know it invites a rhetorical answer but seriously I think no-one has been charged because it was a cockup by the ATF and I think the FBI were there as well weren't they? I remember watching the news reports and thinking it was a pretty amateurish attempt but then the task ahead of the Feds was fairly enormous. Frank Rizzo would have just bombed the joint from a helicopter and Daryl Gates would have sent in APCs loaded with SWAT.

But I still wonder why no criminal charges against anyone if the evidence was there (I mean against the Fed authorities).

 

[Diuretic]

Senator Schumer, the pleasure is mine.

Hang on. All you did was fling Fred's picture at me. What, is he doing your cross-examination for you?

 

[Diuretic]

So peaceful, non threatening people that happen to believe differently then you are fine to be murdered by the Government?

Come on RGS - you know I said nothing of the sort. And I ain't taking the bait. Snowboy showed a picture of the burning compound. What does that tell me? It tells me that there's a picture of the burning compound. I want evidence, not pictures of burning compounds.

I'm being a bit insistent here. You righties have ragged on us libs/lefties long enough. Time for a bit of your own back

 

[Ninja]

Oh, nevermind. My age was in the single digits when Waco went down, and I still have a better recollection of the Chuck Schumer's pathetic shilling for the murderous KKKlinton regime than you do.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

You've researched this I can see. I'm not going to trade facts with you because to be frank I don't have the facts.

You're right in that raiding a stronghold is the last thing any LE organisation should do. Tactically speaking it's usually going to go pear-shaped so it is absolutely the last resort. I have no idea why it was necessary to raid it, I'm not of a mind to go looking for justifications though. What I am interested in is why, if it was carried out for nefarious reasons, has no-one been charged with criminal offences? Rhetorical question. I know it invites a rhetorical answer but seriously I think no-one has been charged because it was a cockup by the ATF and I think the FBI were there as well weren't they? I remember watching the news reports and thinking it was a pretty amateurish attempt but then the task ahead of the Feds was fairly enormous. Frank Rizzo would have just bombed the joint from a helicopter and Daryl Gates would have sent in APCs loaded with SWAT.

But I still wonder why no criminal charges against anyone if the evidence was there (I mean against the Fed authorities).

Liberals ran the government and were not interested in an investigation of any real sort. As to Weaver, he was exonerated in court because the entire affair was an illegal setup by the FBI, being federal agents the sniper and his boss were exempt from prosecution, BUT they should not have been promoted.

Lots of squirelly things happened on Clinton's watch that never got properly taken care of. Vince Foster supposedly killed himself and Hillary got to search his house BEFORE the cops were let in. ( he was an aide to her and had recently become dissatisfied with her and her husband) Clinton's illegally had over 900 FBI files of political enemies IN their residence area of the White House. No one did anything about that either. And on and on.

Yet the liberals would have you believe Bush, a President that has no such history nor accusations, is worse than Clinton.