U.S. attorney general opens criminal probe of Gulf oil spill

[GWV5903]

Like a bad company that focuses on blame rather than solutions to problems, this too will end in nothing gained... and to the detriment of those with a stake in the game... everyone will only end up worse off, on all sides

this is the equivalent of holding the nuremburg trials on june 5, 1944.

Indeed... Or threatening the plumber with investigation and lawsuit while the leak is still happening and you don't even know why, all the while your basement is filling with water

Assess the problem, implement your solutions, help in any way possible to prevent more damage, investigate when the problem is solved and information is gathered, and if there is reasonable cause to charge someone with negligence or a crime, go for it then

This would be the logical choice and the right choice, but unfortunately with have an administration that is working real hard at doing a lot of things back wards, no surprise....

 

[Vel]

Makes me feel better.

What's to stop the other oil companies from doing it again if no-one pays the price?

Somebody needs to go to jail.

Yep.. Exxon and Shell are just itching for the chance to get THEIR names splashed across TV screens because they've caused an environmental disaster. It does so much for a company's bottom line, you know.

 

[LuckyDan]

demonize demonize demonize.

Oh, give me a break.

You do nothing but scream about how Obama isn't doing enough to fix BP's mess, but you don't think BP should be held accountable?

Seriously?

They should definitely be held accountable. My question is what happens if the corporation is found guilty of a "crime?" You can't exactly throw a company in jail.

No but you can throw company employees in jail if they are criminally negligent.

 

[sangha]

Like a bad company that focuses on blame rather than solutions to problems, this too will end in nothing gained... and to the detriment of those with a stake in the game... everyone will only end up worse off, on all sides

this is the equivalent of holding the nuremburg trials on june 5, 1944.

Indeed... Or threatening the plumber with investigation and lawsuit while the leak is still happening and you don't even know why, all the while your basement is filling with water

Assess the problem, implement your solutions, help in any way possible to prevent more damage, investigate when the problem is solved and information is gathered, and if there is reasonable cause to charge someone with negligence or a crime, go for it then

Ahhh yes. I remember how the rightwingers wanted to "Assess the problem, implement your solutions, help in any way possible to prevent more damage," after 9/11 and how they insisted that we "investigate when the problem is solved and information is gathered, and if there is reasonable cause to charge someone with negligence or a crime, go for it then" before invading Iraq. They got so mad when the democrats said we shouldn't wait for the IAEA to investigate.

 

[DiamondDave]

this is the equivalent of holding the nuremburg trials on june 5, 1944.

Indeed... Or threatening the plumber with investigation and lawsuit while the leak is still happening and you don't even know why, all the while your basement is filling with water

Assess the problem, implement your solutions, help in any way possible to prevent more damage, investigate when the problem is solved and information is gathered, and if there is reasonable cause to charge someone with negligence or a crime, go for it then

Ahhh yes. I remember how the rightwingers wanted to "Assess the problem, implement your solutions, help in any way possible to prevent more damage," after 9/11 and how they insisted that we "investigate when the problem is solved and information is gathered, and if there is reasonable cause to charge someone with negligence or a crime, go for it then" before invading Iraq. They got so mad when the democrats said we shouldn't wait for the IAEA to investigate.

We did investigate and had almost a month before any attack in Afghanistan against AlQ/Taliban (who were already known to be involved.... and how long until we attacked Iraq, for KNOWN VIOLATIONS OF THE CEASE-FIRE AGREEMENT that had be constant since we stopped the first part of the military actions known as Desert Storm

What a buffoon

 

[Lonestar_logic]

From the Washington post:

U.S. attorney general opens criminal probe of Gulf oil spill
By Theresa Vargas
Washington Post
June 1, 2010

NEW ORLEANS -- Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. announced Tuesday that his office is using "the full weight" of its investigative power to pursue criminal and civil investigations into the oil spill that has devastated the Gulf Coast.

"The Department of Justice will ensure that the American people do not foot the bill for this disaster and that our laws are enforced to the fullest extent possible," he said.

Git 'em.

Shouldn't they identify the cause before they pursue a criminal investigation? If the cause was a mechanical malfunction, then who would they criminally prosecute?

Holder is the dumbest AG in the history of mankind.

 

[sangha]

Indeed... Or threatening the plumber with investigation and lawsuit while the leak is still happening and you don't even know why, all the while your basement is filling with water

Assess the problem, implement your solutions, help in any way possible to prevent more damage, investigate when the problem is solved and information is gathered, and if there is reasonable cause to charge someone with negligence or a crime, go for it then

Ahhh yes. I remember how the rightwingers wanted to "Assess the problem, implement your solutions, help in any way possible to prevent more damage," after 9/11 and how they insisted that we "investigate when the problem is solved and information is gathered, and if there is reasonable cause to charge someone with negligence or a crime, go for it then" before invading Iraq. They got so mad when the democrats said we shouldn't wait for the IAEA to investigate.

We did investigate and had almost a month before any attack in Afghanistan against AlQ/Taliban (who were already known to be involved.... and how long until we attacked Iraq, for KNOWN VIOLATIONS OF THE CEASE-FIRE AGREEMENT that had be constant since we stopped the first part of the military actions known as Desert Storm

What a buffoon

You can spew as much name-calling as it takes to satisfy your feelings of inadequacy related to your inability to discuss the (LOL!) long investigation of Iraqs' WMD, but it won't stop me from noticing your argument got blown out of the water.

That's why you pretend we invaded Iraq for "KNOWN VIOLATIONS OF THE CEASE-FIRE AGREEMENT" and not for non-existent WMDs or non-existent links to Al Queda. HOwever, I must admit I was almost convinced you were right by your extensive use of capitalized words. Capitalizing phrases ALWAYS makes an argument more powerful

 

[SpidermanTuba]

demonize demonize demonize.

Oh, give me a break.

You do nothing but scream about how Obama isn't doing enough to fix BP's mess, but you don't think BP should be held accountable?

Seriously?

criminalize demonize criminalize demonize criminalize demonize..

Why are you against criminalizing criminals?

 

[SpidermanTuba]

demonize demonize demonize.

Oh, give me a break.

You do nothing but scream about how Obama isn't doing enough to fix BP's mess, but you don't think BP should be held accountable?

Seriously?

I figured as soon as I heard this that the wingnuts would side with BP. This is more of 'find some way to criticized Obama no matter what he does'. Some RW nut on cable said they should be concentrating on plugging the well first, lol, as if Holder and the JD is needed for that.

Yeah I don't get that. Apparently they think each arm of the federal government is supposed to work one by one in a line instead of all at once in parallel - real efficient.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Makes me feel better.

What's to stop the other oil companies from doing it again if no-one pays the price?

Somebody needs to go to jail.

For what? Even Holder can't say at this point a crime was committed.

Yes he can. Killing a pelican is a crime. A strict liability crime.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Like a bad company that focuses on blame rather than solutions to problems, this too will end in nothing gained... and to the detriment of those with a stake in the game... everyone will only end up worse off, on all sides

It is truly amazing how far the right will stretch logic and reason to justify not punishing corporations for their misdeeds.

Why do you insult yourself like this?

 

[DiamondDave]

Ahhh yes. I remember how the rightwingers wanted to "Assess the problem, implement your solutions, help in any way possible to prevent more damage," after 9/11 and how they insisted that we "investigate when the problem is solved and information is gathered, and if there is reasonable cause to charge someone with negligence or a crime, go for it then" before invading Iraq. They got so mad when the democrats said we shouldn't wait for the IAEA to investigate.

We did investigate and had almost a month before any attack in Afghanistan against AlQ/Taliban (who were already known to be involved.... and how long until we attacked Iraq, for KNOWN VIOLATIONS OF THE CEASE-FIRE AGREEMENT that had be constant since we stopped the first part of the military actions known as Desert Storm

What a buffoon

You can spew as much name-calling as it takes to satisfy your feelings of inadequacy related to your inability to discuss the (LOL!) long investigation of Iraqs' WMD, but it won't stop me from noticing your argument got blown out of the water.

That's why you pretend we invaded Iraq for "KNOWN VIOLATIONS OF THE CEASE-FIRE AGREEMENT" and not for non-existent WMDs or non-existent links to Al Queda. HOwever, I must admit I was almost convinced you were right by your extensive use of capitalized words. Capitalizing phrases ALWAYS makes an argument more powerful

And here we go.... might I suggest actually reading the complete motherfucking terms of ceasefire and the list of the REPEATED violations of said cease fire.... then you may wish to look up the consequences of violating a cease fire agreement

It is your inane argument that was blown out of the water....

You would know nothing about a powerful argument, since you attempted to make one that has repeatedly been blown out of the water

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Like a bad company that focuses on blame rather than solutions to problems, this too will end in nothing gained... and to the detriment of those with a stake in the game... everyone will only end up worse off, on all sides

this is the equivalent of holding the nuremburg trials on june 5, 1944.

No it isn't. I can point out several key differences if you like.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

11 people died and Holder is trying to score political points.

He's trying to investigate BP for their criminal and civil wrongdoing. That's called doing his job.

 

[DiamondDave]

Like a bad company that focuses on blame rather than solutions to problems, this too will end in nothing gained... and to the detriment of those with a stake in the game... everyone will only end up worse off, on all sides

It is truly amazing how far the right will stretch logic and reason to justify not punishing corporations for their misdeeds.

Why do you insult yourself like this?

Funny... please show where I stated opposition to punishing any company with criminal misdeeds.. Seems to me that I stated that if upon investigation, after problem solution, if there is evidence of criminal wrongdoing resulting in the mishap, then by all means proceed

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Assess the problem, implement your solutions, help in any way possible to prevent more damage, investigate when the problem is solved and information is gathered, and if there is reasonable cause to charge someone with negligence or a crime, go for it then

Do you think BP's attorneys are busy trying to stop the leak right now?

 

[sangha]

We did investigate and had almost a month before any attack in Afghanistan against AlQ/Taliban (who were already known to be involved.... and how long until we attacked Iraq, for KNOWN VIOLATIONS OF THE CEASE-FIRE AGREEMENT that had be constant since we stopped the first part of the military actions known as Desert Storm

What a buffoon

You can spew as much name-calling as it takes to satisfy your feelings of inadequacy related to your inability to discuss the (LOL!) long investigation of Iraqs' WMD, but it won't stop me from noticing your argument got blown out of the water.

That's why you pretend we invaded Iraq for "KNOWN VIOLATIONS OF THE CEASE-FIRE AGREEMENT" and not for non-existent WMDs or non-existent links to Al Queda. HOwever, I must admit I was almost convinced you were right by your extensive use of capitalized words. Capitalizing phrases ALWAYS makes an argument more powerful

And here we go.... might I suggest actually reading the complete motherfucking terms of ceasefire and the list of the REPEATED violations of said cease fire.... then you may wish to look up the consequences of violating a cease fire agreement

It is your inane argument that was blown out of the water....

You would know nothing about a powerful argument, since you attempted to make one that has repeatedly been blown out of the water

The one thing I love about wingnuts is how they make absurd arguments and then stick to them no matter what.

Do you really expect anyone to believe thast our invasion of Iraq wasn't because of his non-existent WMD's and his non-existent links to OBL? Do you have the cojones to explicitely admit that you think it was not because of the WMD's and the links to Al Queda or will you continue to hide behind the generic sounding "violations of a cease fire agreement"?

You are seriously deluded.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

demonize demonize demonize.

Oh, give me a break.

You do nothing but scream about how Obama isn't doing enough to fix BP's mess, but you don't think BP should be held accountable?

Seriously?

They should definitely be held accountable. My question is what happens if the corporation is found guilty of a "crime?" You can't exactly throw a company in jail.

You can fine them.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Like a bad company that focuses on blame rather than solutions to problems, this too will end in nothing gained... and to the detriment of those with a stake in the game... everyone will only end up worse off, on all sides

It is truly amazing how far the right will stretch logic and reason to justify not punishing corporations for their misdeeds.

Why do you insult yourself like this?

Funny... please show where I stated opposition to punishing any company with criminal misdeeds.. Seems to me that I stated that if upon investigation, after problem solution, if there is evidence of criminal wrongdoing resulting in the mishap, then by all means proceed

So your solution is to wait 20 years until all the oil is cleaned up and all the statutes of limitations have run out and some of the witnesses have passed away and much of the evidence has been lost or destroyed? That's brilliant!

 

[DiamondDave]

Assess the problem, implement your solutions, help in any way possible to prevent more damage, investigate when the problem is solved and information is gathered, and if there is reasonable cause to charge someone with negligence or a crime, go for it then

Do you think BP's attorneys are busy trying to stop the leak right now?

Do you think their IT staff is?

Your question and associated intent is irrelevant