Republicans and personal responsibility
I remember a time when the Republican party prided themselves as the party of personal responsibility. As they now offer partial immunity to Blackwater mercenaries, Patrick Leahy has identified a theme to this administration's activities:
It really is astonishing that the party of personal responsibility should seek to avoid anyone from "their side" ever facing any action as a consequence of what they have done, whether it be the shooting of 17 innocent Iraqis in a Baghdad street or the outing of an undercover CIA agent for her husband revealing the lies that the administration knowingly peddled to take the US to war.Patrick Leahy, who chairs the Senate Judiciary Committee, called the immunity deal another example of "the amnesty administration". "In this administration, accountability goes by the boards," said Senator Leahy, who sits on two Senate panels that oversee the State Department and the Justice Department. "That seems to be a central tenet in the Bush administration – that no one from their team should be held accountable, if accountability can be avoided.
"That goes equally for misconduct and for incompetence," he added. "If you get caught, they will get you immunity. If you get convicted, they will commute your sentence."
Bush and the neo-cons appear to believe that they are above the law, and that they and their enablers certainly should never have to justify their actions before the law.
It was with this mindset that Bush attempted to hold on to Gonzales long after he was toast, proclaiming that he had done nothing wrong when there wasn't a sentient person on the planet who couldn't see that the Attorney General was being economical with the truth.
Then we had Cheney telling us that the vice president's office didn't have to comply with the National Archives because he is his own branch of government.
So the partial immunity offered to Blackwater employees is not remotely shocking. It's part of a long established practice whereby this administration continue to think that the law is for other people and that they - and their associates - are immune from it.
Click title for full article.
7 comments:
And apparently, this issue of loyalty to 'one's owh' is the way Guliani has always operated as well.If 'they' do it, it's bad, if 'we' do it, well, we had a good reason for it, the end justifies the means..
so pls let the stupid masses not vote for Rudy either!
Ingrid
Ingrid, I don't think Giuliani has a chance in Hell of winning. He might win the Republican nomination, but very much doubt he would have a chance at the Presidency as the positions he is adopting to please the Republican base - whether or not something is torture is dependent on who does it - really will alienate most voters.
Plus, he's promising more of the same and all opinion polls say that's the last thing the majority of Americans want.
As they [Republicans] now offer partial immunity to Blackwater mercenaries
I think this is simply further indication that you have no understanding on how the US government works. "Republicans" have not offered Blackwater partial immunity. Investigators from the State Department have offered them a limited form of partial immunity (one that does NOT preclude prosecution), without permission from the Justice Department.
The State Department is part of the Executive Branch of government. The State Department consists primarily of career civil servants. Naturally positions such as the Secretary are political appointments, but the VAST majority are clock punchers who have served under numerous Presidents. That means that some of them are Democrats, some of them are Republicans, and many of them are independent (although we've also established you don't understand the difference, but I digress).
Now, with the obvious pointed out, it should also be pointed out that according to Justice, since it didn't extend any offer of any sort of immunity, and it believes that State overstepped their bounds, it is most likely that there is no immunity agreement offered that is binding. These same Justice people I suppose you would also cartoonishly label "Republicans".
So basically, the central thesis of your rant is completely invalid.
Jason,
Maybe you ought to explain to Senator Leahy why he is wrong to think that this is further example of "the amnesty administration".
The State department may very well be composed of career civil servants, but they answer to the White House and take instructions from the White House. The idea that they operate in some sort of apolitical environment is simply ludicrous.
So since you accept that the State Dept is made up of career civil servants, and since it logically follows that they are not as an institution "Republicans", and given that the State Dept are the ones who supposedly made some kind of offer of limited immunity, then it must hold that your thesis that "Republicans" offered the immunity is quite obviously false. I'm glad we agree.
And as for your belief that the White House pulls the strings on every decision made by every agency in the executive branch, it is quite obvious that you have never worked for the US government. The agencies have quite a bit of autonomy, with the White House guiding them on overarching national policy. Since it is quite obvious that there is no such national policy that the Blackwater employees accused of this incident be given Garrity warnings, then it is ridiculous to try to put this down to some kind of Republican conspiracy. The proof of this is that Justice taking the oppposite position of State on this matter. Leahy knows this, but he is attempting to score political points obviously.
So since you accept that the State Dept is made up of career civil servants, and since it logically follows that they are not as an institution "Republicans", and given that the State Dept are the ones who supposedly made some kind of offer of limited immunity, then it must hold that your thesis that "Republicans" offered the immunity is quite obviously false. I'm glad we agree.
Of course we don't agree. The White House charges the State Department to carry out it's policies. You are trying your usual trick of moving blame away from Bush and onto others.
Pardoning criminal acts is something that this administration is famed for, so it fits right in with their overall behaviour, which was my point.
Jason, the admninistration has had seven years in which it has pursued a policy of politicization of the Justice Department, to the point that many of those "clock punchers who have served under numerous Presidents" are leaving because they can no longer stand the corruption. The subversion of the Justice Department is fairly well documented and is part of the reason there has been such a furor over the firings of those US district attorneys.
As for the Republican Party believing in "personal responsibility", as with so many other things said by the GOP, this is one of those party slogans without any connection to reality. What Republicans really mean is that they dont want "their" money (i.e., taxes) going to anything or anyone that they consider to be "unworthy" (mostly meaning poor people and minorities), but prefer to keep it to themselves and spend it where they want to (on themselves). It is not about responsibility, but about selfishness.
Post a Comment