Unimpeachable Justice: "What's Good for the Goose..."
Unfortunately, the opportunity to Impeach President GW Bush along with his criminal associates has passed us by. Over these last eight years, the Bush Administration has exercised its Executive authority in numerous ways (i.e. warrantless wiretaps; torture; renditions; etc.) that invited charges of High Crimes and Misdemeanors to be Constitutionally tested. Yet, the cowardly Congress of that period abdicated its responsibility to pursue such a remedy in real time.
It would be difficult for these same spineless sycophants in the House and Senate leadership to now hold Bush & Co. retroactively accountable for their crimes - unless, of course, they care to invite prosecution for dereliction of their own sworn responsibility to defend and uphold the Constitution.
The assumption of authority to declare anyone to be an "enemy combatant" as a pretext to depriving these individuals of fundamental rights is perhaps among the most egeregious of crimes committed by this Administration. If there was any true justice in the world, the correct scenario to now effectively address this particular impeachable offense would unfold thusly:
** Noon, Tuesday, Jan 20th, 2009: Barack Obama is sworn in as President of the United States, declaring by oath to uphold the Constitution (as presently understood/implemented by our Government.)
** 12:05pm (estimated): President Barack Obama, using the Executive's recently assumed power to make such a declaration, announces his official determination that GW, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Gonzalez, and other culpable characters are "enemy combatants."
** 12:10pm (estimated): GW, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Gonzalez, etc., are "rendered" to an unknown offshore location where they will be held interminably; absent any habeus corpus or other rights enumerated in the Magna Carta or our own Constitution as written.
**12:15pm: Barack Obama repeats the oath of Office in a symbolic, poignant - yet remarkably substantive - recognition that this new Administration and those to follow will abide the Constitution as given to us by the Framers, as opposed to continuing any allegiance to the bastard morphrodite presented to us by Bush & Co. with the concurrence of the milquetoast 109th/100th Congress.
** Post-110th Congress: We never hear from or see GWB, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Gonzalez, etc., ever again.
This is not merely a rhetorical suggestion. Imagine, if you will, what life has been like for any innocent "enemy combatants" who have been snared in this diabolical system of "justice" as created by Bush and his enabling apologists. Imagine what life has been like for the families of such innocents who wonder where their loved one and, in many cases, their family's breadwinner has been "rendered" to - or if they even remain alive, for God's sake. It is hardly too much to ask that Bush & Co. experience the same level of justice provided to the most aggrieved victims of their criminal debasement of Human Rights.
Ain't going to happen, I know. But I dream of this precedent being established wherein any future President would think twice before assuming tyrannical powers for him/herself to which he/she would not wish to be personally subject. The democratic fairness of our new President performing such an exercise in justice on Inauguration Day would represent a quite unimpeachable change we could believe in.





"We never hear from or see GWB, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Gonzalez, etc., ever again."
Poetic, but injustice nonetheless.
November 25, 2008 1:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Harsh? Indeed!
Unjust? I don't think so - especially as argued in the last two paragraphs. The real injustice is suffered by those innocents who have been "disappeared" (and their families) for no reason other than having been declared to be an "enemy combatant" by our Prosecutor-in-Chief.
Inasmuch as this occurs as a function of a system of "justice" created by GWB and friends, I believe they have no claim to injustice in finding the system claiming them as its victim.
Call it kharma, or otherwise declare "what's good for the goose is good for the gander." But we cannot sanction or suffer any system of justice that excludes the prosecutor from its "rules" at risk of otherwise inviting tyranny in place of democracy.
November 25, 2008 6:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
It does seem to me that, under one system or the other, justice needs to be done, eh? Gander or goose, something MUST apply.
So either justice needs to be done under their system, as you described, or... under a proper system of justice.
And if the latter, then suspect they would be found to have committed acts deserving of some form of punishment, even if we may be too late for Impeachment.
I think Community Service might be the best sentence. Cleaning up the toxic goo left behind by Katrina. Lots of innovative and appropriate items for a good Judge here.....
November 26, 2008 12:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
.
My Good man . . .
I very fine read. Poetic justice it would be, indeed.
Although, I still tend to side with habeus corpus, even for these yellow-bellied miscreants and bastards, as the SCOTUS rendered in Hamdan vs. Rumsfeld, et al.. (by the way Hamdan has been sent home to Yemen as of yesterday. small Human Rights victory I know.)
Only one glaring thing that I noticed in your piece that could be added. That being where you wrote:
Allow me to edit in this manner:
Bush and his scumbag authoritarian enabling apologists.
See my blog from March 16, 2007:
Keep up the writing SJ ... and the faith!
~OGD~
*Dodgin' slings and arrows in the Cafe since June 2005*
November 26, 2008 4:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
My favorite scenario and an actual possibility:
Bush, Cheney, Ashcroft, Yoo and other enablers are indicted by a foreign government with which we have an extradition treaty (say Canada, Germany, Australia or France) for war crimes against one or more of their citizens. Obama, asked by the DOJ what to do, says, "Follow the law and honor our international treaties."
"But should we hand them over?"
"Follow the law and honor our international treaties. I have pledged to do exactly that."
November 28, 2008 5:28 PM | Reply | Permalink