At the top of the Rec List right now is Senator Pat Leahy's call for a "Truth and Reconciliation Commission" to look into the abuses of the Bush Administration. Senator Leahy asks us to sign the petition calling for the creation of such a commission.
But for two reasons, I can NOT in good conscience sign the petition, at least as it's now written.
Text of the petition:
I hereby join Senator Patrick Leahy's call for the establishment of a truth and reconciliation commission, to investigate the Bush-Cheney Administration's constitutional abuses so we make sure they never happen again. These abuses may include the use of torture, warrantless wiretapping, extraordinary rendition, and executive override of laws.
A truth and reconciliation commission should be tasked with seeking answers so that we can develop a shared understanding of the failures of the recent past. Rather than vengeance, we need a fair-minded pursuit of what actually happened. The best way to move forward is getting to the truth and finding out what happened -- so we can make sure it does not happen again.
One obvious problem is the omission of Bush's most serious crime: His lying us into the war in Iraq. I know there's some debate as to what actual laws were broken, and what penalties are available in any case. But seeing as the senator is only calling for a T&R Commission, why should we leave out Iraq? When we read off a list of Bush/Cheney's crimes, it's clear (at least to me) that right at the top should be Iraq... and the (at least) 100,000 innocent people who have been killed on a LIE. So, if all we're gonna have is a T&R Commission, there is NO excuse not to include Iraq.
But the other problem is just that... that we should NOT just have a Truth and Reconciliation Commission!
I don't want this to come across as a slam on you, Senator Leahy. At least you're proposing something... which is more than I can say about most members of Congress (or the media for that matter).
But in response to questions re. prosecution, you said...
Would not rule out prosecution... A failed attempt to prosecute for this conduct is the worst result of all as it could be seen as justifying and exonerating abhorrent actions. Given the steps Congress and the executive have already taken to shield this conduct from accountability, that is a likely result of an attempt to prosecute.
Of course, I would not rule out prosecution in appropriate cases, particularly for perjury
http://www.dailykos.com/...
As NightProwlKitty said in response...
I absolutely reject the notion that a "failed attempt" would be worst of all. If we do not prosecute, that would be worst of all. If we give Bush and Cheney and their ilk a fair trial and they cannot be proved guilty, then that is definitely something I'd like to know about. If our laws cannot be prosecuted, I'd like to know about that, too.
We need to find out if future presidents can also "shield" their conduct from accountability. If this is the case, then we have a big problem. For that would mean we could never hold those in power accountable for their actions. If that's the case, then we may as well stop pretending to call ourselves a democracy.
How do we ever change the law of the land without a trial? If the "unitary executive" is in place, how do we dismantle it if not showing how dangerous a reality that is, how much it points towards tyranny?
I'm sure you've noticed by now that the vast majority of commenters here on DKos, while appreciating your service, disagree that prosecutions would be the wrong way to go, and that all we need is a T&R Commission. In fact, I don't see how we can NOT investigate/prosecute... unless we're willing to admit we are no longer a nation that has moral standing.
Again, I like to use this simple hypothetical:
A person robs a store, kills a couple people, burns the place down on the way out. The cops and prosecutors know who the culprit is. But rather than arresting and charging him, they instead say, "Nothing can be done now. Prosecutions won't bring back the dead. It would cost too much time and money. It would be a distraction from other things we need to do. It would be very divisive. Let's just move on."
To me, unless it goes further, that's all a T&R Commission is saying. Can you even IMAGINE a cop or prosecutor having that attitude toward a run-of-the-mill criminal? No? Well then, why are we willing to give Bush and his minions a pass?