A few months ago, I posted and we discussed my (and other's) reticence about Hillary Clinton's candidacy for President due to her unwillingness to buck war mongers, especially her vote for the Iraq war. I personally believe it was done to preserve her political viability for future political office, paid for with blood and treasure. If not that, then she was horribly naive and clueless in the face of obvious lies and false presentations.
Anyway, now we have the Senate's report on CIA torture, based on the CIA's own records. Not only is torture against international conventions and treaties (signed by President Reagan), but it is also against Federal Law .
18 U.S. Code Chapter 113C-
After the definition of torture- this section.
(nore)
(a) Offense.— Whoever outside the United States commits or attempts to commit torture shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both, and if death results to any person from conduct prohibited by this subsection, shall be punished by death or imprisoned for any term of years or for life.
(b) Jurisdiction.— There is jurisdiction over the activity prohibited in subsection if—
(1) the alleged offender is a national of the United States; or
(2) the alleged offender is present in the United States, irrespective of the nationality of the victim or alleged offender.
(c) Conspiracy.— A person who conspires to commit an offense under this section shall be subject to the same penalties (other than the penalty of death) as the penalties prescribed for the offense, the commission of which was the object of the conspiracy.
Now the John Yoo's of the establishment say that the President makes the law or is above it if his lawyers say so; in times of war (declared or undeclared), times of emergency, times of political opposition (Watergate, anti war protestors), etc....
Also remember, we dismissed the "Just following orders" defense for war crimes after WWII and HUNG people for the very acts the CIA is accused of. If it was wrong in 1942-3, why is it alright in 2003-4?
Anyway, I'm not satisfied with just a report.
One of the problems we have had for the last few decades is that, when some Administration is caught doing bad, illegal things (oh, lets say, stealing US Govt property, selling it to Iran, then funding death squads in Central America). No one is punished or sent to jail. They become consultants, then are back in Govt , in higher positions. If that had not happened after Iran Contra, then Cheney, Rumsfeld, et al would not have been eligible for Federal positions and maybe the Iraq War, torture, and the deaths of 10s of thousands would not have happened.
Let's not make the same mistake again.
According to published reports, Gov. Martin O'Malley of Maryland, is calling for a Special Prosecutor to investigate torture by the CIA.
http://thehill.com/...
Certainly Federal Law has been violated. If there is a Presidential Finding saying the law does not apply, lets see it and W's signature on the bottom. If there isn't, who conspired to tell the CIA that the law didn't apply, and are thus complicit in the act.
Now it may be that Gov. O'Malley is considering a run for President and is staking out a posisiton. If so, I agree with his position.
Former Sec. Hillary Clinton may also be considering a run for President. In June she was asked about the above scenario-
----------
"But I think it is important -- I was not one of those who thought it was necessarily wise to ignore everything that had happened. I thought we needed more transparency. I didn't want people to be criminally prosecuted, people who were doing what they were told to do, that there were legal opinions supporting what they were told to do, but I wanted transparency. And that's what Dianne Feinstein is trying to provide with that 6,000-page report. And I think the American people deserve to see it."
http://www.cfr.org/...
---------
So as a trained lawyer, if another lawyer decides Federal Law, doesn't matter, she is ok with it. No one should be punished or prosecuted, they were just following orders.
But again, the cynical among us might say, O'Malley is just making waves for Hillary. He is outside the Establishment. Maybe so, but Hillary is INSIDE the establishment and might not want to make waves with those in the Military/Industrial/Intelligence complex. That might make them mad at her. Make their friends at the networks and newspapers mad at her. They might even say mean things about her inevitability.
Anyway, this is another "Profiles in Courage" moment for Hillary. She blew it on the Iraq War vote. She could redeem herself over the Torture report. If she, with her standing in the Village, called for a deeper investigation by a Prosecutor, then it would gain momentum. And could the GOP complain after years of chasing failed land deals and soiled dresses? And if they did, you could point that out endlessly until 2016.
A Win Win.
But it only works if Hillary has the guts. Does she?
Ridge