George's Bottom Line

NO, they are bought off by the SAME people. Record soft money and spending by Obama in the past election. What, you thought those corporate donors we're just "supporting" him out of the goodness of their hearts eh? It's called "quid pro quo". If he truly was independent the corporate media wouldn't have glamourized him and done all of his work for him, just like with the last house of cards named Clinton. Get ready for the second version of Jimmy Carter folks. Delusions fall hard, but when they do, they CRASH!!!

What the hell is this? This isn't even a news story. It's a tease for a news story. WHAT IS WRONG with this website???

I hope so.

Well Said, please!

i would certainly hope members of Bush's administration are prosecuted vigorously. Cheney, Rumsfeld and Gonzalez were complicit in the use of torture. i think Bush was swayed by Cheney, but he is still responsible. since Cheney was the architect of the invasion of Iraq, the torture programme and human rights violations.

please!---most of Obama's fundraising came from millions and millions of people sending in $25-$50 as many times as they could afford while being under the limit. Obama will be the first president to have most of his support come from the people instead or corporate special interests. if you have evidence that he has the same amount of corporate funding as any republican please share with us. you don't like Obama which is cool---you didn't pay for his campaign. the taxpayers paid for McCain's campaign (along with his republican machine, corporate mega-donations from oil and big business). so i, a person who voted for Obama, still pay for McCain. lucky for you it doesn't work the same way with your candidate.

If they have done something illegal then he should of course do it. A no brainer.

Of course not. Get real. Obama is a wishy-washy tool.

www.powmadeak47.com/crooks/pres08.html

George, the question as written is sort of like asking someone how many times a week they beat their wife. Last time I checked we are suppose to prosecute those who are proven, ususally in a court of law, to be guilty. The partisn hack, Fertik, you cite as the source of the question might want to go the congressional route in his quest to help those "innocent" tortured soles get even with that meanie Bush.

PEBO will be much too busy covering his own butt! :(

Let's see, a moral dilemma:put a terrorist on the hot seat to get information to save American lives, or just let another 9/11 happen? All of you intellectual people who have never HAD the pressure of having to make a life or death decision should just be quiet and be grateful for the fact that we have not had another attack FOR A REASON. But no, you love the terrorists and hate Bush. You people are fools.

Both parties are the same. They are all bought by the same folks with the exceptions of people like Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul.

david, you are indeed an idiot.

"Last time I checked we are suppose to prosecute those who are proven, ususally in a court of law, to be guilty."

What source did you check with, the encyclopedia for idiots? We're supposed to prosecute only those individuals who have already been prosecuted and found guilty? Surely even an idiot such as yourself can see the irony there.

Blake,

Once becomes subject to criminal prosecution when there's evidence of criminal wrong-doing. In other words, you have it the other way around the way you've formulated it.

As to whether Bush should be prosecuted, I tend to have a much dimmer view. While violations committed by Bush and his henchmen, such as "torture" and "illegal wiretapping" are reprehensible, the fact that we elected him for a second term makes the bigger crime of the illegal, unprovoked invasion of Iraq a much bigger issue in my mind.

In other words, what we need to do as a nation is start looking in the mirror and ask about what kind of a country we want to become going forward. Going after Bush will raise far more questions than it will answer.

I imagine Obama would probably wax about the importance of getting on rather than give a decisive answer to the question, His response could probably be similar to Biden's.

Paul-- I didn't vote for a Democrat so WHY would I vote for a RINO like McCain??? And if Obama's money came from "the people" ahem, why pray tell did he go over to Britan and take money from Lord Rothschild, like McCain? Oh, you like foreign interests backing US canidate do you? Guess you thought Clinton dealing nuclear secrets and military technology to China was just peachy! I DONT like nor voted for Obama, OR McCain, unlike most out there I don't "outsource" my critical thinking to people who can read off a teteprompter... God gave me a brain and the gift of discernment (look it up if you have to) and I USE it! Look up OpenSecrets.org or census.gov. All of the campaign finance info is right there, including the soft money (unregulated) contributions. They gave to McCain 3 to 1. They weren't doing it for nothing. If you can't see that as an investment by the special interests OVER the peoples interests, then you need to WAKE UP. Hell he's not even inaugurated yet and hes is ALREADY backtracking on every promise he made during the campaign. The Kool-Aid is beginning to get sour "my friends", Oops, I mean " my... Comrades!"

nonononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononononono!

I think the Bush administration already has immunity from prosecution from a previous bill passed, if I'm not mistaken. So Obama's administration won't likely retroactively prosecute, but that could still leave the door open for those outside his administration to prosecute.

"George, the question as written is sort of like asking someone how many times a week they beat their wife. Last time I checked we are suppose to prosecute those who are proven, ususally in a court of law, to be guilty."

You don't find out if they are guilty until you get the evidence, indict and prosecute.

djn The preceptes of the Geneva Convention protect all prisoners. When we have complained about the treatment our captured soldiers receivedh this torture we now have only guarenteed similar or more heinous treatment for those captured in current and future conflicts.

If people in our government directed subordinates to violate the Geneva Convention, they and the subordinates should be prosecuted. We have seen in the past that the claim "I was only following orders", should never be accepted, should never absolve anyone from prosecution.

If Cheney and Bush knowingly directed torture according to the Geneva Convention - they should be prosecuted.

We have people who should be - and are, working on investigation and prevention of terrorist acts. We should not need to resort to torture.

When we commit the same crimes as those that commit them on us - we are no better. Then we have lost.

As a nation right now we are basking in the light of what makes us great. The orderly transfer of presedential power from one person to another, the rule of law, our freedom to vote, to speak out without fear of repurcussions, respect for individual rights - these define us. Do not sacrifice everything for such heinous acts.

please!---list of donors and amounts please sir/ma'am. i like the little Limbaugh "ahem" haha.
no doubt there are special interests, you'll have to move to N. Korea or Iran to get away from that. it's a sad truth of liberal democracies. the vast majority of Obama's campaign contribution came from individuals. i'm no fool either and pride myself that i didn't graduate from the Limbaugh Institute of Advanced Conservative Studies (LMAO)!

please---your own site that you cited says 89% of Obama's donations came from individual donors. that would be more than any other presidential candidate in relevanthistory. i agree that lobbyists are not a good thing, but instead of hating everyone and everything you should do something.

Pete---you certainly make the case for prosecution. another poster said that a "law was passed" protecting Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld... but the prosecution would not necessarily be with the US filing charges and prosecuting. these are crimes against humanity. so UN would have jurisdiction. don't get me wrong, they may very well have broken US law. somehow i don't see some of these individuals ever leaving US soil for the rest of their lives.

http://www.pubrecord.org/torture/607-obamas-doj-wont-pursue-bush-officials-over-torture-policy-aides-say.html

Obama's DOJ Won't Pursue Bush Officials Over Torture Policy, Aides Say

johnnyanger---thanks for the link. i assume the UN could still file charges and a tribunal would hear the case(s) in The Hague. torture and illegal detention are violations of international law and the Geneva Conventions.

i guess we don't have to wake up early to watch the Stephanopoulos-Obama interview, johnnyanger.