• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Cheney: Obama Should Be Debriefing, Not Investigating

apdst said:
And created millions of jobs in the process. Unfortunately for the Libbos, the environment didn't suffer from it.
Click to expand...

Link please (both for American jobs and for your evidence that these policies did no harm)

For fun, here is my rebuttal if you believe for some reason that the burden of proof is on me.


NRDC: The Bush Record


EPA cracks down on coke plant pollution (03/31/05)

States sue EPA over new mercury rule (03/29/05)

White House weakens EPA cancer safeguards (03/29/05)

BLM plans to open up protected desert land to recreation and development (03/24/05)

Florida crocodiles to lose endangered status (03/24/05)

Bush administration appeals mountaintop mining defeat (03/18/05)

EPA inspector general to review hydraulic fracturing study (03/17/05)

EPA weakens mercury reduction requirements for power plants (03/15/05)



And that's just in one half of a month...
 
Crunch said:
LOL.... you are already setting the scene for the incompetence of this administration to be blamed on Bush.... you people are incredible.

Just remember, the rest of the Country will…. No attacks for 8 years, good luck with your spin.
Click to expand...


Again I ask what are your qualifiers Crunch? No attacks for 8 years if you forget about the anthrax attacks, forget about the embassy bombing in Iraq and forget about our soldiers being attacked. Also forget that from September 11th, 2001 to January 20th, 2009 was under 8 years. Interesting metric of measurement you got going there.

You know this is funny up until the day Bush left office people were blaming Clinton for all of Bush's failures. Then when the economy was going down they were complaining that Obama didn't change anything even though he didn't take office yet. Then now we're being told to forget about Bush even though for years people were obsessed with the Clenis.
 
formerroadie said:
I think that those who have broken the law should be prosecuted. Cheney is one of those people.
Click to expand...

Which law would that be? The domestic and international definitions of torture are entirely subjective as both use the subjective qualifier of "severe" so in actuality ones definition of torture is left to their own personal opinion of what qualifies as severe. I don't consider things; such as, waterboarding as severe. There needs to be a set standard of what exactly is and is not permitted as interrogation techniques and until that happens no law could have been violated and seeing as we in the U.S. have a constitutional prohibition of ex post facto prosecution Cheney can not and never will be prosecuted for the treatment of detainees.
 
Agent Ferris said:
Which law would that be? The domestic and international definitions of torture are entirely subjective as both use the subjective qualifier of "severe" so in actuality ones definition of torture is left to their own personal opinion of what qualifies as severe. I don't consider things; such as, waterboarding as severe. There needs to be a set standard of what exactly is and is not permitted as interrogation techniques and until that happens no law could have been violated and seeing as we in the U.S. have a constitutional prohibition of ex post facto prosecution Cheney can not and never will be prosecuted for the treatment of detainees.
Click to expand...

IMO (& many others)......Dick Cheney is guilty of so many violations of U.S. law that I could spend the rest of the night listing them. From Restraint of Trade (Cheney Energy Task Force of 2001) to felony violations of the Hatch Act to..."Outing" a CIA agent in time of war....to Lying to Congress to.............On & On.
The fact that he hasn't been officially charged with any crimes ...YET.... has more to do with the fact that he & Bush ran the government & could stop any investigation & the fact that Obama is very busy cleaning up Bush/Cheney's mess of the last 8 years.
The fact that he hasn't been charged,....YET.....Is meaningless. The statute has many years yet to run.
 
Last edited:
Devil505 said:
IMO (& many others)......Dick Cheney is guilty of so many violations of U.S. law that I could spend the rest of the night listing them. From Restraint of Trade (Cheney Energy Task Force of 2001)
Click to expand...

Nobody knows what occurred during that meeting. Actually having a national energy policy for once isn't a crime.


to felony violations of the Hatch Act to...
Click to expand...

Any evidence for Cheney directing federal employees to engage in political campaigns.


"Outing" a CIA agent in time of war....
Click to expand...

Um no first the CIA "outed" Plame to the Cuban government through the Swiss embassy in Havana, then Joe Wilson outed his own wife when he was trying to get some credibility for his bull**** article about Nigerian uranium, a report which has since been proven completely false, and finally Richard Armitage outed her for no political reason what so ever.


to Lying to Congress to
Click to expand...

Such as?

.............On & On.
The fact that he hasn't been officially charged with any crimes ...YET.... has more to do with the fact that he & Bush ran the government & could stop any investigation & the fact that Obama is very busy cleaning up Bush/Cheney's mess of the last 8 years.
Click to expand...

You mean steady economic growth and low unemployment rates? Ya Obama is certainly reversing on that policy and sending this country right down the toilet in the process. The democrats have controlled both Houses of Congress since 2006 and the Presidency for almost a year now. This is their mess, they own it.

The fact that he hasn't been charged,....YET.....Is meaningless. The statute has many years yet to run.
Click to expand...

I was referring to the current topic. What law in relation to the alleged mistreatment of detainees has Cheney violated?
 
Last edited:
Agent Ferris said:
Which law would that be? The domestic and international definitions of torture are entirely subjective as both use the subjective qualifier of "severe" so in actuality ones definition of torture is left to their own personal opinion of what qualifies as severe. I don't consider things; such as, waterboarding as severe. There needs to be a set standard of what exactly is and is not permitted as interrogation techniques and until that happens no law could have been violated and seeing as we in the U.S. have a constitutional prohibition of ex post facto prosecution Cheney can not and never will be prosecuted for the treatment of detainees.
Click to expand...

US Law: 113c § 2340
As used in this chapter—
(1) “torture” means an act committed by a person acting under the color of law specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering (other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions) upon another person within his custody or physical control;
(2) “severe mental pain or suffering” means the prolonged mental harm caused by or resulting from—
(A) the intentional infliction or threatened infliction of severe physical pain or suffering;
(B) the administration or application, or threatened administration or application, of mind-altering substances or other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or the personality;
(C) the threat of imminent death; or
(D) the threat that another person will imminently be subjected to death, severe physical pain or suffering, or the administration or application of mind-altering substances or other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or personality; and
(3) “United States” means the several States of the United States, the District of Columbia, and the commonwealths, territories, and possessions of the United States.
Click to expand...

Now waterboarding is torture. The threat of being drowned to death is very real. It tricks the body into the effects of drowning by building up carbon dioxide in the lungs. The person feels the effects of drowning. So yes that would fit the definition of C and D. Also we have prosecuted waterboarding in the US and abroad.

To give you an example in 83 a texas sheriff, James Parker and his deputies were prosecuted for waterboaring suspects to get false confessions. US Assistant Attorney Scott Woodward stated: the prisoners who were subjected to waterboarding were not "model citizens," but they were still "victims" of torture.

The sheriff and his deputies were convicted and sent to prison.

Waterboarding is torture plain and simple. There's nothing subjective about it we've prosecuted it and have considered it to be torture. We prosecuted one of our own soldiers for doing it to a vietcong during the war and we prosecuted the japanese for doing it.
 
Agent Ferris said:
Nobody knows what occurred during that meeting. Actually having a national energy policy for once isn't a crime.




Any evidence for Cheney directing federal employees to engage in political campaigns.




Um no first the CIA "outed" Plame to the Cuban government through the Swiss embassy in Havana, then Joe Wilson outed his own wife when he was trying to get some credibility for his bull**** article about Nigerian uranium, a report which has since been proven completely false, and finally Richard Armitage outed her for no political reason what so ever.




Such as?



You mean steady economic growth and low unemployment rates? Ya Obama is certainly reversing on that policy and sending this country right down the toilet in the process. This is Obama's mess he owns it.



I was referring to the current topic. What law in relation to the alleged mistreatment of detainees has Cheney violated?
Click to expand...

Ah....You are now asking me to PROVE my case without benefit of a thorough investigation to uncover the facts. The fact is that Cheney was able to quash any such investigation for 8 years & is now crying like a baby when it looks like those investigations will go forward & undoubtedly uncover enough evidence to (literally) hang him.

Little wonder he is screaming his head off!
 
Last edited:
Agent Ferris said:
Um no first the CIA "outed" Plame to the Cuban government through the Swiss embassy in Havana, then Joe Wilson outed his own wife when he was trying to get some credibility for his bull**** article about Nigerian uranium, a report which has since been proven completely false, and finally Richard Armitage outed her for no political reason what so ever.
Click to expand...

Do you have information regarding the "CIA outing plame to the cuban government" as you claim?
 
PogueMoran said:
Again I ask what are your qualifiers Crunch? No attacks for 8 years if you forget about the anthrax attacks, forget about the embassy bombing in Iraq and forget about our soldiers being attacked. Also forget that from September 11th, 2001 to January 20th, 2009 was under 8 years. Interesting metric of measurement you got going there.
Click to expand...

Nice try.... you know damned well we are always talking about attacks on civilians on US soil.... but it was a nice try.
You know this is funny up until the day Bush left office people were blaming Clinton for all of Bush's failures. Then when the economy was going down they were complaining that Obama didn't change anything even though he didn't take office yet. Then now we're being told to forget about Bush even though for years people were obsessed with the Clenis.
Click to expand...
 
Crunch said:
Nice try.... you know damned well we are always talking about attacks on civilians on US soil.... but it was a nice try.
Click to expand...

It still hasn't technically been 8 years yet, you should have said, "almost 8 years."
 
Crunch said:
Nice try.... you know damned well we are always talking about attacks on civilians on US soil.... but it was a nice try.
Click to expand...

Oh so the last time I asked you about this you went off about attacks that happened during the clinton years that weren't on US Soil. So again you use qualifiers and forget about the anthrax attacks that happened on our soil and did kill americans which we still haven't found the culprit. By your same metric of qualifiers Clinton kept us safe for almost 8 years from foreign based attacks on US soil. He must have been doing something right and he brought the trade center bombers to justice and are still in jail.
 
the president went back on his word to leon panetta
 
Agent Ferris said:
Nobody knows what occurred during that meeting. Actually having a national energy policy for once isn't a crime.




Any evidence for Cheney directing federal employees to engage in political campaigns.




Um no first the CIA "outed" Plame to the Cuban government through the Swiss embassy in Havana, then Joe Wilson outed his own wife when he was trying to get some credibility for his bull**** article about Nigerian uranium, a report which has since been proven completely false, and finally Richard Armitage outed her for no political reason what so ever.




Such as?



You mean steady economic growth and low unemployment rates? Ya Obama is certainly reversing on that policy and sending this country right down the toilet in the process. The democrats have controlled both Houses of Congress since 2006 and the Presidency for almost a year now. This is their mess, they own it.



I was referring to the current topic. What law in relation to the alleged mistreatment of detainees has Cheney violated?
Click to expand...

You don't admit the hypocrisy of what you are saying here, do you?

On the one hand, you are demanding proof of crimes while on the other hand you are advocating we stop any investigations of these crimes?!?!

If Cheney is innocent, wouldn't you want that proved?
 
PogueMoran said:
US Law: 113c § 2340


Now waterboarding is torture. The threat of being drowned to death is very real. It tricks the body into the effects of drowning by building up carbon dioxide in the lungs. The person feels the effects of drowning. So yes that would fit the definition of C and D. Also we have prosecuted waterboarding in the US and abroad.

To give you an example in 83 a texas sheriff, James Parker and his deputies were prosecuted for waterboaring suspects to get false confessions.

US Assistant Attorney Scott Woodward stated: the prisoners who were subjected to waterboarding were not "model citizens," but they were still "victims" of torture.

The sheriff and his deputies were convicted and sent to prison.
Click to expand...

No they were convicted for "conspiring to force confessions" not for torture.

Waterboarding is torture plain and simple. There's nothing subjective about it we've prosecuted it and have considered it to be torture.
Click to expand...

Lol, the word "severe" is entirely subjective. It's a subjective qualifier thus whether or not waterboarding is torture is your own opinion. Subjective qualifiers have no place in legal definitions.

We prosecuted one of our own soldiers for doing it to a vietcong
Click to expand...

No it was a North Vietnamese POW not VC, he was protected by the Geneva Conventions, and entitled to POW status IE, he could not be subjected to ANY coercive or unpleasant treatment of ANY kind:

"No physical or mental torture, nor any other form of coercion, may be inflicted on prisoners of war to secure from them information of any kind whatever. Prisoners of war who refuse to answer may not be threatened, insulted, or exposed to unpleasant or disadvantageous treatment of any kind."

International Humanitarian Law - Third 1949 Geneva Convention

during the war and we prosecuted the japanese for doing it.
Click to expand...

The Japanese were not convicted for just waterboarding people, while they were being waterboarded they were, also, beaten and burned with cigarettes and so much water was pored that their stomachs became descended and then they would proceed to beat on the descended stomach. That is not in any way the same thing that occurred at Gitmo.
 
The Prof said:
the president went back on his word to leon panetta
Click to expand...

Good for him!! (of course that's BS & you know it but...what the hell....Did you overhear what Obama promised Panettea?)

& even if that was true....So what?? (does he get a demerit like he should for using mustard on hamburgers?)
 
Last edited:
Devil505 said:
You don't admit the hypocrisy of what you are saying here, do you?

On the one hand, you are demanding proof of crimes while on the other hand you are advocating we stop any investigations of these crimes?!?!
Click to expand...

Um no I'm asking for what crime was actually committed in relation to the current topic, first I would like to see the statute which Cheney allegedly violated then we can talk about evidence. Now as to the other topics you have provided the crimes allegedly committed thus I would like to see evidence for the accusations.

If Cheney is innocent, wouldn't you want that proved?
Click to expand...

Innocent of what?
 
Agent Ferris said:
Um no I'm asking for what crime was actually committed in relation to the current topic, first I would like to see the statute which Cheney allegedly violated then we can talk about evidence.
Click to expand...

Good......I take it that you fully back the idea of AG Holder investigating these things then.

We are in agreement!!:)
 
PogueMoran said:
Do you have information regarding the "CIA outing plame to the cuban government" as you claim?
Click to expand...

"In a second compromise, officials said a more recent inadvertent disclosure resulted in references to Mrs. Plame in confidential documents sent by the CIA to the U.S. Interests Section of the Swiss Embassy in Havana.

The documents were supposed to be sealed from the Cuban government, but intelligence officials said the Cubans read the classified material and learned the secrets contained in them, the officials said."

CIA officer named prior to column - Washington Times
 
Devil505 said:
Ah....You are now asking me to PROVE my case without benefit of a thorough investigation to uncover the facts.
Click to expand...

Um the investigation is into the treatment of detainees not the other crimes which you are alleging Cheney committed. It seems to me that if you are making these accusations that you would have some sort of evidence that led you to believe this.
 
Devil505 said:
Good......I take it that you fully back the idea of AG Holder investigating these things then.

We are in agreement!!:)
Click to expand...

Whatever's clever. But no one is talking about investigating the other crimes Cheney allegedly committed, the investigation is into the treatment of detainees, I'm just wondering what crime is being investigated to begin with, or perhaps the Obama administration doesn't believe in the prohibition of ex post facto prosecution.
 
Agent Ferris said:
Whatever's clever. But no one is talking about investigating the other crimes Cheney allegedly committed, the investigation is into the treatment of detainees, I'm just wondering what crime is being investigated to begin with, or perhaps the Obama administration doesn't believe in the prohibition of ex post facto prosecution.
Click to expand...

I'm talking about right now. There is enough "Probable Cause" right now, that I feel comfortable that I would be able to obtain search warrants from a U.S. Magistrate to uncover more evidence of Cheney's other crimes. (all that is needed is the political will to do the right thing)

Let me ask you flat out:
Are you against investigating possible criminal violations committed by the former VP?
If so, why?
 
Last edited:
Devil505 said:
I'm talking about right now. There is enough "Probable Cause" right now, that I feel comfortable that I would be able to obtain search warrants from a U.S. Magistrate to uncover more evidence of Cheney's other crimes. (all that is needed is the political will to do the right thing)

Let me ask you flat out:
Are you against investigating possible criminal violations committed by the former VP?
If so, why?
Click to expand...

What would you use as probable cause? Don't forget, you have to be specific to get a warrant.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom