• 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!

Terror Memos Didn't Violate Legal Ethics, Report Finds

RightinNYC

Girthless
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
25,893
Reaction score
12,484
Location
New York, NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Terror Memos Didn't Violate Legal Ethics, Report Finds : NPR

In the 2/19 edition of the Friday Night News Dump™, we have this:

Bush administration lawyers did not violate legal ethics rules when they wrote memos authorizing harsh interrogations for terrorism detainees, the Justice Department said Friday, releasing the long-awaited results of its investigation into the memos.

The report focuses on three men who worked at Justice under President Bush: John Yoo, Jay Bybee and Steven Bradbury. All three worked in the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel, crafting the standards for interrogating high-value terrorism detainees.

According to the cover letter accompanying the report, the investigation originally found professional misconduct by Yoo and Bybee. But the career official in charge of overseeing the office of professional responsibility overruled that finding.

Now the report says the men "exercised poor judgment." That means the men will not face disbarment or criminal punishment.

I'm glad to see that they avoided turning this into a partisan witchhunt. Whatever you think about the morality or practicality of the eventual conclusions of the memos in question, it was absurd to argue that their mere drafting violated ethical rules.
 
Lawyers covering for lawyers. Very surprising.
 
Lawyers covering for lawyers. Very surprising.

So if a future Republican administration investigated the actions of Obama-era officials accused of misconduct and determined that they were innocent, would you see that as "lawyers covering for lawyers" or as an exoneration?
 
So if a future Republican administration investigated the actions of Obama-era officials accused of misconduct and determined that they were innocent, would you see that as "lawyers covering for lawyers" or as an exoneration?

Lawyers investigating lawyers only comes in second, in lacking credibility, to cops on cops. It matters not which team they're on.
 
Lawyers investigating lawyers only comes in second, in lacking credibility, to cops on cops. It matters not which team they're on.
So why did you elect a lawyer to the presidency?
 
Did you ever considered the fact that maybe you're just wrong?
He's a liberal, that wouldn't cross his mind if you pulled it through his ears with a string.
 
He's a liberal, that wouldn't cross his mind if you pulled it through his ears with a string.

Heyyyy American, that was pretty good. You've been practicing, ehh? :2rofll:
 
I guess we'll never know, as ADK is evidently afraid to address his own hypocrisy. :shrug:

True enough, you will never know, as long as your reading comp stays so low.

Thanks for trying to play, tho.
 
Moderator's Warning:
Let's discuss the topic, not each other
 
True enough, you will never know, as long as your reading comp stays so low.

Thanks for trying to play, tho.
Spell it out for me, champ.
 
Water boarding is torture.

Torture is against the law.

People who authorize torture have committed a crime.

This isn't about left or right.
 
How is it possible that torture is illegal, people were tortured and nobody is being charged with a crime in regards to said torturing? I won't claim to know the specifics about where authorizing something illegal and immoral is considered a breach of professional ethics, but the system is clearly failing here. I believe in the rule of law, so it may be that legal technicalities prevent anyone from getting prosecuted. However, if that is the case, I would like to know how so such absurd loopholes can be closed.
 
How is it possible that torture is illegal, people were tortured and nobody is being charged with a crime in regards to said torturing? I won't claim to know the specifics about where authorizing something illegal and immoral is considered a breach of professional ethics, but the system is clearly failing here. I believe in the rule of law, so it may be that legal technicalities prevent anyone from getting prosecuted. However, if that is the case, I would like to know how so such absurd loopholes can be closed.

Crimes are not always prosecuted. Just reality.

Exposing a covert CIA spy is against the law, even for a president, yet no one was charged with that crime either. If the Dems had any kahunas they would have gone after Bush and Cheney and Rove and company. But, Obama and Holder probably thought that fight would take too long. Also, the case was already damaged due to Libby's lies and obstruction, which he was found guilty of 4 felonies because of.

Maybe some day, some brave soul will go after Bush and Cheney for authorizing illegal torture. Someday...
 
Back
Top Bottom