Senators and congressmen and Judges will determine what is a crime here. A prosecutor will seek, and gain an indictment.CIA lawyers cleared the destruction of torture tapes. Does that mean no law was violated?
No, quite the opposite. The tapes may have been evidence of a crime, but their destruction doesn't erase the potential crime. Worse, we know the tapes exhibited torture, and that they were destroyed; that's destruction of evidence.CIA lawyers cleared the destruction of torture tapes. Does that mean no law was violated?
There was a former CIA agent who came out saying that water boarding was allowed. I bet the Attorney General is just wishing right now that he had answered water boarding questions in front of the Senate Judicial committee.
No, it just means the CIA lawyers thought they could defend the destruction of the video tapes successfully if the tape's destruction ever came called into question.
It means that there was no cover up.
No. But what can we do to get this CIA agent who is leaking and ratting on our President Bush and VP Cheney?
harriet meyers, #43's legal adviser at the time, got wind of the intent to destroy the tapes, and recommended against it.
Its a go....executive privilege.no crimes ,no time ever for anything...F.P
No. It means no LEGAL statute was violated.
The CIA doesn't make laws in this country.
BWHAHAHAHA!!!
Do you REALLY want to argue that, just because a lawyer does something that ultimately makes it legal????
According to that logic, Clinton should never had been impeached and John Dean should never have done time.
Nope, that doesn't mean anything.
Who the eff cares? I mean really. People would blame them for the next attack and its the whiners who prevent them from extracting info using any and all means. These are terrorist suspects, I really dont believe we would hold non dangerous people or torture innocents.
No. It means bush's ';YES-men'; are trying to spin and cover for him.
No comments:
Post a Comment