I thought I'd say a few things before starting the comments, because I'll never catch up. I'm sure several people have pointed some of these out already.

- He's a confused individual. America's international reputation would be enhanced by prosecuting these officials, not brought down. Doesn't he know that the fact the US tortured people and did nothing about it is a prime recruiting tool? Does he think people in other countries don't already know the US did these things?

- If there's evidence of a crime, and no attempt to prosecute, THAT'S political. he's using that word to mean what he thinks it does, not what it actually does. In the same vein, not talking about something that needs to be talked about can be a political decision too.

- When he said that his "#1 one job is to hold government officials accountable", how did you avoid doing a spit-take? It's too bad that wasn't on TV, because I bet his nose grew about a foot. He doesn't believe that at all, and it's clear from the interview.

- He's a total tool and liar, and knows it. He kept mouthing the right words about things that should be done, then when you asked him about specifics, he'd say the exact opposite

thing is what should be done.

I love the way you nailed him at the end, using his own words. That's beautiful stuff.

I bet that if you had prosecutions, they'd be the biggest ratings winners in the history of US television. Worked during the French revolution, I'm pretty sure it would work today.

Thanks for the good work Glenn.

The rich don't need you to get it. They don't care if you die. They can replace your labour when you're too sick to work. And there are more than enough idiots, as this thread is already showing, arguing against something that every civilized country already has. The really sad thing is, you can easily afford it. It's not the money.

They just don't care if you live or die. It's not gonna affect their cash flow.

is a real tool. If he hasn't figured out by now that black Republicans are just used as show pieces, he'll never figure it out. Why work so hard to be part of a group that doesn't want you?

Where he pointed out that people were always calling for the death penalty for drug dealers, but that didn't work as a deterrent because drug dealers faced death every day. He wanted to see the death penalty for white-collar criminals, because it would make those guys think twice.

It was funny, but made you think. Important, but sickening column Glenn. I hate being reminded of the scope of corporate greed before breakfast.

The hypocrisy gets ratcheted up another notch, and I'm amazed, again, at how little response there is.

"To accept the central premise of our political class -- it's unfair to prosecute Bush officials for things that DOJ lawyers told them was legal -- is to destroy the rule of law in the United States."

That appears to be where we are today, sadly. The rule of law doesn't mean what people think it does.

Does the word "law" really mean anything in the United States anymore? I think that, in a nutshell, is what is really at stake here. Is there any reason I shouldn't be calling the President the Dictator if this is allowed to happen? I can't really think of one.

Thanks for this Glenn.

That's the funniest damn thing I've read in weeks. I'm gonna send that to a couple of friends, and they'll think it's hilarious too.

You should be charging people for that kind of comedy.

Having just listened to the radio interview she did give, why would she talk to you and get eviscerated? I would be ashamed if I was one of her professors listening to this.

She's so full of it...she says the media doesn't need to take on positions, then does so in the next sentence. She can't defend her viewpoint, and she knows it.

Disgusting. She should be fired.

It almost certainly is.

You are aware he did work before "Off the Wall" right? For a small group called the Jackson 5? You might want to look into that.

And yeah, Michael had huge problems. And Billie Jean was a phenomenal song. They're both true.

You think he was the only one?

What you said about Herbert, I agree with. He's one of the better columnists out there, generally speaking.

Whatever the reason he didn't do it before, I'm glad to see him finally making a statement on this topic. Herbert is usually an effective writer, and seeing him on the sidelines on issues this important was strange to me.

Not that he isn't saying anything you haven't been for a while, but it's nice to see someone else adding to the chorus.

Hey, NOB? The answer is yes. Trials are better. That's the way civilized societies do it.

And painful, as Tom usually is. Loved the last column particularly, what a brilliant little STFU.

You're right, that was nauseating. Ugh. Maybe we should go back to the days of scarlet letters for these people.

It goes back to journalists calling people on their bullshit, and stenographers refusing to do it. I guess NPR's ombudsman has clearly stated where they stand on that question.

It's torture. And that thing in Iraq? It's an occupation, not a war. Sometimes language matters.

Wow. That just might have been the single dumbest thing I've read all year. A definite contender. It read like it was produced by a poorly-written computer program.

Thanks for that Glenn. That's a good way to tell who the journalists are...the real ones LOVE calling bullshit. It's the most fun you can have on the job.

But then, I guess that's not in the mindset of stenographers.