It's a given that nothing significant will happen to any current member of the administration, ever. Not before they leave office, or after. That's just the way it is. The only thing to do is catalogue the idiocy.

For when Senator Clinton becomes president.

I'm not really itching for Hill to sit in the Oval Office, but I like the idea of what it would do the fright wing of the GOP. It would drive them literally batshit crazy.

And she would have all those new superpowers Cheney fought for so aggressively.

I don't believe that Glenn and other would let her slide on infractions similar to Bush. But I would hope that Glenn and others will post the endless examples of what the frighties posted when confronted with parallel positions in Dubya's admin.

It's stupid and childish, I know. But when one has no power, one has to invent games of simple amusement.

lol, Roseanne knows the score.

Why is Congress so passive? It's not that they've all been bought, though some surely have. It's not that the rich people like Rockefeller are inclined to Fascism, though some surely are. Nor, I believe, is it that some congress people are cowed because they're afraid, though some appear frightened. No, I see a deeper reason, a reason behind all those reasons.

I think it has to do with the nature of our "post-Capitalistic" society. Unfettered capitalism has turned us all into I-me-now savages. Competition is both pervasive and severe. One might say we've all become ends occupied to the extent that we no longer care about our means. Think about it. When was the last time you heard someone say, "I'm doing this for myself, because it's the right thing to do regardless of outcome"? Kucinich? And did you see how fast he was dismissed as a flake? Principle is dead, we have all devolved into monsters, and we're probably getting precisely what we deserve.

Needs to make an appearance in the DC district court, now.

Instead of term limits, I would instead recommend Proportional Representation (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proportional_representation for all of its different variations).

See also http://www.fairvote.org for activists that are trying to promote them.

eastriver: It would drive them literally batshit crazy.

They are already literally batshit crazy.

And I'm sure shooter will be along shortly to make exactly that point.

Both Rockefeller and Harman prefer to be part of the ruling elite. Their political affiliation just gives credence to the notion that there is government and an opposition. Peopling both sides are those who are more concerned with personal advancement that with party affiliation.

The Democrats on the Senate Intelligence Committee are Rockefeller, the Chair, and Dianne Feinstein, Ron Wyden, Evan Bayh, Barbara Mikulski, Russell Feingold, Bill Nelson and Sheldon Whitehouse. Harry Reid and Carl Levin are also listed as ex officio members of the committee.

I think that Feingold is the only one on this list whose recent actions and statements indicate that he is not an enabler of the Bush lawlessness.

I think we need to start a campaign through one of the progressive netroots organizations to bombard Harry Reid relentlessly with phone calls, emails, and even print and television advertisements until he replaces Rockefeller with Feingold as Chair of the committee. Even as Chair, Feingold would face an uphill battle against this collection of DINO's, but I think that having him in charge could give us a much better chance of restoring a true oversight function to the Senate with respect to intelligence gathering activities.

What group would be best to approach?

On a separate track, would the Senate Judiciary Committee have the appropriate authority to hold hearings on these blatant obstructions of justice that Glenn highlights in this and the April post? How do we bring about some pressure for this to happen? Would the House Judiciary Committee be a better venue?

Why? Because like the Abu Ghraib pictures it would be leaked, and live forever in cyberspace as the stereotype of all America. While I'm sure quite a few here would like that to occur, our current reputation of being the cruelist, most bloodthirsty, lawless nation in recent history doesn't need embellishment. As for the legality of the destruction, it may or may not surpass the act of leaking such information, so unless I hear calls for the exposure and prosecution of the leakers as well, forget about it.

Do I really need to ironically point out that your name solves your dilemma? Gee, if money were taken out of elections by public funding of elections, would we be able to get representatives who were more inclined and had more time to protect our nation’s ideals and interests? Just wondering.

Interesting how the reasons given for destroying the tapes by Gen. Michael V. Hayden, the C.I.A. director was that the decision to destroy the tapes was made “within the C.I.A.” and that they were destroyed to protect the safety of undercover officers and because they no longer had intelligence value.

Even the person who I never talk to knows the real reasons. I hope one of our weak Dems points out to Gen Hayden how easy it would be to mask out the identity of the interrogators. I guess if you in fact did ban torture, why not keep the tapes as a learning tool to show how it hurt the interrogations and why it was such a cruel torture technique that is an insult to our nation.

Gen Hayden, your CIA audience must have been laughing at you in derision for your tool talk.

I'm quite unsurprised to learn about the destruction of the videotapes. I also find that I'm not feeling particualrly outraged about it. The truth is, that the existence or non-existence of evidence doesn't change the evil of what went on in those rooms in the first place.

Its just another example of how the lack of oversight and accountability will invariably bring out the worst even in the best of us.

Shooter of course absolutely relies on the fallacy that it can't be wrong if we're the ones doing it, but the Universe knows better. I worry to about the effects of the interrogation methods on the perpetrators. To be in that position can't be good for your soul.