Instead, let's be very clear that this Department has become so thoroughly politicized under the Busheviks that it essentially serves political interests as its primary function; "justice" is less a matter of law in today's DoJ than it is a matter of 1) ukase from the throne; 2) service to political agenda and will.

This is why I have repeatedly called for the abolition of the Department of Justice rather than its "reform." The Department's politization has become so thoroughly institutionalized that "reform" is an illusion, simply replacing one political agenda (or autocratic will) with another.

Where, exactly, is the Justice in that?

It should be obvious that 'Chuckie' was chosen for trial and conviction for torture as a political matter, not a criminal one. Regardless of his criminality. This is a show trial -- much like Manuel Noriega's trial and conviction in Florida -- not a real one.

"Justice" is not the issue. Sidestepping it-- or crawfishing, if you prefer -- is the point. By having a show trial of this clearly odious individual, the plug can be pulled with regard to the torture business involving the Busheviks, much as the show trial of Manuel Noriega (after, it might be noted, his government in Panama was overthrown, thousands of Panamanians were exterminated, and he was dragged out of a church and hauled hither) pulled the plug on the many accusations of drug running and treasonous criminality under the Bush the Old Regime.

It's very interesting that some have been hollering about the DIFFERENCE between what Chuckie did and what the Busheviks have done, "Can't you SEEE???" Well, yes. It's obvious, plain as day. The DIFFERENCE couldn't be clearer. Chuckie is evil because he is captive. Busheviks are free. What more do you need to know?

And the DoJ will not even investigate charges of torture/war crimes or what have you against the Busheviks, and the Incoming (as well as the entire Palace staff) has indicated a complete lack of interest in ordering otherwise.

Therefore, it will not be done. A purely political decision, not in any way connected with the notion of "Justice."

Happy New Year.

Really, I am not trying to be phony in my belief just to create conflict. It's just that I feel that there are usually no absolutes in political arguments. If there are absolutes, then why do we have diplomacy? Why have trials for accused persons?

My only point is that there is always someone to argue an alternative point, whether it is torture or stoplights. I totally agree with Glenn's articles against the Bush administration and hope we can get these guys into a courtroom. But I am not willing to deny anyone their right to present their side of the argument, even Bush. (Whom I feel is guilty of horrible offenses)

If you want another non-public servant scenario to prove the point, I will try to give you one.

One nite, while I was visiting the emergency room, I witnessed two individuals pull up in car. One young man was holding his neck because his motorcycle chain had come loose on an accident and partially ripped open his throat which was bleeding profusely. Although I didn't ask whether or not the driver obeyed all the traffic lights on his way to the emergency room, I think it's not to unreasonable to assume that he skipped a few to get his friend medical help.

I would expect anyone in this situation not to obey traffic signals.

And Kitt, all public servants are always private citizens. They don't give up private citizenship or rights just because they are doing work for the government. Police officers or other servants are subject to the law at all times.

Respectfully,

vv

With special prosecutors carrying out separate investigations on torture, illegal spying, intelligence manipulation, politicization of DOJ, the destruction of records and manipulation of the financial markets, the Obama administration will be free to go about its business. The prosecutors do the work and we stop hounding him.

I agree 100%. This is where the excuses on the Left for evading oversight falls apart. The common rhetoric ALWAYS follows along these lines:

There's serious problems for us to address. Americans are concerned about health care, and jobs, and education. They don't want us to focus on the past and they are sick of political divisiveness, etc.

So just turn it over to special prosecutors like Fitzgerald and then do the people's work. It's all really so simple. They don't have to walk and chew gum at the same time if that's what they're afraid of. Just get someone else to chew the gum.

Kitt, you said:

"Aside from the fact that on-duty firemen, police officers and ambulance drivers are not private citizens or civilians while on duty"

If this is true, then why were police officers on trial for Rodney King beating? Why are there soldiers in jail for Abu Ghraib offenses?

It's because they are private citizens subject to the law just like the rest of us are. And Glenn' point in his articles is that the president is also a private citizen subject to the law as well and should be put on trial for torture and human rights violations to which I agree.

vv

There's a reason why Jonah Goldberg calls her the normally sensible Ruth Marcus. She may be disobliging the right on Caroline Kennedy, but her instincts are reliably in synch with theirs.

Civilized nations can agree on Governments sometimes have to use a little torture in the defence of liberty is no vice. However, torture used in the defence of tyranny is immoral.

I thought your inane comment must almost certainly be snark. Until I read some of your previous letters.

Why don't you go hunt down OS' actual birth certificate?

ALLEGED "witches" were essentially tortured because the courts wanted their confessions as being "witches", any "spells" they'd made, as well as to implicate other "witches" - who were also considered a serious threat to the community. The new alleged "witches" would then be tortured into confessions as well as implicating even more "witches".

Logically speaking, the basis of their argument for torture - they were witches, and thus a dangerous threat to the community - had never even been proven in a court of law to begin with. And, yet this ALLEGATION was the basis of their being tortured into providing the information which ultimately led to their conviction.

Essentially, you could replace the label "witches" above with the label "terrorist", and you'd essentially see that the same logic being used today for torture hasn't changed from that being used in the Salem Witch Trials.

They are torturing alleged to get the information they need to convict them, find others, and ultimately protect the community.