Matt Dowd Thinks People on the Left Who Want Accountability Just Want to "Punish People"
By Heather Sunday Apr 26, 2009 3:00pmYou can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!
DOWNLOADS: (1492)
PLAYS: (2854)
Apparently George Stephanopoulos just can't wrap his head around the idea that the lawyers who wrote the newly released memos might have done it to sanction torture. What other reason does he think they could have possibly had for writing them? And in response Matt Dowd says that those on the left just want to punish people. Heaven forbid anyone might want us to be a country of laws and one that doesn't sanction torture. No, it just has to be about revenge to him.
Login or Register to post comments.
The line between the terms "punish" and "accountability" is very thin. I don't care about punishment. I just want the perps to be held accountable. Why is that so hard to understand?
..and their propagandists are making so much noise about this betrays how little they understand about the concept of justice. To them justice = retribution, often retribution for its own sake, retribution that is, as often as not, unjust in its exercise.
We (a just society) do not seek justice merely in order to direct retribution or revenge upon those whom we compel to suffer justice. Instead, we seek justice so as to a safe-guard society, that society may have a better tommorow. Retributive justice is, or should be, an after-thought of the overall justice process....that being because nobody ever escapes personal justice, even though they may succeed in delaying certain aspects of it. Justice, is the only the foundation upon which the home that is any healthy society can be built. Being that the over-arching totality of conservatives build their justifying principles upon that which is, in its essence, sociopathic impulses, it is no wonder that none of them seem to grasp the point and purpose of justice.
They tortured to get false confessions to justify the illegal wars and invasions. I have been saying this over and over.
Yes, ron, I agree. Posting again, in case you missed it in the other thread. BushCo started the torture, long ago, to try to torture-out a link between Iraq and 9/11. New York Times, Op Ed:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/26/opinion/26r...
.
Of course the rapist has a different opinion...
Of course the murderer has a different opinion...
Of course the liar always has a different opinion...
Of course the TORTURER has a different opinion...
... And America has laws.
.
if "America" had morals none of this would have taken place to begin with.
This nation STRIVES for morals and that's why the criminals that have been in our government the past 8 yrs are running scared!
Your so called "government" has been murdering people from it's inception. If you had morals your so called "government" would have been eliminated after it's first murder.
EXCUSE ME!
as is thrown in your face everytime you
commit some infraction that you are not aware
is now wrong, it is pointed out to you
rather obtusely, IGNORANCE OF THE LAW IS NO EXCUSE !!!
lawyers have no excuse for not knowing what the law is,
any lawyer like bybee who writes memos clearly stating
as he has in detail about torturing someone, knew the
law and was accommodating the criminals bush/cheney in
the whitehouse to cover their asses.
too bad bybee wrote this torture definition after bush/cheney
had started their rein of torture on terrorists and the
American public.
The saying was ignorance of the law is no excuse!
what's the difference in what i said above,
except i used three !s and you used one !
you are rather petty...are you not?
When it comes to the "common" criminal. And, you can damn well bet the republican wingnut types want both accountability and to exact punishment from them!
I see young kids brought into the criminal justice system for things that, by comparison to the harm caused by the powered criminals, what they have done is comparatively harmless.
IN 2003 when ever I want a shot of greedy lying ignorance I come here and watch your clips of the days media.
God how ignorant the MSM talking assholes are.
I can relax an understand that the only things I missed were more lies!
I'm ok with punishing every torturer and every memo-writer who codified torture. They gave us The Great Depression 2, let's give them The Nuremberg Trials 2.
It's pretty funny that right wingers are offended at the idea of punishment for having committed a crime. These are the people, after all, behind the death penalty which the future former state of Texas uses to "punish" hundreds of people every year.
black eye, but are determined to make sure that the entire world despises all Americans. Guess that's easier than justice in these people's eyes. How sad. It's bad enough they illegally tortured, but now to make matters worse, it has to be discussed constantly making excuses and partisan framing. Just sad.
.............now, it is the US of BLOODYISRAEL behind the IRON CURTAIN of ignorance purposefully inflicted by the 'Librul media'. BLOODYISRAEL has successfully taken over the US, and wants to keep it SILENT!! It helps to spred it's BLOODYPROPAGANDA, and it's covert agenda, and to protect the whores of BLOODYISRAEL. You won't hear anymore about Jane Harmon's TREASON, either.
The rethugs and their defenders are trying to make this about right/left politics which is outrageous. Evil has overtaken this country when its leaders can attack any nation it wants on with fake excuses and break international laws with supreme arrogance. This is about right and wrong, and the "right" is wrong and has been for decades. Just punish the law breakers, who gives a crap what their political philosophy is.
But nobody's calling for a lynch mob. The call is for investigations. And yes, we'd also like to hear about Democratic complicity in these crimes.
Unlike Republicans calling for the violent overthrow of the government because they don't want a Democratic president. Lynch mobs are very Republican.
Punish someone for what?
For torture?
For invading a nation without reason?
Why not punish them?
This is only partisan inasmuch as those responsible for the crimes were Republicans!
PS If Democrats were responsible for the crimes I want them punished too. I can't believe that the same people who vilified Clinton for lying about sex think that torture has nuances that can excuse it.
Republicans are obsessed with the rule of law, but only as it applies to everyone else. Always have been, always will be. End of discussion.
It's time to put a stop to that kind of thinking. Democrats and Independents and concerned citizens need the backbone and wisdom to bring peace and order to this country and get these rogue rethugs and corportists under control. If they want to go galt, let them and let's come up with inventive ways to live without them. No more iokifyr crap or copping out when they whine a little bit.
obviously the repuglican wingnuts are scrambling to avoid accountability....
but I don't see anyone here addressing the (valid) point by Dowd about the complicity of the Democrats.
I'm so disgusted by political expediency on the part of people (like Hillary, et al.) taking the place of what they know the right answers to be.
Obama has been less than progressive so far...
sorry.
maybe there are people on the left that just want to punish people. i personally, have spoken to people
that have a similiar opinion/view that i do, i want consequences/"punishment" of those guilty of illegal doing(s). why? because this country is based on the rule of law by the people. dawd is trying to flip-flop framing suggesting those against torture want a suggestion of torture upon those found guilty. maybe that's alittle heavy but you may know what i mean. i want consequences so those that are courted by special interests/elites will give it a second thought. "the people" of this country have essentially been taken out of the "process". corporations/capitalists and government have had their way for too long. i do feel our position in the world could also be empowered.
I thought the right-wing was the party of accountability
Right?
Yes, for everyone else, silly. See above.
Why, you gonna finger-thump my nose?
That's TORTURE!!!
Will the right wing fascist nazi neocons offer up a few scapegoats to make all of this to go away>
'Scooter' was one, Abramoff was another, Maddoff, too, but the REAL PLAYERS, no, to them a different 'code of ethics' are always applied. American Acceptionalism.
Stephanopoulos says that for this to be a crime, the lawyers had to know they were wrong when they were writing the memos justifying torture? WTF? It's only a crime if you know it's a crime when you do it? So as long as I remain deliberately ignorant I cannot commit a crime? Certainly explains a lot about America.
http://www.nolo.com/definition.cfm/Term/CDBD2...
But I doubt they lawyers responsible could have passed the bar without knowing they were wrong.
.
Q U E S T I O N:
Which came first...
... The memos to torture or the torture?
And if the torture came first, then the memos are evidence of just what but the commission of a crime?
.
...the evidence seems to show that the INTENT to torture came first.
Whether actual torture was performed prior to the supposedly legal defense is something investigation can prove.
.
Q U E S T I O N:
What prevents other Administrations from adopting "other" illegal activities if there are to be no investigations, no accountability, no consequences of any wrong doings?
If that, then we no longer are America, that Nation of Laws but instead have become America, who's president decides.
.
That's why it is so important to prosecute these crimes.
If the OLC can immunize illegal activities this way, there is no law.
You mean like wiretapping Americans in contravention of FISA?
...that if an honorless President had his OLC issue an opinion that it was legal to imprison all homosexuals for national security purposes half of the Republicans in congress would be Gitmoed.
"How does this sound, Mr. (name of idiotic, hypocritical conservative): we'll admit that the torture issue is about punishing the Bush administration rather than upholding the rule of law if you admit the Clinton impeachment was about punishing Bill Clinton rather than upholding the rule of law. Do we have a deal?"
That would be lying to get them to tell the truth!
Because they always act in a vindictive partisan fashion, they can't understand that other people are not motivated by the same impulses. They then raise the complicity of democratic politicians in the torture policy like it is some kind of trump card that will end the discussion. They assume people calling for investigations will stop once they realize it will pull in Democrats as well as Republicans but if you are against torture, and for the rule of law, then you are interested in accountability no matter whose party the perpetrator is a member of.
(where your comment falls apart is that even if Republican's finally admitted the obvious about their own vindictive persecution of Clinton over a blowjob, it doesn't change the motivation of people who want to see the rule of law prevail today.)
was to put Republicans in a position they cannot win.
To this day I have never seen one Republican admit to even the slightest misstep in the Clinton impeachment process, not even to say something as lame as "perhaps we overreacted a little" on the matter. When the Clinton impeachment is brought up to Republicans to point out their hypocrisy in legal matters such as this torture case, they still say the same thing: "That case was about the 'rule of law' because Clinton lied under oath!" I don't believe the thought of admitting their true motives in the Monica Lewinsky "scandal" has ever crossed their minds to this day. Collectively these people are one humongous Energizer bunny: they know how to do one thing - one completely useless and thoughtless thing - and will keep doing it until their batteries die.
Thus they will never admit that the Clinton impeachment was nothing more than an act of political revenge (for nothing more than Clinton's having won the presidency fair-and-square, it must be noted: that is how child-like and fucked up these people are). And then the general public can sit back and enjoy watching yet another dima-a-dozen, whiny, tantrum-throwing Republican try to wiggle his way out of a no-win situation by babbling incoherently about how this case is so different from the Clinton case even though the legal issues in this case are much more cut-and-dried than the other.
Non-partisan interest in accountability in this case - which is my interest above all (if Pelosi and other spineless Democrats get swept out, so be it) - is not the true concern of anybody "debating" on these stupid and destructive tv talk shows; the true concern for anybody appearing on these awful tv "news" shows is in making the guy from the other party look stupid and weak - something the left just doesn't get. Right and wrong, logic and illogic, etc, etc have no place in these made-for-tv arguments.
I'd like to see those guilty of torture (and ordering, approving and defending torture) subjected to Enhanced Heightening aka being hung by the neck until slightly taller. It was good enough for the Japanese torturers, its good enough for Chaney et al.
I see all these videos today, and just can't watch them. It makes America look ULTRA-TRASHY, and my head spin.
If (the late) Saddam Hussein or Ahmedinejad or Gadaffi were waterboarding Americans, how long would it be until the cry was torture, loud and clear? No debate, no opnion, just nuke 'em.
We just want the truth and contrary to what Col. Nathan R. Jessep thought, we can handle the truth!
George seems to think that these Ivy-league educated lawyers, who had studied both the laws and treaties and the techniques to be used, might have been ignorant that they were sanctioning torture. And Bybee feels bad about it now, so why are we being so mean to them?
Dowd seems to think our pursuit of investigations is sour grapes, and it makes him (as a supporter of Bushco, the status quo, corporatism, etc.) really angry.
I've said it over and over: One of the best things about the Bushco years is that the depravity and corruption of the American MSM have been made abundantly clear.
His childlike wonderment is really something to behold. He's a perfect example of the brainless idiots infesting Sunday morning teevee.
Steffy is dense enough to be the moderator of a laughable sham of a show. He is little more than a clueless status quo enabler whose idea of success is making a big salary and doing what his corporate masters tell him to say.
Challenge Dowd about accountability? Nope. Why his corporate overloads might get pissed off and take his condo and Rolls Royce away. How dreadful.
If you ask me, both of these pathetic, partisan assclowns need to find something else to do. Like get off the air for starters.
Can't imagine Clinton would have anything to do with him.
Isn't Stephanopoulos like 4 feet tall?
presidential campaign, taught at Columbia, etc. I think he's just becoming the person he's expected to be as an MSM star: willfully dense, obtusely ignorant, obviously in favor of the status quo, corporatism, etc. I wonder if one day he'll snap out of it and wonder how an idealistic young political operative became a shriveled moral whore.
Matt Dowd doesn't like our laws much! There are countries he can go to that may have the kind he likes. Saudi Arabia comes to mind.
I thought conservatives liked punishing people.
Oh wait, that's right, just other people.
the Establishment.
DAMN STRAIGHT!! But I also want a precedent set so that if ANY criminal minds inhabit our White House, Congress or Judicial branches AGAIN; that they KNOW FULL WELL they will be held accountable.
The other side of the coin is IF we do NOTHING.....the next time, and there will be a next time, those guilty of crimes against our nation and humanity will know they TOO can get off scott free.
So yes...I WANT THE GUILTY PUNISHED!!
President Obama can go right on doing the work of the Executive Branch, and the Judicial Branch can easily handle this can of worms. But it MUST BE DEALT WITH!!
If we hung Japanese war criminals for waterboarding people why can't we hang Republican war criminals for waterboarding people. After all the Republicans are all in favor of the death penalty when applied to potential Democratic voters.
The Republican Guard is for capital punishment for the average American law breaker. Not themselves.
Do we not punish rank and file Americans for breaking the law? Should the Republican Guard be the exception?
After all, we want to look forward and all their crimes were committed in the past. (not advanced in this video, but commonplace nonetheless).
What an inane argument. Aren't all crimes those that were committed in the past? If not, how do we discern crimes that have not been comitted yet? This is circular reasoning at its worst.
These monsters should have their throats filled with glue and set aflame. God would smile. Justice would be halfway done.
Regular people follow the law. If regular people do not follow the law we will be held accountable. Republicans and others must either follow the laws or be prepared to whine all the way to prison. The left wants justice just as the right wingnuts want justice. We can separate and identify the unworthy amongst us but the right wingnuts cannot.
Reich wingers have no problems with torture or the lies that lead to war in Iraq-but watch them grit their teeth with rage when discussing Clinton's bj!
Megan McCain needs to just jump ship and become a Democrat. Her party's a lost cause.
Just like Susan Eisenhower did. Get a clue.
after a couple of years of being trounced by the reichtards...she will change parties
That's because those on the right believe everyone is as politically vindictive as they are, and just can't believe that some people actually believe in the rule of law.
bush and his crew had no problem blaming and having trials for soldiers following his policy for torture in Iraq prisons after photos appeared in the media. He let them take the fall when we didn't know that policy came from the White House. Now Cheney won't shut up, but nothing while the troops he suports were discharged and locked up for doing what they were lead to believe was needed to be done. Another gutless act by the sick bastards on the right who think honor, patriotism and morals are only words to use against others and not not for themselves.Excuse me, but isn't the definition of torture "punishing people"? They are the ones who "just want to punish people".
We're all for more prisons, long punishments, the death penalty. Yeah, that's us lefties. How insightful, Dowdie.
Anything and everything even remotely positive that we have accomplished since 9/11 internationally has been built on a foundation of clay. We must Investigate, Prosecute, and Incarcerate ("Punish") those responsible if we are to free ourselves of the stain of torture.
While we're at it, let's reopen Iran-Contra -- it cannot be a coincidence that some of the same actors there are involved with Iraq/Afghanistan and Torture.
they are still trying to frame this politically?
if there are dems in congress who knew what was going on...and signed off on it...i want them gone and tossed into prison
i dont ever want a president, whether republican or dem to do this again
we have done this before
no one faced prosecution for what happened to the japanese americans during ww2...that was criminal
but you cannot sanction torture
if this chapter is closed....it will happen again
Because they know if we do what is right, prosecute them and put them in jail then everyone will realize that all the things that we have been saying about Bush/Cheney et al is true. This is something that they just cant come to grips with.
Punishment is something a parent may mete out to a child who has run into the street in defiance of the parent's warning. Yet a child cannot comprehend ultimate consequences. The parent does not wait for the "consequences" of the child's actions to occur, which could cost the child his life. A punishment is usually meted out that scares the child into obeying parental guidance. These guys should be so lucky if it were true that all America wants is to punish them for conducting torture. They'd be treated as though they didn't comprehend the consequences of illegally authorizing torture.
And we know that isn't true.
It's more grown-up than "punishment". In the larger framework of adult life when parents are not in charge any more, our body of law sets forth the parameters of acceptable and unacceptable behavior and metes out consequences for violations of the law. The founders established America, above all else, to be a country of laws, not "men" meting out punishment at their pleasure, destroying the function of a dictatorial, punitive, or indulgent "king-playing-parent".
And so we have consequences for those who defy the law that are not related to any kind of personal relationship with the person whose actions are being considered. Not punishments.
It is childish to call the consequences of lawbreaking "punishment". Such language reveals more about the person who frames it that way than what actually happens. A consequence is the final result of lawbreaking, just as being hit by a moving car is the final result of a child defiantly running out into the street. A "punishment" is having to sit in the corner for an hour while everybody else is having fun. Losing your job because you committed a crime is a punishment -- the final consequence would be incarceration for the crime.
Finally, consequences provide lessons in natural feedback about one's actions if one survives a foolish or illegal act. Without natural feedback, no important learning is possible. Many people who lose their jobs but don't go to jail for company theft just move on to do it in their next place of employment.
Simply, consequences are the ultimate feedback about our actions, and "punishments" are personal, meted out to try to avoid the ultimate consequences for whatever reason.
So I'd rather see those who authorized and committed torture receive the full consequences of the actions for which they were and still are accountable. Otherwise, they end up with no natural and/or lawful feedback about the horrible actions they authorized, condoned, or committed, and torture as an accepted practice of the government spreads like a disease in the thinking of people.
But I don't think Americans will ever accept it as something that's okay for their government to do to anybody.
And we want the standard followed that no one is ABOVE the law.
This it a nation of laws (or is supposed to be).
We want our laws followed by our public officials (you know, the people whose salaries we pay?)
My question is, "Why does Matt Dowd want to obstruct justice?"
If crimes have been committed, and you stand in the way of them being properly investigated and adjudicated, that is TEXTBOOK obstruction of justice -- and a crime in and of itself.
Does the corporate media want to be brought up on charges of aiding and abetting criminal activity? Because I for one would be more than happy to hook that up too.
Especially considering their role in doing things like presenting supposedly "impartial" military experts who advocated for war in Iraq, while knowing full well that these men were working for defense contractors that stood to financially benefit tremendously from the war, and not informing the public as to this significant conflict of interest.
I don't appreciate the Fourth Estate acting as business agents for war profiteers, yet they seem to do it quite a lot. Again, that makes them complicit in aiding and abetting still more criminal activity. Perhaps our next round of "punishment" should start there.
it's that they're vindictive law-and-order, national defense, severe punishment types.
Pretty funny when it's the Republicans arguing for forgiveness and leniency.
do not change unless the pain of not changing is greater than the pain of changing. The belief that torture is at any time justifiable must change. So do I support punishment? Yep.
If I remember correctly, Matt Dowd was part of the Bush Crime famly in the first term. He is lining up with the rest of the members to cover their asses.
I would say that if the crime family waterboarded these guys 183 times and 83 times, they were just into punishing them. It would be obvious to thinking people that you would not be getting valuable information when using the same tactic that many times and you would just be punishing the guy.
Accountability? Punishment? Call it what you want - if Congress/Obama sweeps torture under the rug, it means that the President and those who report to him are above American law and international treaties to which American has agreed. It means we are not a nation of laws but of men. Those men who have power can (and will in the future) do as they wish and without fear of any consequences or the wishes of the American people.
forget about torture and not deal with it. And, President Obama should really have nothing more to do with any such investigations and prosecutions except to allow them to proceed and not prevent the DOJ or Congress from doing their jobs. It really should be up to the DOJ and Congress to investigate and prosecute where they see fit. The history of why and how torture came to the forefront of policy in the bush administration needs to be made a permanent part of the public record. What must not be done is to forget it all and pardon it.
Login or Register to post comments.