> It only goes to show that the "Deep State" is real. "The CIA inspector general’s office has said it “mistakenly” destroyed its only copy of a comprehensive Senate torture report, despite lawyers for the Justice Department assuring a federal judge that copies of the documents were being preserved." If we had never heard about the transgressions of the past, we wouldn't be fooled into expecting better out of the current crop.Įdit: Am I the only one who read Brasil: Nunca Maís? Did the Church Committee change anything? It's actually reprehensible that we can talk about this stuff openly while parading the people who did it as experts on what we should do next. I would rank that coolness as way cooler than Kazakhstan but equally as cool as the Brazilian dictatorship? Still haven't got a chance to check out the CIA torture footage, but seeing as one of the people who ordered the torture and authorized the destruction of the tapes was put in charge and just left office a year ago, it turns out that discussion doesn't mean much.Įdit: I guess it teaches us that we shouldn't expect more consideration from the current regime than the past one, seeing as they've not only gone entirely unpunished, but were rewarded. There isn't time to prosecute over every detail that someone objects to given the range of objections there are.
They appoint the people who determine what the words mean and that leads to occasional creative reinterpretations.
These are people who write the law, they are not expected to be stay-inside-the-legal-lines types because they all have different opinions on where the lines should be and are usually in the process of drawing them. People in glass houses are cautious in their stone throwing.Īnd a final and decisive stroke - there is plausible uncertainty about whether the action is illegal. Combine mass popular support with executive power and there isn't a lot practically that can be done.įurthermore it appears that most of the US politicians have some sort of borderline-corrupt activity going on if not being actively involved in something illegal (Epstein springs to mind, various scandals that turn up around presidential elections). To gain the presidency it is all-but-mandatory to have the enthusiastic backing of a big chunk of voters and the tacit or explicit approval of around half of them.
0 kommentar(er)
