In the Matter of the US vs. Bush…

not yet indicted for confessed war crimes, I give you an amicus brief from Ambrose Bierce:

PARDON, v.  To remit a penalty and restore to the life of crime.  To add to the lure of crime the temptation of ingratitude.  (From The Devil’s Dictionary)

That second definition applies particularly well to the accused’s partner in such crimes, the also not-yet-indicted Richard Cheney.

That “not-yet” should most likely read “never” is merely a reflection of a my suffering the lapse of mind Samuel Johnson described in defining a second marriage: “The triumph of hope over experience.”

Image:  William Hogarth, “The Bench,” 1758.

Explore posts in the same categories: Republican knavery, Snark, torture, War

Tags: , , , , , ,

You can comment below, or link to this permanent URL from your own site.

2 Comments on “In the Matter of the US vs. Bush…”

  1. Ted K Says:

    Aahh!!! Give it up Tommy boy. Don’t torture yourself like Sullivan does. You knew it would never happen when you saw Cheney playing invalid in the wheelchair going out of the White House.

    I agree 100%, but time to move on. The stain isn’t removable and our shirts weren’t that clean to start with. With Iran bubbling and apt to explode around Labor Day, you better rest up, you’re gonna need it. Have some wine and watch some Fawlty Towers.

  2. I thought he was playing Mr. Potter, just without the presence of Lionel Barrymore.

    Turns out that whole government of laws thing was just an aspiration, an ideal, not reality. Is it worse now, or are my eyes just clearer?

    Yeah, worse now:
    – Nixon’s persistent criminality finally got him removed from office, even if Ford did let the capo di tutti capi off scot free.
    – Impeachable Constitutional crimes of the Reagan administration, isolated to foreign policy, were at least investigated and exposed, although pardons and Supreme Court verdicts let the perpetrators off.
    – Clinton got impeached for revenge and politics, not law, worse again.
    – The most Constitutionally criminal administration ever (that I’m aware of) hasn’t even been thoroughly investigated. Scooter Libby? Ha.

    The only argument I can see against the conclusion that there has been a steady devolution of the rule of law in the U.S. is that LBJ’s persistent lies about Vietnam brought no legal sanction. The Gulf of Tonkin Resolution and the Authorization for Use of Military Force are of a piece, though I’m not sure either strays beyond normal political bullshit combined with a flexible interpretation of the power to declare war (which isn’t necessarily a bad thing in principle, just implemented awfully in both these cases). Even a dreamer like me never thought the Constitution set an expectation that elected officials would never lie.

    (On a side note, it’s clear that the Republican Party is a RICO with regard to the Constitution.)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: