Ruth Marcus' Inadvertent Argument For Prosecuting Bush Administration Officials
Via Balloon Juice, in a WaPo chat today, Ruth Marcus wrote:
[Q]: But many of us do not want criminal prosecutions which would be almost impossible to achieve since most of the evidence (e-mails, et al) has been “lost.” We simply want the facts about torture, illegal spying, habeas, etc. made public so the next time a President seeks to break the law, he will think twice.
Ruth Marcus: That’s a different question. I’m more agnostic on investigation in a non criminal sense. What I’d like to know is, What needs investigating that has not already been investigated? What information that could reasonably be made public has not already emerged? But do you really think the prospect of investigation would have deterred Bush? Didn’t seem so.
More . . .
(Emphasis supplied.) Seems like Marcus is saying the only thing that will deter future lawlessness is criminal prosecutions. I am not sure she is right about that but I think Marcus has placed herself in the following position -- either support criminal investigations into law breaking by the Bush Administration or accept that lawbreaking will occur again. I think the reality is Marcus is in favor of the latter, or at least if it is done by Republicans.
Speaking for me only
| < Supreme Court Extends Police Immunity for 4th Amendment Violation | Hillary Clinton Confirmed As Secretary of State > |
