The Washington Post's David Ignatius is a personal case study in what's wrong down in the Village. Again the AB Journal gives Ignatius top billing on it's op-ed page….and again, Ignatius lays down the isolated and rotted Village mindset.
If the U.S. federal government, according to Ignatius, holds it's agencies, like the CIA, accountable for it's actions…..then "other countries" who might otherwise "admire America's committment to democracy and the rule of law" would simply "conclude that we are all plain nuts."
That's what Mr. Village says. If the powerful people in our federal agencies are held accountable for their actions, then America has lost it's collective mind.
Ignatius, admittedly, has a hard time understanding what could be wrong with a vice-president ordering CIA officials to withhold super-secret intelligence programs from Congress, in defiance of existing law. It's just too, too difficult for elected officials to obey the law these days, and naturally with Ignatius, any considerations of investigating or prosecuting high-level conservatives in the Village would only be a cause for group fainting.
Right off the Village bat, Ignatius has it all pegged….
"The latest ''scandals" involving the Central Intelligence Agency are genuinely hard to understand, other than in terms of political payback."
Yep, David….it's all just too "hard to understand". Too hard to understand for anyone. If Villager Dave doesn't understand those "scandals" because they're just too hard to follow, how could a judge or jury or commission understand…let alone those poor ignorant Americans out there.
It''s just gotta' be "political payback." Big Village Dave, like Fox's Bill O'Reilly, is just looking out for the little guy who finds all this stuff "hard to understand", and in the case of Dick Cheney's capture and control of the CIA during the Terror years…….
It would be impossible to prove "criminal intent" for CIA interrogators who operated within the framework of the Justice Department's guidance.
There you have it. The Village has spoken.
Ignatius flaunts his Village citizenry. In Village thinking, the Bush Justice Department COULDN'T have done anything illegal or wrong. If Bush and Cheney cherry-picked John Yoo out of the Justice Department, didn't tell his superiors, and ordered him to write torture memoes in direct violation of existing American law….to Ignatius, that's standard conservative operating procedure.
Why has Ignatius gone all Peak-Village right now?
Attorney General Eric Holder is considering appointing a prosecutor to investigate criminal actions by CIA officers involved in the harsh interrogation of al-Qaida prisoners. But the internal CIA report on which he's said to be basing this decision was referred five years ago to the Justice Department, where attorneys concluded that no prosecution was warranted.
Obama doesn't want an investigation, and Bush/Cheney sure as hell don't want one….and the Village doesn't want one. But Holder, confronted by the egregious nature of recent evidence pointing to numerous national and international war crimes ordered by the Bush administration, is "considering appointing a prosecutor." The nerve of the Attorney General, huh?
Notice Village Dave's thinking. Holder is considering appointing an investigator to look into how the torture memos the Bush Justice Department "legalized" were implemented…..but Ignatius concludes that the Bush Justice Department already looked into those complaints and concluded that no wrongdoing happened. Well, that settles it then, right?
Today in Villageland, holding any conservatives in power to account is simply "gotcha" politics….
President Obama has tried to end this "gotcha" culture….
Try that one out on a local judge or law enforcement representative….."Judge, don't you want to look forward and not backward? Any attempt by you, Judge, to hold me accountable for breaking the law would just be some vindictive payback on your part, Judge. Just more silly "gotcha" politics."
Summarizing…..I often blog about today's corporate "journalists", labeling them the Knee Pad Media, or the Village. David Ignatius' piece today encapsulates the ethos of that Village. If conservatives are in power, according to Villager David Ignatius, those conservatives are above the law and can never be prosecuted, or even investigated, for anything they did while in office. That's the given. Any attempts to go against this given are only and always "political payback" and "gotcha" politics by non-conservatives.
If Democrats are in power, then the Village rules are entirely different. If Democrats are in power, then fibbing about fellatio is a horrendous national threat that demands a $50 million, multiple-year investigation and a teevee sham spectacle of a prosecution.
Here'a an excellent takedown of the Village on this same topic.
Update:
Village regular, Roger Cressey, tells the new and obnoxious MSNBC dumbass anchor, Dylan Ratigan, that those Democrats who want to investigate law breaking are "stupid and foolish…."
{ 19 comments… read them below or add one }
The "big steaming pile" is that anyone cares if Cheney is investigated. This whole debacle and the Sotomayor nomination is being brought to the media forefront to deflect any negative media attention from the "Socialist Healthcare Reform Bill" Obama, Nancy and Harry are slamming through.
It's all a conspiracy, huh average? A conspiracy to silence any information about a health care reform plan the voters want?
Come on Rev, you and I both know that the govt uses the media to divert attention to exactly what is going on behind the scenes. He isn't going to be put up on charges and we know it. It would be like putting Clinton up on charges of treason for not handling al'kaida when he had the opportunity.
Is it what the voters wanted? Because according to reliable sources the split between wanting and not wanting this program is about the same as the split in the Cap'n Trade Bill. Have you read the healthcare bill? Is it on line like they promised, I mean in it's complete form and not like the other bills that had stuff added hours or minutes before the final vote? I can't even find it. Here is another problem. Ask any Democrat or Lib what is in the bill and what does it mean to them. Do they see any repercussions? Have they ever spoke to folks from foreign countries with socialized/govt run medicine. They haven't a clue. However I will grant you one thing the Rep media heads are spreading alot of garbage about the program also.
I caught this as i was scanning the radio this am. It was on the Glen Beck show. I know you don't like him, I don't either really, but this caught my attention. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQ7LcplfkgY.
It is by Ezre Taft Benson former pres. of the LDS. I feel he is right on the money. Start at about the 2 minute mark. The Japanese said the same thing about taking our econmy after WWII and they have succeeded.
Via Glenn Greenwald:
"This morning, I spoke with Todd for roughly 30 minutes about the relative significance of torture investigations, the implications of failing to prosecute high-level political officials when they break the law, the role of the media in these matters, and whether Todd was expressing his own views or merely repeating what the White House believes."
It's really an interesting talk. Greenwald really lays it out in simple terms that are really hard to refute, as Todd makes excuses along the way.
Read more and listen to their conversation here:
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/radio/2009/07/16/todd/
joe has it about right. It's about controlling the news cycle. Obama is keenly aware of it, as he was throughout the presidential campaign.
Americans don't care if Cheney told Congress about some potential CIA plan to take out Al Qaeda leaders that was never implemented. Only rabid partisan attack dogs care about such things. Anytime Obama and the Dems are getting hammered in the news cycle, they dribble out some little piece of classified information like this to divert attention away from them and back to where they want it, on Bush/Cheney, who've been out of office for six months. They've done it so many times now that it's become obvious.
Once more, King voices his opinion that a Republican executive branch's compliance with the rule of law…is entirely optional.
jimmy…the Salon Greenwald-Todd interview is quite good and very revealing.
King….what's the rule of thumb on how many times you "implement" the program before you tell congress?
walter, based on the fact that King asserted that the plan was NEVER implemented, I think your question becomes superfluous.
Perhaps you could brush up your reading comprehension.
Where do you stand on the issue?
Here's the problem:
If the program was never implemented…..then there would have been no program for Panetta to have terminated.
If Panetta terminated a program…by definition….it had to have been operational.
No, by definition, it doesn't. There is a difference between operational and implemented… words matter.
I've been gone a week and still nothing on Cheney?
I figured you were doing the vacation thing.
Obama won't allow Holder to go after Cheney. I'm a layperson…and I could prosecute Cheney myself, there's so much evidence. But it wouldn't be prudent.
The nation will simply limp along until a new Nixon-Bush comes along and finishes the place off. Glad it won't be in my lifetime.
I've read lots of stuff about Cheney including this Greenwald fellow for Salon and have never seen any actual evidence, Reverend. Just a lot of repeated speculation made under misguided assumptions.
Come on, larry. The Plame case ALONE warranted a separate investigation into Cheney's orchestration of the Iraq fraud-up.
What do you do with Bush/Cheney ordering a second tier Justice Dept. hack like Yoo to "legalize" illegal acts of torture?
Even Fitzgerald talked about the "cloud" over the VP's office.
The "misguided assumptions" language…is….misguided.
You and a good part of the left start any kind of look at a Cheney action under the assumption he has some kind of nefarious motivation, Reverend. It insults your readers if you deny it.
Whether it's Bush or Cheney, or a working schmoe like Joe the Plumber, or even a beauty pageant contestant, you've become the demonizer party. It's quite ugly.
One man's demonization is another person's "pointing out the facts."
I could care less what Cheney's motivation was. That has no significance to the fact that he wilfully broke numerous laws.
If I rob a bank to feed my family….I still go to court and get convicted for bank robbery.
What's an insult is arguing for amnesty for all elected officials (except Clinton, of course) when they violate the law. I think we rejected the idea of a King awhile back.
You're double standard is showing.
But there's no evidence, Reverend. I've already said I'm all in if you find some.
Like those WMD's in the Barney White House fiasco…..that "evidence" must be around here somewhere.
Which rule was changing the subject? #3?